Interesting Article on Energy Storage

[Mike90250]

Many examples of pumped storage right here in California. And it's nothing new. The problem in Oz, fresh water or sea water ???

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pumped-storage_hydroelectric_power_stations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms_Pumped_Storage_Plant

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castaic_Power_Plant

Worlds largest generation capacity of 3,003 MW VA, USA

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_County_Pumped_Storage_Station

[bcroe]

Many examples of pumped storage right here in California. And it's nothing new.

Worlds largest generation capacity of 3,003 MW VA, USA

I wonder what percent of the pumping energy is recovered when the water comes back down (efficiency)? Not listed.
Bruce Roe

[GRickard]

Here is a paper that says "exceed 80%,....".

http://www.hydro.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/NHA_PumpedStorage_071212b12.pdf

[Sunking]

Very outdated material. Dan seems to be the only one who does not know all Hydro and Pump Back Lakes were built out by WW-II in the USA and there is no more land or water to use. Not surprising because Dan is just plain [redacted] like all [redacted]

Mod Note: You can all mentally fill in your likely candidates for SK's words. Just don't do it in a post.

[bcroe]

Here is a paper that says "exceed 80%,....".

Thats a pretty impressive round trip figure. If I could do that for about 30,000 KWH I wouldn't need a grid tie to
carry summer energy over to winter. Lets see, just put the whole house on an elevator and raise it all summer.
In winter just let is slowly come down, a friction brake would convert the energy to heat at 100% efficiency....
Bruce Roe

[J.P.M.]

I wonder what percent of the pumping energy is recovered when the water comes back down (efficiency)? Not listed.
Bruce Roe

Short answer: Various sources put it at 70 - 80 % or so.

Broadly speaking, in terms of net energy gained, for what's commonly defined as "pumped storage", unless and until someone manages to violate entropy and make frictionless and 100% efficient systems, pumped storage is a net energy user, so, more energy is used to pump the fluid up to a higher potential energy than is gained when that potential energy is converted to kinetic energy. Broadly speaking, system efficiency = 1 - (%system losses). So, what's recovered is 1-system losses. Plus, losses that are called the "velocity head" losses that show up and are manifested as the fluid velocity at discharge from the turbine and thus still theoretically capable of some work by virtue of still having some kinetic energy, with potential head = V^2/2g. There is some discussion about whether or not those velocity head losses ought to be considered system losses or simply irreversibilities that are external to the system. Long story.

If the cost of "system losses" can be reduced to zero (by getting nature to pay for and do the pumping, for example: Tidal dams, or evaporation -->> rain -->> filling the Great Lakes -- >> Niagara Falls, etc.), then most all energy (less the velocity head and friction piping losses on the way down) is a gain. But that's not usually what's referred to as pumped storage.

Most of the advantages in pumped storage are in the time shifting of the generation.

[DanKegel]

Many examples of pumped storage right here in California. And it's nothing new. The problem in Oz, fresh water or sea water ???

Right, it's nothing new, it's proven stuff. The discussion isn't about whether it works, it's about using it on a grand scale, and if Australia were to go non-fossil for all their electricity, how much pumped storage they'd need.

About fresh or sea: the report is proposing closed-loop systems which don't require much water to keep them topped off, so probably fresh.

[inetdog]

Short answer: Various sources put it at 70 - 80 % or so.

I have seen figures closer to 50% for pumping and storage within the California State Water Project system.

Not necessarily optimized for energy storage.

[J.P.M.]

I have seen figures closer to 50% for pumping and storage within the California State Water Project system.

Not necessarily optimized for energy storage.

Also, that 80% figure probably does not take electric motor inefficiencies into account, just turbine efficiencies. Got to be careful what we're talking about.

[Sunking]

Right, it's nothing new, it's proven stuff. The discussion isn't about whether it works, it's about using it on a grand scale, and if Australia were to go non-fossil for all their electricity, how much pumped storage they'd need..

