A group of scientists from the University of Birmingham, in the United Kingdom, and the University of Melbourne, in Australia, has investigated, in an extensive research, the potential of liquid air energy storage (LAES), which has so far seen development for large scale energy storage, and it has been mostly developed by U.K.-based specialist Highview Power.
The company is currently preparing to deploy LAES technology in a range of locations including a 400 MWh system in the United States, a 250 MWh project in the United Kingdom, and a 300 MWh facility in Spain. “LAES has, currently, a technology readiness level (TRL) of 8,” research co-author Adriano Sciacovelli told pv magazine. The TRL measures the maturity of technology components for a system and is based on a scale from one to nine, with nine representing mature technologies for full commercial application.
The technology is described by the research group as a concept where electricity is stored in the form of liquid air or nitrogen at cryogenic temperatures – below -150 degrees Celsius. It charges by using excess electricity to power compression and liquefaction of the air which is then stored as a liquid at temperatures approaching -196 degrees Celsius. To discharge, the liquid air warms and becomes a pressurized gas that operates a turbine to generate electricity.
It was conceived for utility scale applications and an output ranging from 5 MW to 100 MW. “Compared to pumped-hydro storage, which is based on the same basic concept, cryogenic energy storage has the advantage that it is a technology that can be produced through an established industry and without any expensive or rare material,” emphasized Sciacovelli. “Furthermore, there are no degradation issues and no need for specific locations or the orographic conditions that are needed for pumped-hydro, or of an underground cavity, as for compressed air storage.” Compared to these storage technologies, however, LAES has the drawback of a lower cycle efficiency, for both charging and discharging, which is close to 60%. Nonetheless, cycle efficiency can be increased through integration and co-location of LAES with nearby processes, for example liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals.
An LAES system produces hot and cold streams during its operation, both during air compression for charging and evaporation for discharging, and these streams can be utilized to improve the system efficiency, or in several industrial process. “Currently, all existing projects are being developed for grid support but decarbonization targets will likely push this technology closer to industrial processes that waste a lot of heat,” Sciacovelli stated.
The ideal location of cryogenic storage is at a grid node with a high share of renewables or an industrial park with large waste of heat. “Cryogenic storage is not directly competing with lithium-ion batteries as it provides storage for a longer duration, from over 10 hours,” Sciacovelli added. “By contrast, for lithium-ion storage, when it is needed for more than between four and six hours, bankability, currently, remains an issue.”
In terms of costs, the research group estimated that a LAES system can be built at between €300 and €600 per kilowatt-hour. “Investment return is estimated at approximately 20 years for a standalone system without integration with an industrial facility for use of excess heat,” research co-author Andrea Vecchi told pv magazine. “An ideal location in an industrial park, however, may significantly reduce this time frame.”
All existing projects were defined by the research team as bankable, although they stressed that these positive business cases are favored by certain conditions, including a determined price structure in the energy market and the presence of a grid unable to support high levels of renewable energy penetration. “LAES systems are, so far, conceived as strategic assets for the power network,” Vecchi further explained. “They can provide not only grid balancing but several grid services.”
Furthermore, the scientist went on to say, due to the high energy density of liquid air, cryogenic storage occupies less space than compressed air or pumped hydro. “We estimate that these systems can be smaller by at least an order of magnitude,” he stated.
More details on the research can be found in the paper Liquid air energy storage (LAES): a review on technology state-of-the-art, integration pathways and future perspectives, published in Advances in Applied Energy.
*The article was amended on August 2 to reflect that the estimated cost for a LAES system is expressed in kilowatt-hours.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Lithium ion battery technology has made liquid air energy storage obsolete with costs now at $150 per kWh for new batteries and about $50 per kWh for used vehicle batteries with a lot of grid storage life left. The storage cycle efficiency is also much better for batteries.
LAES is not obsolete. It requires no rare earth metals for a start. It has no density loss with time.
It required no new manufacturing methods to build the plants. It will have a longer life span.
It passively shifts renewable energy from day to night easily giving 12 hour storage. A plant once built with maintenance will likely last forever, and that is part of the costings.
Lithium ion is great for a great many things including grid level energy storage but laes will win this fight in the long term.
How does LAES compare to Lithium Ion in terms of persistent storage?
Meaning, if a country was going to replace or augment a strategic oil reserve with a strategic energy reserve, which technology would make the most sense?
Or perhaps, for long term energy storage, synthetic-gas (syngas) or other power to gas (P2G) technologies are the way to go?
I think Lithium Ion and liquid air can work well together. Lithium batteries up front so to speak. If there’s a blackout then those batteries can come online in something like point 44 of a milisecond (as was reported with the big Tesla battery in South Australia – so quick that no one notices there’s been a trip. Then use liquid air to take up the longer term power supply.
Liquid air batteries are amazing though. There’s something here about it having 60% efficiency (I’d read it was about 70 to 80% but anyways) But this article doesn’t mention that Highview have worked out a way of reusing the excess heat and cold from the process to reuse that energy to make further compression more efficient – around the 90% area. So that’s pretty good I reckon.
Liquid air “batteries” for stationary storage are indeed very interesting and safe. These huge Lithium ion stationary storage plants harbour the danger of uncontrollable fire …a fire that cannot be extinguished … has to burn out ! I would have concerns about a small lithium ion battery for domestic solar power storage … but there is always lithium iron phosphate which is somewhat safer.
By submitting this form you agree to pv magazine using your data for the purposes of publishing your comment.
Your personal data will only be disclosed or otherwise transmitted to third parties for the purposes of spam filtering or if this is necessary for technical maintenance of the website. Any other transfer to third parties will not take place unless this is justified on the basis of applicable data protection regulations or if pv magazine is legally obliged to do so.
You may revoke this consent at any time with effect for the future, in which case your personal data will be deleted immediately. Otherwise, your data will be deleted if pv magazine has processed your request or the purpose of data storage is fulfilled.
Further information on data privacy can be found in our Data Protection Policy.