Thermodynamic analysis of three compressed air energy storage systems: Conventional, adiabatic, and hydrogen-fueled

34Citations
Citations of this article
62Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We present analyses of three families of compressed air energy storage (CAES) systems: conventional CAES, in which the heat released during air compression is not stored and natural gas is combusted to provide heat during discharge; adiabatic CAES, in which the compression heat is stored; and CAES in which the compression heat is used to assist water electrolysis for hydrogen storage. The latter two methods involve no fossil fuel combustion. We modeled both a low-temperature and a high-temperature electrolysis process for hydrogen production. Adiabatic CAES (A-CAES) with physical storage of heat is the most efficient option with an exergy efficiency of 69.5% for energy storage. The exergy efficiency of the conventional CAES system is estimated to be 54.3%. Both high-temperature and low-temperature electrolysis CAES systems result in similar exergy efficiencies (35.6% and 34.2%), partly due to low efficiency of the electrolyzer cell. CAES with high-temperature electrolysis has the highest energy storage density (7.9 kWh per m3 of air storage volume), followed by A-CAES (5.2 kWh/m3). Conventional CAES and CAES with low-temperature electrolysis have similar energy densities of 3.1 kWh/m3.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Safaei, H., & Aziz, M. J. (2017). Thermodynamic analysis of three compressed air energy storage systems: Conventional, adiabatic, and hydrogen-fueled. Energies, 10(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/en10071020

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free