Design issues for compressed air energy storage in sealed underground cavities

Large-Scale Pumped Thermal Electricity Storages—Converting Energy Using Shallow Lined Rock Caverns, Carbon Dioxide and Underground Pumped-Hydro

“…From their work, Figure 2 shows an assessment of the safety factor against lift-up depending on normalized storage pressure and on normalized storage depth. Perazzelli et al studied several design issues of LRCs in 2015, for their possible application to CAES, including ground uplift, buckling of liner, cycling and fatigue and concrete plug [18]. To evaluate the integrity of cavern sides, in 2016, Tunsakul et al performed a study of fracture patterns of rock mass around a pressurized storage cavern based on the element-free Galerkin (EFG) method with a cohesive crack model.…”

“…In all cases, to limit rock failures to unavoidable low-amplitude tensile fracturing in the vicinity of cavern periphery and to avoid stepping into the domain of shear fracturing, it is recommended that the maximum pressure operated in the cavern does not exceed the uniaxial compression strength of the rock mass, which is usually higher than 15 MPa for most rock formation. In the case of soft rock mass, usually of low Young's modulus (i.e., lower than 10 GPa), large radial displacements of rock walls must be avoided to hinder a heavy tensile fracturing of the thin concrete shell protecting the liner, as well as to hinder a later buckling of the liner itself at depressurization [18]. This can be accomplished by a high-pressure cement-grouting of the rock mass to a radial distance of at least one diameter, creating a somehow synthetic rock mass of higher uniaxial compression strength and of higher Young's modulus.…”

“…Issues related to fatigue of the concrete shell and liner are of course linked with maximum and minimum pressures during operations, to the quantity of cycles along the cavern lifetime (40 years expected), to the quality of the rock mass and finally to the shell and liner themselves. Perazzelli et al have conducted thorough simulations on this subject [18]. Another issue is the liner compatibility with fluids contained in the cavern.…”

Current research and development trend of compressed air energy storage

“…The influence of the compressor on the system performance was clarified which provides the evidence to support the system optimization. Perazzelli and Anagnostou (2016) proposed a geometrical description of the vortex air motor, derived the calculation formula of the vortex drive torque, established the dynamic working process of the vortex air motor and verified it through experiment. Li et al (Saadat & Li, 2016) combined a liquid piston with a solid piston, which was driven by a hydraulic booster, to substantially reduce the volume of the pump/motor.…”

Comparing Subsurface Energy Storage Systems: Underground Pumped Storage Hydropower, Compressed Air Energy Storage and Suspended Weight Gravity Energy Storage

“…The second is the 110 MW plant with a rated energy capacity of 26 hours in McIntosh (USA). Many studies have been carried out to analyze the implementation of CAES plants in disused underground spaces [11][12][13][14], but no plants have been built yet. This paper analyzes different ways of storing energy in disused underground spaces.…”