Advanced Rail Energy Storage gets ROW lease from BLM

[Euclid]

Norm48327

 

ARES Pitch Man said:

Everyone believes that we have a mission to reduce our carbon footprint, to help with global warming, to stop burning fossil fuel…

Everyone? I don't think that's correct.

 

Not everyone does.  So far everyone has the right to believe what they want.

This will amount to energy rationing by price, and it will not require public support. 

Don’t let the childlike sugar coating of this vision fool you:

“Finally, rail storage has a relatively small environmental footprint. CEO Jim Kelly has said that rail storage "produces no emissions, burns no fuel, requires no water, does not use environmentally troublesome materials, and sits very lightly on the land."

He told trade mag SNL:

When you're done and it's time to decommission, you repurpose the railcars, you recycle the rails, you recycle the railroad ties, you rake up the gravel, you throw down grass seed," he said. "In a year no one knows you were there.

…it's just a clever way of repurposing existing materials. The train goes up. The train goes down. It's so easy to explain.”

[Norm48327]

Euclid

Everyone believes that we have a mission to reduce our carbon footprint, to help with global warming, to stop burning fossil fuel…

Everyone? I don't think that's correct.

[bedell]

My first thought was April Fools a month late!

[tomikawaTT]

Actually, here in Nevada it's all run by Warren Buffett (aka Berkshire Hathaway.)

This is a way to salvage electrical power that would otherwise be surplus to requirements at the instant of generation.  The wind blows when it blows.  Bright sunshine provides lots of kilowatts, but moonlight doesn't.  And if you don't use it, you lose it.  60 percent of something is a big improvement over 0% of the same thing.

So, what happens when its midnight, hot and the wind is calm.  The plant operators will shift the natural gas burning gas turbines from maximum efficiency to maximum output, just as they do now.

The electric railroad might seem to be a poorer choice than pumped storage, except that, here in the dessicated desert, there's no water to spare for pumping up a mountain.

This isn't the first time this idea has hit these forums.  I tossed it in several years back, purely as a 'what if' idea.  Nice to see that someone with sufficient money has the same idea.

Chuck (Clark County, NV. resident)

[Euclid]

 

Murphy Siding

 

Euclid

 

I don’t think that “cost effective” is part of the concept.  This is all about coercion and a sense of duty on the part of the consumer.  This kind of storage is only needed with energy sources that are unreliable and intermittent, such as wind and solar.  The frictional losses in running railcar loads up and down amount to a loss of efficiency, which adds to the cost of electricity.  Renewable energy alone adds to the cost of electricity.  It all amounts to paying rent on your carbon footprint.    

 

 

 

 

 

To quote Lucy VanPelt from A Charlie Brown Christmas: "It's all run by a big eastern sydicate don't you know".

     The power grid is all connected.  There have been power storage facilities around to deal with demand peaks and valleys since before wind and solar started being usedto produce wholesale electricity.  That carbon footprint ghost must live under your bed.

     On the surface, the idea of doing this function with a railroad seems like re-inventing the wheel in a more complicated, expensive fashion.

 

 

Sure, there have always been fluctuations in power demand, but that is not what this is about.

I think you should take a look at the video in the OP.  He says:

“Everyone believes that we have a mission to reduce our carbon footprint, to help with global warming, to stop burning fossil fuel… But we also have a dilemma in doing that.  The dilemma is that renewable technologies are fundamentally intermittent.  You only get power out of windmills when the wind is blowing.  You only get power out of solar facilities when the sun is shining.  But our demand for electricity is much more stable and we can’t tolerate having the lights go off when the wind doesn’t blow.” 

 

[Murphy Siding]

Euclid

 

I don’t think that “cost effective” is part of the concept.  This is all about coercion and a sense of duty on the part of the consumer.  This kind of storage is only needed with energy sources that are unreliable and intermittent, such as wind and solar.  The frictional losses in running railcar loads up and down amount to a loss of efficiency, which adds to the cost of electricity.  Renewable energy alone adds to the cost of electricity.  It all amounts to paying rent on your carbon footprint.    

 

 

To quote Lucy VanPelt from A Charlie Brown Christmas: "It's all run by a big eastern sydicate don't you know".

