Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Ultra-Mega-Super-Duper-Mondo -Giganto-Humongous Capacitors

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Ultra-Mega-Super-Duper-Mondo -Giganto-Humongous Capacitors

Unread postby SolarDave » Sat 16 Jul 2005, 05:50:37

I have a dream - that we will sequester much of the carbon we are pumping out of the ground in "whole house" sized carbon super capacitors. Yes - BIG ones, the size of a trachcan/wastebin, buried next to the house. 12 or 24 of them, each around 1-2 volts, with 1,000,000 cycle lifetime. (Anyone want to back me financially?)

This setup would enable grid load-leveling, home EV dump charging, locally-generated power (solar, wind, etc) storage, blackout ride-through, and it might be environmentally benign.

So - it's research time. What is the LARGEST carbon ultracapacitor ever made? Single unit, or "battery" - I don't care.

Here is a reference to an 80,000 Farad monster:

Unbelieveably Large Capacitor

And this electric "dragster" has the equivalent of 432,000 Farads at 2.5 volts:

Capacitor Powered Car

So - how many Joules or Farads would an ultracap the size of a 33 gallon trashcan store, and what would it cost. Tell me I'm not crazy ;-)
User avatar
SolarDave
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu 19 May 2005, 03:00:00

Unread postby chris-h » Sat 16 Jul 2005, 07:16:34

Energy Stored in a Capacitor.

The Energy stored in a capacitor is given by:
E = 0.5 C V 2

Where
E = Energy stored in capacitor, Joules
C = Capacitance, Farads
V = Potential Difference, Volts

only 2.5 volts.

Normal capacitors has much less farad but much more voltage up to 400 K.
So energy stored the same very little compared to the grid actually.
So another dead end.
88822-88822=0
chris-h
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Mon 11 Oct 2004, 03:00:00

80.000 F capacitor

Unread postby Epyon » Sat 16 Jul 2005, 08:19:07

Hey guys,

the 80.000 F capacitor is the largest capacitor that is currently commercially available. We are talking about a 80.000F 1.7V (115,6 kJ)capacitor with the measurements of 98.5mm x 82.5mm x 237mm.....not too bad hey?

There are indeed a lot of applications with these new capacitors. Most popular at Epyon is the 5000F capacitor because of its good price quality ratio. Epyon currently develops modules out of these for the use in trains and electric vehicles. For more info please send an e-mail to info@epyon.nl or visit the website www.epyon.nl

These new capacitors have a much larger energy density than the traditional capacitors, the new capacitors range to approximately 10Wh/Kg (I believe a Lead acid battery has an energy density of 20 Wh/Kg).

So Solardave, from experience I think your dreams can be realized right now!
User avatar
Epyon
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Ultra-Mega-Super-Duper-Mondo -Giganto-Humongous Capacito

Unread postby Devil » Sat 16 Jul 2005, 09:07:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SolarDave', 'I') have a dream - that we will sequester much of the carbon we are pumping out of the ground in "whole house" sized carbon super capacitors.


Dream on. Have you any idea of how much carbon we are pumping into the air each year, from fossil sources? Some 5 gigatonnes = 5 x 10^9 tonnes = 5 x 10^15 g. One supercap uses typically about 5 g of carbon. Therefore, to sequester one year's emissions of carbon, you would need make 10^15 supercaps. This is about 170 supercaps per man, woman and child in the world per year, just to balance the emissions, not to mention the 200 or so gigatonnes that we have already stocked in the air since the start of the industrial revolution. I have a little niggling feeling that your dream couldn't even make a measurable dent in the 750 Gt of carbon in the atmosphere (even if we could find room for it all, if we extracted it).

As the C in the atmosphere is bound up in molecules like CO2 and CH4, there is another wee problem. Where would we find the energy to extract the carbon from them?

Have a look at http://www.cypenv.org/Files/sequest.htm to get a glimpse of the magnitude of the problem.

Now, let's imagine your dream became reality. These capacitors are electrolytic. By definition, that means they are leaky. They cannot hold their charge indefinitely. This makes them ideal for floating applications where a sudden short-term load needs power. They cannot be used for storing energy in non-floating applications. One of the characteristics of electrolytics is that the leakage current varies between individual components. For this reason, in series constructions, necessary for voltages >2.5 V, a balancing network of resistors of a value such that each one is about 1/10 the resistance of the leak. is necessary. This would have the advantage that the charge in each unit would always be ± identical (otherwise, the energy available would be limited to proportionally that of the most discharged one). However, this chain of resistors would accelerate the discharge, unless they were floating.

Practically, I cannot foresee your notions being very good.

Dream on! :)
Devil
User avatar
Devil
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 816
Joined: Tue 06 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Cyprus

Re: Ultra-Mega-Super-Duper-Mondo -Giganto-Humongous Capacito

Unread postby SolarDave » Sat 16 Jul 2005, 13:33:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SolarDave', 'I') have a dream - that we will sequester much of the carbon we are pumping out of the ground in "whole house" sized carbon super capacitors.


