gravity storage

[raymon]

After reading each other's answers, I realize that nothing is easy. Yet we will have to find solutions if we have to do without fossil energy to respond to the intermittency of renewable perhaps another track off topic is biogas.

[Gaston]

I do not understand why 70 shuttles since the charges are removed from the wagon but hey it's two stations of 65000 m² by counting the spaces between charges.

Probably for maximum power

To produce 333 MW of power, a mass corresponding to a storage of 2Mwh must go down in 21 seconds ... that is to say a speed of 2057 km / h (or 500 km / h if one supposes shuttles of 4 wagons).

With 35 4 simultaneous carriages the necessary speed is 15 km / h (the other 35 shuttles are being loaded or loaded).

[izentrop]

Well seen !
In this case, about 40 lanes are needed between the 2 stations.
The return of empty shuttles can be done in single file on bypass routes.

Edit: In fact less than that since several shuttles can follow also.

[Grelinette]

It is true that this concept is interesting, especially since gravity storage with water is presented as the one with the best yield.

That said, the articles (related) on the ARES project are already several years old but there does not seem to be any positive consequences today ... (a bit like the project RAR-Energia... except that for ARES there is no mystery and it's more a question of performance!)

Having said that, I don't understand why you talk about "wagons that go back empty"in your last comments !!! The principle is precisely to reassemble the full wagons with the unused energy of the wind turbines and other pv, so that they go down by restoring the energy when it is necessary!

[Gaston]

Having said that, I don't understand why you talk about "wagons that go back empty"in your last comments !!! The principle is precisely to reassemble the full wagons with the unused energy of the wind turbines and other pv, so that they go down by restoring the energy when it is necessary!

In the booklet linked by izentrop, we can clearly see that there are more "masses" stored than wagons (in the example given by Ares, approximately 1400 masses were calculated, whereas there are only 280 wagons).

During prolonged use (during loading or unloading), it is therefore necessary for empty wagons to travel in the opposite direction to fetch masses from the storage stations.

[Christophe]

For the choice of the turbine in micro or pico hydraulic here is another subject: energies-renewable / select-a-micro-turbine-hydraulic-pelton-or-a-helix-t14812.html

[lilian07]

For my part, I think mass gravity storage is not feasible for the power level that we are looking for. Too much complexity, gigantism of the system, mechanical complexity of the flow of the wagons ... etc and it is far from being a system as successful as the hydraulic storage. Yes to run a clock ... no to store the surplus of the RE. See the formula E = mgh which gives a very low level of potential energy, even with enormous masses.
I prefer a pneumatic storage even if the energies engaged remains low.

[moinsdewatt]

Store renewable energy using simple concrete blocks

Thomas Drink 5 January 2019 Energy



The science behind Energy Vault's technology is simple and uses the transformation of kinetic energy into potential energy, and vice versa. Because concrete is much denser than water, lifting a block of concrete requires (and can store) much more energy than a water tank of equal size.

A six-armed 120 crane is standing at the center of the device. In the neutral state, concrete blocks weighing 35 tons each are carefully stacked around the crane. In case of excess solar or wind energy, a computer algorithm requires one or more crane arms to locate a concrete block, using a camera attached to the crane arm.

Concrete blocks for storing and restoring energy
Once the crane arm has located and hung a concrete block, an engine starts, powered by surplus electricity from the grid, and lifts the block from the ground. The crane truck is specifically programmed to counteract the movement of wind oscillations. As a result, he can lift the block gently, then place it on another stack of blocks, higher up on the ground.

The system is "fully loaded" when the crane has created a tower of concrete blocks all around its central pylon. The total energy that can be stored in the tower is 20 megawatt hours (MWh), enough to power 2000 homes for an entire day.
..........

In full, and with a video of synthesis https://trustmyscience.com/stocker-ener ... ocs-beton/

[Grelinette]

Store renewable energy using simple concrete blocks
..........

In full, and with a video of synthesis https://trustmyscience.com/stocker-ener ... ocs-beton/

It is very interesting these projects to consider the storage of energy by gravity.
It joins the project, about which we spoke about econology, with wagons loaded with concrete blocks and hoisted up a hill.

In this latest project, the principle of choosing concrete blocks on the ground and stacked them thoroughly is very surprising. I imagine the process is reversed to restore energy.

The video is really to see:

That said, given the friction forces involved and the wear of the mechanisms, it is surprising, as it is said, that this system would be more effective than the gravity storage of water ... It nevertheless has the advantage to be installed anywhere without devastating a large area, unlike a hydraulic dam.

If this system actually represents a way of storing energy that is somewhat interesting and profitable, and proven, it could perhaps equip directly a windmill mast: a large concrete ring surrounding the mast of the wind turbine could be hoisted up depending on the energy storage needs produced but not consumed, then returned down, or even associate this principle of stacking directly around the wind turbine ...

Moreover, a small technical question on this subject: by playing on the speed of hoisting and descent of the mass, what can be interesting in this principle for the storage of energy?

[Ahmed]

The animation shows only the moment during which the difference in height is maximal: one suspects that when the heights balance the energy is zero (and even less if one continues to move the blocks laterally on a same level!) and that what is at the bottom only serves as base ... It is therefore not very comparable to gravity hydraulics.