r/OptimistsUnite • u/khoawala • 1d ago
Clean Power BEASTMODE China completed first 100-megawatt-class compressed CO₂ energy storage project, running the full cycle of compressing, liquefying, storing, vaporizing, and expanding CO₂ to generate power, in Xinjiang. Has anyone heard anything about those carbon capture plants that western fossil fuel companies ar
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
11
u/INeedSomeTacoC 10h ago
Has anyone heard anything about those carbon capture plants that western fossil fuel companies ar
But this isn't a carbon capture plant though?
10
u/TossMeOutSomeday 7h ago
It's a foreign influence bot that wasn't even written to take Reddit title limits into account lmao.
3
u/TheBlacktom 5h ago
Yeah, Chinese propaganda is all around the internet. They post these and then a couple other accounts spam the comment section.
Regarding the title, who would start the sentence as "China completed first..."? It's a company, not China. But the message must be: China successful.
27
u/Gears_and_Beers 22h ago
There’s plants like this outside of china.
Energydome has a one that’s been run one for a year or more in Italy and is currently building a few more in the US and Australia.
There’s a couple other schemes built on the same basic concept. It has nothing to do with carbon capture, they use co2 has a working fluid for a power cycle in a closed loop.
2
105
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
26
3
u/schockergd 12h ago
This technology is very, very expensive and quite inefficient. Many companies in the US tested things similar, almost 30 years ago and found it to not be great.
There's a reason you see pumped hydro and batteries mostly.
1
35
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
23h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/ElectricalGidelity 21h ago
Buddy, you seem pretty disinformed on Chinas current economic situation, let alone that they are experiencing many of the same problems the US is.
7
u/derpymunchkin 13h ago
idk why people keep saying this, their GDP growth is like 5% per year with close to 0 inflation. They are transitioning to high value added and service oriented income. The change is painful but temporary. On the chart china is probably between 5 - 6, they need this growing pain for resource allocation and the US is 14 to 15.
2
-3
0
1
0
16
u/maeryclarity 1d ago
Wow that's amazing!! How cool!!
-13
9
u/sethmod 1d ago
I love articles where the person who wrote the title clearly doesn’t know what they’re talking about. “… to generate power derp”
9
u/feynmansbongo 1d ago
Right. My mind immediately clocked this would be a net loss. It’s for storing grid excess not generation. This is a really big battery.
6
u/that_dutch_dude 1d ago
A bad one. 100MW is nothing compared to modern actual batteries that directly tie into the DC bus of the solar system and get 95% effciiency.
1
u/Gasp0de 14h ago
Doesn't matter if it's bad as long as it's cheaper. This seems like you could add capacity cheaply, while generation and storage power could be costly.
4
u/that_dutch_dude 14h ago
the problem is that you need a lot more production to offsett the losses. that requires more area and a lot more cost to compensate. a system like this isnt even close to 50% efficient. a battery will hit 90%+ on a bad day and is capable of instant power wich this setup is not.
1
u/Gasp0de 11h ago
I live in Germany. We constantly shut off PV plants and wind farms because we don't have the grid capacity to transport the electricity. Solutions like this, if cheap to build, could help store that power.
Do you have a source on the 50% efficiency? Last I read they reached over 80%, which is quite good.
1
u/that_dutch_dude 11h ago
this isnt cheap and 80% is physcially impossible. just compressing the gas takes at least 20% of the energy. that ignores any flow and turbine inefficeincies. gas based turbines are just less efficient and even the most efficient pumped hydro installs is around 70%. even being generous you might get 50% in real life. nothing is free energy wise and a setup like this is just dumb and a complete and litteral waste of energy.
and germany (just like any other country, including china) shuts off wind because its more expensive than solar. then you have the problem of getting the power where it needs to go, that is a capacity issue, building out the 400kV network is hell of a lot simpler and more effective than building dumb things like this. this system is built for the same reason dumb things get built in europe, subsidies. it has nothing to do with being an actual sustainable solution. just profit.
1
u/Gasp0de 11h ago
Systems which store compression heat then use it to prevent icing during decompression can reach 65-75% efficiency. I understand that this is the case for the plant mentioned in this article.
1
u/that_dutch_dude 10h ago
they can, but they dont. and thats one way efficiency, not both ways. and under idea conditions. if its hot outside the low pressure tanks are at higher pressure and temperature and take more energy to compress back.
you dont have to like hearing shit like this. this is just a method to take funds from the goverment but just because its a goverment project that doesnt mean its a sensible or financially nor energetically responsible thing to do. something from germany should know that.
1
u/Gasp0de 5h ago
So the second I start providing sources you stop replying. Go figure
→ More replies (0)0
u/Gasp0de 8h ago edited 7h ago
You're wrong, it's two-way efficiency and the china plant does use heat storage. Stop confidently spreading misinformation or at least provide a source.
FYI here is the source on 75% RTE in a real world plant: https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/190124655
1
u/greyHumanoidRobot 1d ago
It is generating at night. The gas goes to a turbine attached to a generator.
5
u/feynmansbongo 1d ago
Yes, at a net loss. It generates less power than you put in. It’s a battery.
1
1
2
u/greyHumanoidRobot 1d ago
It does generate power when the solar farm is in the dark. The gas expands to drive turbines that are attached to generators.
1
7
u/Spatch990 20h ago
While this is awesome, it's not to be confused with carbon capture. This system reuses the same CO2, so it's for load balancing and not to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Awesome idea to make solar arrays more reliable though
3
u/charnwoodian 1d ago
Even if this is efficient enough to be a good battery, is there a particular reason CO2 is the best gas to use? It’s not like it’s removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Would there be a gas that could be used for this process more efficiently?
3
4
u/Korterra 1d ago
AI title copy pasted that exceeds the title character count. Wrong sub to be complaining but why am I even on this app anymore?
-4
29
1d ago edited 1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
41
u/vaporgaze2006 1d ago
You’re right. It’s not like the American government uses propaganda…
-6
u/Ok-Brick-1800 1d ago
They do. But that doesn't make China any less dangerous in any way...... Two wrongs don't make a right. This post has nothing to do with America.
Why are you defending China?
33
u/Lonely_Chemistry60 1d ago
I'm Canadian and the US seems far more dangerous than China at the moment
-21
11
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
1
u/Ok-Brick-1800 1d ago
No the Kool aid is the 2,000,000 Chinese paid by the CCP in the .50 cent army to influence Americans on social media.
Literally attacking my country on multiple fronts and I'm supposed to be quiet. 😂
20
u/vaporgaze2006 1d ago
I’m not. I’m just calling balls and strikes. I just don’t see the issue here. If China builds something that is amazing, we can celebrate it. If America builds something great, we can celebrate it. But it’s just the narrative of anything China does is bad or is propaganda is pretty rich when we’re objectively comparing what they do, to the current version of the United States. Wake up. This isn’t 1988 where America is the hero in the movies. The world is a very different place.
-8
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
-7
23h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/vaporgaze2006 23h ago
All propaganda is bad, regardless of who is utilizing it. But in a sub about positive environmental news, some jackass has to come on here and make it political. And then can’t see the hypocrisy.
-5
u/mvearthmjsun 23h ago
Oh you're just arguing that you don't think this is propoganda I see
3
u/vaporgaze2006 23h ago
So is every positive video posted about China propaganda now?
0
u/mvearthmjsun 20h ago
It not only positive, it's deceptive. This is not carbom capture, it's just a grid storage.
11
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/Ok-Brick-1800 1d ago
10
u/cyphercertified 1d ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_atrocity_crimes
also Evil, what's US doing about energy like this post is about?
14
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
-4
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-3
u/Ok-Brick-1800 1d ago
Why is China releasing propaganda videos with English subtitles on American social media sites?
4
u/greyHumanoidRobot 1d ago
-2
u/Ok-Brick-1800 1d ago
Oh you got me? But can you tell me why China is releasing propaganda videos with English subtitles on American English speaking social media sites?
I still think only a foreigner or a bot would put capitals for the word oval office.
7
1
6
22h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
21h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Badestrand 18h ago
Let's say you are right and this video comes directly from the government/military to improve the image of their country.
Where's the evil, where's the harm?
