{"title":"绝热和绝热压缩空气储能系统的全生命周期用能效率和CO2强度","authors":"Boyukagha Baghirov , Sahar Hoornahad , Denis Voskov , Rouhi Farajzadeh","doi":"10.1016/j.est.2025.118572","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study uses the concept of exergy-return on exergy-investment (ERoEI) to evaluate the life-cycle exergetic efficiency and CO₂ intensity (grams CO₂ per MJ of electricity) of (diabatic and adiabatic) compressed air energy storage (CAES) systems. Several CAES configurations are assessed under defined system boundaries, including diabatic systems powered by methane (CH₄) or hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>), and adiabatic system with a thermal energy storage (TES) facility.</div><div>The results show that conventional (diabatic) CAES system powered by natural gas has the lower exergetic efficiency and higher CO<sub>2</sub> intensity compared to adiabatic CAES due to the heat dissipation during compression stage and additional fuel requirements for reheating the air during expansion. Integrating carbon capture and storage (CCS) plant with conventional diabatic CAES can nearly halve the CO₂ intensity for electricity generation although the additional exergy investment for the CCS process reduces the exergetic efficiency of the system. Transitioning to green H<sub>2</sub> (produced from low-carbon electricity) as the primary turbine fuel in the diabatic CAES results in a 65–76 % reduction in CO₂ intensity. However, the average exergetic efficiency of system decreases by around 10 %, mainly due to the substantial exergy investment associated with hydrogen production. It is also found that the adiabatic CAES system integrated with TES demonstrates the highest thermodynamic and environmental performance. When 100 % of compression heat is captured and reused during discharge phase, the system reaches ERoEI values up to 61 % with CO<sub>2</sub> intensity of 12–26 g CO₂ per MJe.</div><div><em>Disclaimer: The results and performance metrics presented in this study are based on modelled scenarios and literature-derived parameters under defined system boundaries. Actual performance of CAES systems may vary depending on site-specific conditions, technology maturity, and operational configurations. All efficiency values, CO₂ intensity estimates, and comparative assessments should be interpreted within the context of the assumptions and limitations described herein. This study does not constitute a commercial endorsement or performance guarantee. The authors have made every effort to ensure accuracy but accept no liability for decisions made based on this analysis.</em></div></div>","PeriodicalId":15942,"journal":{"name":"Journal of energy storage","volume":"139 ","pages":"Article 118572"},"PeriodicalIF":8.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Life-cycle exergetic efficiency and CO2 intensity of diabatic and adiabatic compressed air energy storage systems\",\"authors\":\"Boyukagha Baghirov , Sahar Hoornahad , Denis Voskov , Rouhi Farajzadeh\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.est.2025.118572\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>This study uses the concept of exergy-return on exergy-investment (ERoEI) to evaluate the life-cycle exergetic efficiency and CO₂ intensity (grams CO₂ per MJ of electricity) of (diabatic and adiabatic) compressed air energy storage (CAES) systems. Several CAES configurations are assessed under defined system boundaries, including diabatic systems powered by methane (CH₄) or hydrogen (H<sub>2</sub>), and adiabatic system with a thermal energy storage (TES) facility.</div><div>The results show that conventional (diabatic) CAES system powered by natural gas has the lower exergetic efficiency and higher CO<sub>2</sub> intensity compared to adiabatic CAES due to the heat dissipation during compression stage and additional fuel requirements for reheating the air during expansion. Integrating carbon capture and storage (CCS) plant with conventional diabatic CAES can nearly halve the CO₂ intensity for electricity generation although the additional exergy investment for the CCS process reduces the exergetic efficiency of the system. Transitioning to green H<sub>2</sub> (produced from low-carbon electricity) as the primary turbine fuel in the diabatic CAES results in a 65–76 % reduction in CO₂ intensity. However, the average exergetic efficiency of system decreases by around 10 %, mainly due to the substantial exergy investment associated with hydrogen production. It is also found that the adiabatic CAES system integrated with TES demonstrates the highest thermodynamic and environmental performance. When 100 % of compression heat is captured and reused during discharge phase, the system reaches ERoEI values up to 61 % with CO<sub>2</sub> intensity of 12–26 g CO₂ per MJe.