E3S Web Conf.
Volume 162, 2020The 4th International Conference on Power, Energy and Mechanical Engineering (ICPEME 2020)
|Number of page(s)||4|
|Section||Power and Energy Engineering|
|Published online||07 April 2020|
Comparing Subsurface Energy Storage Systems: Underground Pumped Storage Hydropower, Compressed Air Energy Storage and Suspended Weight Gravity Energy Storage
Hunaser Energy, 33005 Oviedo, Spain
2 Mining Engineer, 39011, Santander, Spain
3 University of Oviedo, Mining Exploitation Department, 33004 Oviedo, Spain
* Corresponding author: firstname.lastname@example.org
In the current energy context, intermittent and non-dispatchable renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar photovoltaic (generation does not necessarily correspond to demand), require flexible solutions to store energy. Energy storage systems (ESS) are able to balance the intermittent and volatile generation outputs of variable renewable energies (VRE). ESS provide ancillary services such as: frequency, primary and voltage control to the power grid. In order to fulfil the power system control, ESS can switch within seconds for different operation modes. Many times, ESS imply environment impacts on landscape and society. To solve this problem, disused underground spaces, such as closed mines, can be used as underground reservoir for energy storage plants. In this paper, a comparative analysis between underground pumped storage hydropower (UPSH), compressed air energy storage (CAES) and suspended weight gravity energy storage (SWGES) with suspended weights in abandoned mine shafts is carried out. Pumped storage hydropower (PSH) is the most mature concept and account for 99% of bulk storage capacity worldwide. The results obtained show that in UPSH and CAES plants, the amount of stored energy depends mainly on the underground reservoir capacity, while in SWGES plants depends on the depth of the mine shafts and the mass. The energy stored in a SWGES plant (3.81 MWh cycle-1 with 600 m of usable depth assuming 3,000 tonne suspended weight) is much lower than UPSH and CAES plants.
© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2020
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.