←back to thread

190 points erwinmatijsen | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.503s | source
Show context
fulafel ◴[] No.45112956[source]
It doesn't list the advantages over water, which seems the most common in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_energy_storage systems.

You'd think water would be easier to exchange heat with since it can slosh around the heat exchanger elements in the tank more easily. Which should translate to lower costs since you don't need as many exchanger structures in the medium.

Any guesses for the motivation in using sand? Maybe it's that you can heat it over 100C? But then big heat differences to the environment mean high conductive/radiation losses or heavier insulation requirements.

replies(8): >>45112966 #>>45112970 #>>45112974 #>>45112977 #>>45113241 #>>45113273 #>>45113356 #>>45113612 #
decimalenough ◴[] No.45112970[source]
The article mentions that they heat the sand to 500°C, which is not possible with water (well, at least not without turning into steam along the way).
replies(1): >>45113324 #
Cthulhu_ ◴[] No.45113324[source]
To be pedantic, yes you can but you'd need to pressurize it to uuhh... According to this calculator [0], you can get water to 370 degrees C if the pressure is 207 atmospheres, which is about the pressure of the ocean two kilometers deep.

[0] https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-vapor-saturation-pr...

replies(2): >>45113493 #>>45113554 #
1. nick49488171 ◴[] No.45113493[source]
How many kiloton of TNT equivalent?
replies(1): >>45113560 #
2. grues-dinner ◴[] No.45113560[source]
Well, if you say the energy stored is the 100MWh from the headline figure, and say you can arrange release every joule of all at once by flashing high-pressure water to steam at 1 atm that's about 0.1kT.

So quite a bang - allegedly this is 200lb, so about the same: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDgvar7ON54