About fresh or sea: the report is proposing closed-loop systems which don't require much water to keep them topped off, so probably fresh.

Dan are you that darn ignorant? Yeah I know so. Pump back lakes have been around for a century now. In the USA all available land for hydro and pump back lakes was built out by the end of WW-II. Most of it built by German and Japanese POW's. There is no more land left and no POW's to do hard cheap labor.

As for Australia where the hell are they going to get the water? Do you have any clue the volume of water it takes? No you do not have any clue. Do not dare say sea water because that only proves you are ignorant. Last thing anyone wants to do is pump sea water inland and make a lake out of it. If you are stupid enough to do that, you just polluted your ground water with salt. Not only can you not drink it, you damn sure cannot irrigate crops with salt water. Well you can if you want another Bonneville Flats to race high speed vehicles or make runways for planes.

[DanKegel]

In the USA all available land for hydro and pump back lakes was built out by the end of WW-II.

Are you quite sure about that? I just checked the dates a half-dozen US pumped storage powerplants were placed into service, and they were all in 1960 - 2000 or so.

You might want to check your facts.

[J.P.M.]

Are you quite sure about that? I just checked the dates a half-dozen US pumped storage powerplants were placed into service, and they were all in 1960 - 2000 or so.

You might want to check your facts.

Either way, pumped hydro is site limited by geography and other considerations. Most potential sites, in the U.S. anyway, and considering mostly the economics and environmental considerations, have been identified. Those parameters may and will probably change, and I may be wrong but I'd guess not a whole lot.

How about addressing SK's other points contained in that post instead of cherry picking ? Or, using your tricks of implication, false assumptions and putting words in other people's mouths by phony assertion, I guess since you didn't object to those other considerations SK raised, you must agree with them - such as the idea that pouring salt water on the ground isn't a good idea.

You are again out of your knowledge depth and area.

A respectful but serious suggestion for your consideration: Stick with computers and software. You look less ignorant there.

[solar pete]

Hey All,

They are thinking about pumped hyrdo in the Adelaide Hills near Hahndorf, they already pump water from the Murray River into large dams in the Adelaide hills (electricity cost for this pumping 36 million per year), there are a bunch of old gold mines in those hills and there is talk of using the old abandoned mines. Its very early days and it's all very hypothetical at the moment but it would be fresh water and using mines would make it underground avoiding evaporation. Cheers.

[Sunking]

Are you quite sure about that? I just checked the dates a half-dozen US pumped storage powerplants were placed into service, and they were all in 1960 - 2000 or so.

You might want to check your facts.

I don't have to check Dan. Got to many friends that work with the Army Corps of Engineers. There is no significant amount of land or rivers to damn up for hydro. It is all built out. Perhaps we can start with your house and land. Australia has a lot of land. They just do not have water and why most of the country is a barren desert. Pump sea water, you gotta be a dan fool to believe that.

As for Australia can do what they want. Sooner or later they will go nuclear like the USA. Just a question of how much time a noisy ignorant minority like yourself give up and get the hell out of the way. minority. Australia has some of the largest uranium deposits in the world. Enough to fuel the world for several million years with clean safe, and cheap power. All you want with no limits. Australia could become both a economic and military super power in a decade if they wanted. It is right there at their feet. All they have to do is pick it up.

Dan you cannot even stop to think about where all that power is going to come from for pump back lakes. At best round trip efficiency is 75%. Pretend it is money. You invest $1 and get 75-cents back. How long until you are bankrupt with that investment strategy? Only a dan democrat would invest in that pile of baloney.

[GRickard]

Let's get back to basics. Are we talking about pumped storage or hydro dams? Two different animals.

Yes, there are limited places to build new dams and keep navigable waterways. However there are several existing (non-hydro) dams being retrofitted with generators on the Ohio River. The company I work for assembled the rotor for the Cannelton Dam that recently came on line as well as working at the Willow Island Dam. These are not considered pumped storage though.

Greg