I've been following this idea for quite a few years and really wanted to see some real world testing of this. However, I can't help but being worried about the many valves and pipe joints in the system to be under constant cyclic pressure. It is safer to have it buried underground so when a valve bursts, the jet stream won't poke a big hole in someone, but it also is more difficult to perform maintenance. Unfortunately, currently the most effective way to do hydroelectric energy storage is still pumping water to a very tall place.
@MrEdmundsj9 ай бұрын
I feel like there would be a way to work with a dam to improve efficiency but not sure how
@MrBikeman75 ай бұрын
Worth a 'go' for sure. Concern that finding leaks underground could undo the project. Better above ground tanks.
@georgefleming864 Жыл бұрын
The principle of this technology is about the same as that of the hydraulic air compressor. We know a lot about the HAC. A comment below says that this project has been on hold for five months. I wonder whether that is because they finally tried the idea and found a very hard problem with it. Since the water and the air are in direct contact in the storage tanks, as the pressure increases the water absorbs more and more of the air. When they use the compressed air that is still free inside the tanks to push the water through the turbine to produce power, the pressure in the water drops as it passes through the turbine. That pressure drop causes the dissolved air in the water to escape while the flow is still in the turbine. The turbine can't handle this two-phase flow, which becomes increasingly more air and less water per unit volume as it passes through. It is like the problem, only in reverse, that happens when a pump tries to pump a mixture of air or some other gas and water or some other liquid. It can't do it well enough, or at all. The technical explanation is set forth in many places including the internet, for instance, "pumping two-phase flow." In other words, Augwind did not know about, and did not anticipate, the Champagne Effect. This effect has been studied thoroughly. It became obvious more than forty years ago when water-compensated CAES became a subject of great interest. Because of this effect, it is very difficult to safely operate a water-compensated CAES cavern. (Hydrostor, beware.) And because of it, I do not see how Augwind can generate much power with this arrangement. They can store energy with it at high efficiency, but they won't get most of it back without a lot more research, probably some patentable discoveries, and a much longer time to market. I don't think they are nearly ready to sell their system. If this is the reason for putting the project on hold, it will be far from the first time that the problem of dissolved air in the water has put a stop to the dream.
@discoguru8363 Жыл бұрын
Interesting take.
@bonsaimoldova Жыл бұрын
Then they should have a piston that separate air from the water? You pump water, the piston moves and push the air into tanks. In the reverse mood - the air push the piston that will push the water into turbine.
@johnborton4522 Жыл бұрын
While there could be many reasons for a 'project on hold' status (including complete implosion of the project), I think you may be misunderstanding their system. You say: //"Since the water and the air are in direct contact in the storage tanks, ..."// If you look at their patents (and video including this one), you'll see that they don't store the air in contact with the pressurized water. The air is stored separately in 'air only' storage tanks (1:20) Essentially they are using the water only as a 'hydraulic piston' and the contact only happens for a short period during a 'compression stroke' (0:55) Then, that 'piston' (they call it a "compression tank"), now near full of water, is returned to atmospheric and used as the supply tank for the compression stroke on an adjacent tank/piston. The output of compressed air is stored separately. The entire process is reversed for energy retrieval. Given the short time that the water is under pressure (low dwell time - low aeration), and the fact that the water is returned to atmospheric every stroke (equal or greater time for deaeration), I think you'll find that the "champagne effect" will be trivial. Your comment would however apply directly to Hydrostor and I haven't studied their system to see how they plan to handle it. My take.
@hyphen2612 Жыл бұрын
@@johnborton4522 I think his points are pretty valid. Although the air and water are stored in separate tanks, the pumped water still dissolved a significant amount of air when pressurized, it will quickly even out all the water in the system. Once you start running the turbine with this water, the cavity would erode the turbine pretty quickly. A lot more research is needed to make this system work with the kind of reliability claimed in the video. For example, additives in the water or specially blended fluid to reduce air solvency. Or special gases that have very low solvency in a fluid.
@johnborton4522 Жыл бұрын
@@hyphen2612 //" I think his points are pretty valid."// It's literally not valid to say they are stored together (as he did) when they are not stored together. //"A lot more research is needed to make this system work with the kind of reliability claimed in the video." // I don't disagree. My point of correction of his claim still stands though.
@En_theo4 күн бұрын
Compress air without losing heat ? I don't think so... even with the water to cool it down, it does not change anything to the fact that we will lose energy there anyway, the only difference is that the heat goes into the water.
@willw613 Жыл бұрын
So cleaver like the scalability and the fact it doesn't need rare minerals that can be used for ev vehicles
@youtuberesearch7017 Жыл бұрын
This is how deep well works.
@sampleoffers197810 ай бұрын
Supposedly geothermal heat is only 50 feet deep in order t get steam power.
@sampleoffers197810 ай бұрын
so the air can't directly push turbine like with wind power blades? Because if it could just be air meets turbine blades, that design could work for hybrid vehicles and electric plants.
@pastorgoof Жыл бұрын
How much its cost per mega watt
@wujeson3921 Жыл бұрын
same question
@thedubwhisperer21577 ай бұрын
The megawatt (MW) is a unit of power - this video is about energy, measured in Joules (J)
@aflamgy-26932 жыл бұрын
What about the efficiency of this system .. I think it will be below 30%
@BS-yy8ur Жыл бұрын
*Not sure about efficiency, I don't know about exact calculation, but carbon footprint will be near about 1% or may be less in this type of technology. This air battery is simple and better than any other acid creating battery. Polution is a huge problem ahead us. This planet is becoming sick actually. We should bring clean and green energy technology instead of increasing more and more pollution through our other movements.*
@wujeson3921 Жыл бұрын
hydropump could get 80% efficent. how about this process?