Dream on. Have you any idea of how much carbon we are pumping into the air each year, from fossil sources? Some 5 gigatonnes = 5 x 10^9 tonnes = 5 x 10^15 g. One supercap uses typically about 5 g of carbon. Therefore, to sequester one year's emissions of carbon, you would need make 10^15 supercaps. This is about 170 supercaps per man, woman and child in the world per year, just to balance the emissions, not to mention the 200 or so gigatonnes that we have already stocked in the air since the start of the industrial revolution. I have a little niggling feeling that your dream couldn't even make a measurable dent in the 750 Gt of carbon in the atmosphere (even if we could find room for it all, if we extracted it).


Thanks for the facts and figures, Devil. All I can say is "ouch." I am suggesting something like 1200 KG carbon/house, so it is more than a household might generate in a year, but still....

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', 'A')s the C in the atmosphere is bound up in molecules like CO2 and CH4, there is another wee problem. Where would we find the energy to extract the carbon from them?


I think we would move further "upstream." and tap into the schemes that are suggesting creating under-ocean lakes of CO2, or reinjecting CO2 into old oil wells, rather than try to wring it out of the air. Even so, I understand it taks as much energy to pry carbon and oxygen apart as it does to get them together. The carbon might have to come from another source (charcoal? It's a slow process, but it does pull it out of the air...) and it would have to be renewable... But at least it would be sequestered.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', 'H')ave a look at http://www.cypenv.org/Files/sequest.htm to get a glimpse of the magnitude of the problem.


Thanks for the link!

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', 'N')ow, let's imagine your dream became reality. These capacitors are electrolytic. By definition, that means they are leaky. They cannot hold their charge indefinitely. This makes them ideal for floating applications where a sudden short-term load needs power. They cannot be used for storing energy in non-floating applications. One of the characteristics of electrolytics is that the leakage current varies between individual components. For this reason, in series constructions, necessary for voltages >2.5 V, a balancing network of resistors of a value such that each one is about 1/10 the resistance of the leak. is necessary. This would have the advantage that the charge in each unit would always be ± identical (otherwise, the energy available would be limited to proportionally that of the most discharged one). However, this chain of resistors would accelerate the discharge, unless they were floating.


You are probably aware that you are describing "passive" capacitor balancing approaches, and they are indeed known to be inefficient. Active approaches are much more efficient.

A Backup Power System Using Ultracapacitors

Everything "leaks" electricity. Any type of battery loses part of the energy stored inside it over time. Even the grid is a big leaker: close to 10% of transported energy and growing...

Overview of the Electric Grid

I don't deny the capacitors will leak. It's a matter of "how much."

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Devil', 'P')ractically, I cannot foresee your notions being very good.

Dream on! :)


Thanks for your assessment - I'll stick to my day job! BUT....

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Epyon', 'S')o Solardave, from experience I think your dreams can be realized right now!


I'd like to hear if anyone has worked the numbers on a "whole house" sized capacitor bank, engineered to be low cost/high volume, and low leakage (in other words, "lightly stressed") just to get a ballpark idea of the performance of such a monstrous set of capacitors.

I know Ultracapacitors are being used in some high-end solar lighting:

Solar Lighting with Ultracapacitor Storage

The size I am suggesting is a gigantic scale-up from that. It ought to be possible to work up some numbers.

Certainly easier than estimating the cost of some of the other technologies being discussed on this board....

While this idea only addresses storage, not generation, it's still a possible piece of the puzzle.
User avatar
SolarDave
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu 19 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Off the wall but on topic

Unread postby SolarDave » Sat 16 Jul 2005, 13:47:55

I just had another thought, but this one is a little whackier.

Coal might be a good source for the carbon. Now bear with me...

In California, for example, the ratio of electricity required for peak times is approximately 50% - 100% more than is needed during off peak. That means, in California, up to HALF of the generation capacity in the state is turned on and then off EACH DAY.

And until someone invents a Nuclear reactor that can be brough up to full power and then back to zero every 24 hours, the top HALF of that generation will be provided mostly by fossil fuels.

What would the value be of leveling that load with enough storage to smooth out the 24 hour cycle - no more? I'll bet the value would be HUGE, and it would enable "baseload" technologies like Nuclear to meet peak demands...

Is this an example of how a fossil fuel "resource" (coal) would be used in a different manner (to manufacture load-leveling ultracapacitors) rather than burning it - to change the course of Peak Oil?
User avatar
SolarDave
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 400
Joined: Thu 19 May 2005, 03:00:00

Peak shaving with ultracaps

Unread postby Epyon » Sun 17 Jul 2005, 18:46:16

Hey Dave,

we allready looked into the idea of saving money by storing energy during off peak times and then using it at peak times and related applications. The problem is that current ultracapacitors are still too expensive for that use. However there is a new development in the field of ultracapacitors that is expected to make ultracapacitors very suitable for such applications; so called hybrid ultracapacitors, implying a combination of a battery and a ultracapacitor. These will be ready for the market in a few years. If you know companies interested in such a business case, please let me know.

Any other ideas/dreams are also welcome!
User avatar
Epyon
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat 16 Jul 2005, 03:00:00


Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron