Among the presently available energy storage systems, second generation CAES 2 (Compressed Air Energy Storage) shows attractive economic and operational features together with satisfactory level of performance. CAES2 plants integrate an air compression and storage system with a commercially available Gas Turbine. A small size plants based on a 4600 kW Mercury recuperated Gas Turbine equipped with an artificial compressed air storage system has been investigated. Preliminary evaluations have been carried out to assess the maximum achievable GT power augmentation taking operations safety and plant life duration into consideration. For a fixed amount of stored air (defined according to the requested minimum duration of the discharge phase), investment, maintenance and operating costs have been evaluated by varying the air storage pressure from 2000 to 10000 kPa. The minimum annual equivalent cost is achieved by assuming a design storage pressure of 4000 kPa. From 4000 to 10000 kPa, costs are in practice insensitive to the air storage pressure.
Salvini, C. (2015). Techno-economic analysis of small size second generation CAES system. ENERGY PROCEDIA, 82, 782-788 [10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.812].
Techno-economic analysis of small size second generation CAES system
SALVINI, Coriolano
2015-01-01
Abstract
Among the presently available energy storage systems, second generation CAES 2 (Compressed Air Energy Storage) shows attractive economic and operational features together with satisfactory level of performance. CAES2 plants integrate an air compression and storage system with a commercially available Gas Turbine. A small size plants based on a 4600 kW Mercury recuperated Gas Turbine equipped with an artificial compressed air storage system has been investigated. Preliminary evaluations have been carried out to assess the maximum achievable GT power augmentation taking operations safety and plant life duration into consideration. For a fixed amount of stored air (defined according to the requested minimum duration of the discharge phase), investment, maintenance and operating costs have been evaluated by varying the air storage pressure from 2000 to 10000 kPa. The minimum annual equivalent cost is achieved by assuming a design storage pressure of 4000 kPa. From 4000 to 10000 kPa, costs are in practice insensitive to the air storage pressure.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