@sampleoffers197810 ай бұрын
Wind and solar being abundant sources, the efficiency is still helped by no need to drill, process and transport fuel cargo. So that goes into efficiency as supporting auxiliary power source.
@qwerty-jq5gzАй бұрын
PRO: il sistema è interrabile, basso impatto ambientale CONTRO: bassa densità energetica, necessita di grandi superfici. Liquid air: PRO: densità energetica superiore CONTRO: alto impatto ambientale(credo per questioni di sicurezza non interrabile). VOLANI: Costosi, nulla sul mercato per uso abitativo. Per l'uso privato nulla oltre le butterie.. investirei in questa direzione. Dulcis in fundo... Solare-eolico> hho> Co2> metano (qui ci divertiamo con le effic enze) Quest'ultima soluzione dovrebbe essere fortemente incentivata poiche preleviamo dall' atmosdera la mostruosa Co2!
@paulverse4587 Жыл бұрын
This is not new and sadly not effective (and nothing you can fix without breaking physics). If you compress air at let's say 200 bar, you'd only be able to store 0.4kWh per m³ of pressurized space. Energy Density = (P * V) / (k * (γ - 1)). There is also some losses, with the efficiency being ~70% to compress it, and another loss at generating electricity, in total probably around ~50% regained energy. There are other ways like heating salt etc that are more sensible to store significant amounts.
@sampleoffers197810 ай бұрын
what is the efficiency of drilling for oil, frackig for gas...then processing into fuel....then transporting it to be sold
@paulverse458710 ай бұрын
@@sampleoffers1978 Probably extremly high, as you just grab existing energy. But the problems there are with the negative effects on climate, environment and on human health. Anyway, since we were talking about storing electricity, "using existing one laying around" isn't really comparable.
@aljohame5 ай бұрын
What is the must effective way to store energy without using batteries@@paulverse4587
@loanhua8598Ай бұрын
Is it safe?
@jadejadivyaraj9201Ай бұрын
It is better to use gravity energy storage system 😅😅😅
@qwerty-jq5gzАй бұрын
👏
@madtscientist8853 Жыл бұрын
Damn what is the world coming to. When People come up with very complex mechanisms to make a simple turbine spin
@sampleoffers197810 ай бұрын
Solar can maybe power condensed air collection, then I'd think the released air could gradually turn wind blades. Then maybe even leave behind cold tank as it's releasing.
@quantumenergysolutions9128 Жыл бұрын
I have an energy company. What is the price per KWH stored?
@youtuberesearch7017 Жыл бұрын
Who cares about stored energy?
@patrick594 Жыл бұрын
@@youtuberesearch7017You're not very educated on the most complex issues of the electric grid right? The problem isn't generating (clean) electricity, it is generating only as much as it's needed when it's needed. It happens to be that when the most energy is generated, it's when it is the least needed. So saving this electricity so that it can then be used when it IS needed is the difference between keep burning fossil fuels and finally be able to use renewable energy sources.
@youtuberesearch7017 Жыл бұрын
@@patrick594 Of course i'm not educated because i dont need so big electric generator. Most effective generators are most simplest not complex. But question was different maybe i didnt understood his question about price per Kwh
@wujeson3921 Жыл бұрын
So do I our team are working for renewable energy development and electricity storage. always to see who's technology could be more economic
@arthurh1969 Жыл бұрын
Wen house?
@B99ziv Жыл бұрын
how do i can make video like this?
@clongoram Жыл бұрын
A free program called blender 3d probably.
@mailmemathur90 Жыл бұрын
Fake coz they never reply
@dantronics1682 Жыл бұрын
were you worth replying to?
@tich789 Жыл бұрын
I was working on this project briefly and it isnt fake, but project is on hold currently (5 months ago)
@bawilitsoko6450 Жыл бұрын
@@tich789 any reason why it's on hold?
@wujeson3921 Жыл бұрын
@@tich789 I am working on redox flow battery. I wondered capital investment ,efficiency and cost per Wh? interesting in share more information together
@Crane_pond_Chronicles Жыл бұрын
The Amish already do this
@ultrastoat329810 ай бұрын
Yah, but they generate the pressure with their butt holes. And that doesn’t scale.
@sampleoffers197810 ай бұрын
I believe it. Some reason.
@KaranPatel-pl7it Жыл бұрын
I want Wikipedia
@BS-yy8ur Жыл бұрын
*Why?*
@BS-yy8ur Жыл бұрын
🤔
@karanpatel8497 Жыл бұрын
@@BS-yy8ur i want to make project on this idea
@fatehyabali Жыл бұрын
Bbbb
@drorbenami4827 Жыл бұрын
ONLY WATER AND AIR ??? So what are all those solar panels for: To cook breakfast ???
@miketiong844110 ай бұрын
Solar panels are for running water pumps to compress the air for storage during day time. Compressed air is for pushing the water to run the water turbines at night
@Youtube..Enjoyer8 ай бұрын
No, dinner as well.
@brandonbeedle52784 ай бұрын
Not that revolutionary. The Amish have been doing this for decades.