     The power grid is all connected.  There have been power storage facilities around to deal with demand peaks and valleys since before wind and solar started being usedto produce wholesale electricity.  That carbon footprint ghost must live under your bed.

     On the surface, the idea of doing this function with a railroad seems like re-inventing the wheel in a more complicated, expensive fashion.

[tree68]

MidlandMike

Power storage facilities have existed for decades to deal with demand peaks and valleys.  They also can sub for power plant failures.

More than a few small hydro facilities regularly serve as surge providers.  One near here has been that way for years.  

[MidlandMike]

Euclid

 

...  This kind of storage is only needed with energy sources that are unreliable and intermittent, such as wind and solar.  ...

 

Power storage facilities have existed for decades to deal with demand peaks and valleys.  They also can sub for power plant failures.

[tree68]

Murphy Siding

   I bet it's a lot more cost effective to do this with water in a pipe, as the post above discusses.

Methinks it depends on the geography.  To efficiently use stored water, one really needs a fairly sharp gradient - lots of elevation in a fairly short distance - with enough space at the top for a suitable reservoir.  I saw one plan years ago for Storm King Mountain (IIRC) above the Hudson River in NY.

This plan, if it's going to work, would need a fair distance of consistent grade - thus would be better for relatively flatter ground, albeit with that 10% grade.  

[Deggesty]

Euclid

 

I don’t think that “cost effective” is part of the concept.  This is all about coercion and a sense of duty on the part of the consumer.  This kind of storage is only needed with energy sources that are unreliable and intermittent, such as wind and solar.  The frictional losses in running railcar loads up and down amount to a loss of efficiency, which adds to the cost of electricity.  Renewable energy alone adds to the cost of electricity.  It all amounts to paying rent on your carbon footprint.    

 

 

[Norm48327]

Strictly opinion but it sounds a lot like another pie in the sky idea. Lots of drawbacks to running rail cars on a ten percent grade, not to mention the needed infrastructure.

[CandOforprogress2]

Now we have a use for the Virginian Railroad line owned by NS

[Euclid]

 

I don’t think that “cost effective” is part of the concept.  This is all about coercion and a sense of duty on the part of the consumer.  This kind of storage is only needed with energy sources that are unreliable and intermittent, such as wind and solar.  The frictional losses in running railcar loads up and down amount to a loss of efficiency, which adds to the cost of electricity.  Renewable energy alone adds to the cost of electricity.  It all amounts to paying rent on your carbon footprint.    

 

[Murphy Siding]

Deggesty

Quite interesting. What is the source of the electricity necessary to lift the trains up the grade? A renewable energy source? What is the response should the renewable energy source fail and all of the trains are at the bottom of the grade? Fire the boilers up?

 

I'd think that they would pull electricity off the grid when there is an overabundance and head downhill during peak needs times.  This could take up the slack of what to do when the wind is blowing, the sun is sizzling, rivers are flowing, and nobody has a need for extra juice.

     I bet it's a lot more cost effective to do this with water in a pipe, as the post above discusses.

 

[D.Carleton]

Basically a stored energy power plant. There are plants out there that use the same general idea. During low power demand cycles water is pumped from a lower reservoir to a higher reservoir. When demand increases the gates on the upper reservoir are opened and water flows through hydroturbines to generate electricity.

[Deggesty]

Quite interesting. What is the source of the electricity necessary to lift the trains up the grade? A renewable energy source? What is the response should the renewable energy source fail and all of the trains are at the bottom of the grade? Fire the boilers up?

[SledDawg]

This is a fascinating project that I was unaware of:

http://insights.globalspec.com/article/2550/an-energy-storage-project-gains-traction

"In simple terms, the system will work this way: A fleet of electric trains will haul flatcars weighing 230 tons each up a 5.5-mile-long incline to an elevation some 3,000 feet above their starting point. When grid stabilization services are needed—say at times of fluctuating output from renewable energy resources—the trains will roll downhill at speeds of just under 19 mph. On their descent they will use regenerative braking to generate electricity and deliver it to the grid."

Here's the company: http://www.aresnorthamerica.com/

This would make a fascinating  but at the same time really boring model railroad!

Dave G.