</div><div><em>Disclaimer: The results and performance metrics presented in this study are based on modelled scenarios and literature-derived parameters under defined system boundaries. Actual performance of CAES systems may vary depending on site-specific conditions, technology maturity, and operational configurations. All efficiency values, CO₂ intensity estimates, and comparative assessments should be interpreted within the context of the assumptions and limitations described herein. This study does not constitute a commercial endorsement or performance guarantee. The authors have made every effort to ensure accuracy but accept no liability for decisions made based on this analysis.</em></div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15942,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of energy storage\",\"volume\":\"139 \",\"pages\":\"Article 118572\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of energy storage\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X25032852\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENERGY & FUELS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of energy storage","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352152X25032852","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENERGY & FUELS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究使用火能投资回报(ERoEI)的概念来评估(绝热和绝热)压缩空气储能(CAES)系统的生命周期火能效率和CO₂强度(每兆焦耳电能克CO₂)。在确定的系统边界下评估了几种CAES配置,包括由甲烷(CH₄)或氢(H2)驱动的绝热系统,以及带有热能储存(TES)设施的绝热系统。结果表明,与绝热CAES相比,传统(绝热)天然气CAES系统具有较低的火用效率和较高的CO2强度,这主要是由于压缩阶段的散热和膨胀过程中再加热空气所需的额外燃料。将碳捕获和储存(CCS)工厂与传统的非绝热CAES相结合,可以将发电的二氧化碳强度降低近一半,尽管CCS过程的额外火用投资降低了系统的火用效率。过渡到绿色H2(由低碳电力产生)作为非绝热CAES的主要涡轮燃料,可使二氧化碳强度降低65 - 76%。然而,系统的平均火用效率下降了约10%,主要是由于与制氢相关的大量火用投资。研究还发现,与TES集成的绝热CAES系统表现出最高的热力学和环境性能。当100%的压缩热被捕获并在排放阶段被再利用时,系统的ERoEI值达到61%,二氧化碳强度为每MJe 12-26 g CO₂。免责声明:本研究中给出的结果和性能指标是基于已定义系统边界下的模拟场景和文献衍生参数。CAES系统的实际性能可能会因站点特定条件、技术成熟度和操作配置而有所不同。所有效率值、CO₂强度估计和比较评估都应在本文所述的假设和限制的背景下进行解释。本研究不构成商业背书或性能保证。作者已尽一切努力确保准确性,但对基于此分析做出的决定不承担任何责任。
Life-cycle exergetic efficiency and CO2 intensity of diabatic and adiabatic compressed air energy storage systems
This study uses the concept of exergy-return on exergy-investment (ERoEI) to evaluate the life-cycle exergetic efficiency and CO₂ intensity (grams CO₂ per MJ of electricity) of (diabatic and adiabatic) compressed air energy storage (CAES) systems. Several CAES configurations are assessed under defined system boundaries, including diabatic systems powered by methane (CH₄) or hydrogen (H2), and adiabatic system with a thermal energy storage (TES) facility.
The results show that conventional (diabatic) CAES system powered by natural gas has the lower exergetic efficiency and higher CO2 intensity compared to adiabatic CAES due to the heat dissipation during compression stage and additional fuel requirements for reheating the air during expansion. Integrating carbon capture and storage (CCS) plant with conventional diabatic CAES can nearly halve the CO₂ intensity for electricity generation although the additional exergy investment for the CCS process reduces the exergetic efficiency of the system. Transitioning to green H2 (produced from low-carbon electricity) as the primary turbine fuel in the diabatic CAES results in a 65–76 % reduction in CO₂ intensity. However, the average exergetic efficiency of system decreases by around 10 %, mainly due to the substantial exergy investment associated with hydrogen production. It is also found that the adiabatic CAES system integrated with TES demonstrates the highest thermodynamic and environmental performance. When 100 % of compression heat is captured and reused during discharge phase, the system reaches ERoEI values up to 61 % with CO2 intensity of 12–26 g CO₂ per MJe.
Disclaimer: The results and performance metrics presented in this study are based on modelled scenarios and literature-derived parameters under defined system boundaries. Actual performance of CAES systems may vary depending on site-specific conditions, technology maturity, and operational configurations. All efficiency values, CO₂ intensity estimates, and comparative assessments should be interpreted within the context of the assumptions and limitations described herein. This study does not constitute a commercial endorsement or performance guarantee. The authors have made every effort to ensure accuracy but accept no liability for decisions made based on this analysis.
期刊介绍:
Journal of energy storage focusses on all aspects of energy storage, in particular systems integration, electric grid integration, modelling and analysis, novel energy storage technologies, sizing and management strategies, business models for operation of storage systems and energy storage developments worldwide.