Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MashimaroG4 t1_iwhy3xr wrote

Reply to comment by lughnasadh in Italian startup Energy Dome claims its CO2 grid storage batteries are cheaper than lithium-ion, and need no rare minerals, being made from just off-the-shelf steel components, water & CO2. It's opening its first 200 MWh facility in Sardinia in 2023 by lughnasadh

77% isn't great for batteries (For example Tesla's Powerwalls are 90% round trip efficient (you get 90% useable A/C power for the 100% you put in (includes all the AC->DC->AC steps, plus battery losses)

Of course if these are 40% cheaper, than that's what really matters for some power sources. Especially as we super saturate with solar and other.

26

Thatingles t1_iwi386b wrote

cost per KwH is really the king for grid scale storage.

41

wolfgang784 t1_iwibi08 wrote

We don't necessarily need 1 single type of battery for the entirety of the world to focus on, though.

Perhaps this replaces a large number of lithium battery uses, but if it doesn't make sense for bigger things like an electric car then we can still use the old tech. If it's made how they claim, it should be drastically better environmentally even if only a portion of the world's lithium ion battery uses are met.

11

Dischordance t1_iwj19zb wrote

The fact these don't need the exotic elements to function, coupled with not needing major tech breakthroughs makes these incredibly viable.

10

palmej2 t1_iwi8qxf wrote

Agreed.

I would point out that my understanding is the Powerwall neglects transmission and other losses to consumers. These would likely be more proximal to where the power comes in and thus big picture may be more competitive than 77% vs 90% (though grid scale would likely have that in common and the price basis you mentioned would still drive choice). Also batteries degrade and would likely have more significant maintenance/replacement costs. I know Powerwall can do larger installations, but believe they are more suited for end user demand whereas this is more grid scale.

7

Sp3llbind3r t1_iwikl08 wrote

Yeah, but if you can store solar or wind power that nobody can use at that moment it‘s not a 23% loss but a 77% win. If that power replaces fossil fuel power you would have to produce at night or in winter, it would be a huge win.

5

palmej2 t1_iwipxcx wrote

Yes, agree. But for a system such as this I think that would be common against all alternatives, the difference might be that the CO2 could allow for more capacity, or a reduced initial cost (making it more widely feasible) and potentially having additional future scalability benefits.

3

MashimaroG4 t1_iwik9pj wrote

True, they make a "megapack" or something that is being installed grid scale. I own two powerwalls and Solar (bought before Elon went off the deepend, but I think the economics are still about the best for Tesla Solar). So my generation is on the roof (I never charge from the grid, except for an impending storm). My current reading match up about with the spec sheet (for Month to date in Nov : 287kWhr in and 250kWhr out (and battery 87% charged as of noon, it normally charges to 100% by about 1pm if I'm not doing a lot of high energy items at home)

1