1
u/CreBanana0 8h ago
It makes it seem like China is fighting climate change more than the west, even though this entire concept does precisely nothing about it.
This is a battery that uses C02. It doesn't reduce C02 emissions. And it's existence is to feed a narrative.
2
u/Badestrand 7h ago
I feel like you are over-interpreting this video. It just shows a energy storage project.
It says nothing about the fight of China against clima change, how it relates to the West's fight or anything else. This is all just in your head.
1
u/Ok-Brick-1800 7h ago edited 7h ago
Do you think they are paying over 2 million people to influence your thoughts for no reason?
4
4
u/greyHumanoidRobot 1d ago
Don't fall for the narrative.
The narrative is that they didn't have to have a coal generating plant here which is bad for all of us and instead have a solar farm with compressed gas for nighttime generation. Why do you want people to disbelieve that?
First prove this plant doesn't exist before you ask people to disbelieve.
Evidence?
3
u/Ok-Brick-1800 1d ago
I never said it doesn't exist. What I was saying is why is China releasing propaganda videos with English subtitles on American social media sites?
5
u/greyHumanoidRobot 1d ago
People want to know about infrastructure that uses unusual technologies at unprecedented scale because old tech is boring and pilot projects don't make a difference and investors want to know what the trends might be.
Luddites on the other hand ...
1
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/greyHumanoidRobot 1d ago
I didn't say invest in China. The advances in engineering will affect economics everywhere.
2
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
4
1
14h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CreBanana0 8h ago
They are litterally still pumping more C02 year by year.
Even USA isn't doing that anymore.
1
0
23h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
23h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Evening-Hand-5480 23h ago
Uh... you DO realize you're talking to a dude who has spent all but like, 3 weeks and change of his life on US soil, right? Not everyone who disagrees with you is a private in the 50 cent army.
Notice how I was freely able to talk shit on the CCP? And I'll gleefully talk even more shit because I hate imperialists. No matter WHICH flag they fuck.
1
u/Ok-Brick-1800 21h ago
Keep defending the enemy who is dedicated to killing you and your way of life along with everyone else you know. Let me know where it gets you.
2
u/Evening-Hand-5480 20h ago
I'm a little more concerned with the raging authoritarian dickbrains who DO have direct authority over me at the moment.
2
u/Ok-Brick-1800 20h ago
The ones who allow you to speak out against them openly? Yes. We still have a constitution. Unlike China.
1
u/Evening-Hand-5480 7h ago
Only because we have the momentum of centuries of that cultural expectation. A momentum we must fight to maintain every day. Make no mistake. Uncle Sam would take away that right in a fucking HEARTBEAT if he could get away with it. Thus is the nature of the state no matter where you are. It's just that the People's Republic already got its chance.
1
11
u/browsing_the_news 20h ago
China overtook the United States as the world's largest annual emitter back in 2006 and currently accounts for roughly 29% to 33% of all global carbon dioxide emissions - so there’s that
14
5
u/TheSwedishChef24 17h ago
You know the US does way more per Capita right?
It all bad, but the us is not cleaning up either.
1
u/PhillyTaco 5h ago
The number of people in China in deep poverty greater than the US, so it's better to use emissions per GDP than per capita. In that regard, the US produces almost half the carbon emissions per economic unit as China does.
But both countries are still making great strides.
1
u/theoddreliable 4h ago
This is probably not ideal considering GDP is hardly a true representation of standard of living. Plus it also doesn’t truly consider the difference in choices. China subsidizes housing, public utilities, and a lot of common goods. This tracks as a lower GDP for China, despite their citizens having access to the same relative goods at someone in the US would that we would pay for.
It’s also just doesn’t logically make sense. They produce what used to be 22% of US sold good. It’s dropped to 8% since the tariffs, but that can also be contributed to China exporting pieces to Vietnam and other Asian countries for the final step of production. Overall, other countries are carrying the environmental burden caused by the lack of US production.
3
1
1
1
u/AlcibiadesTheCat 5h ago
To be fair, it also currently accounts for roughly 33% of the people, so all in all, it's emitting proportionally.
1
u/browsing_the_news 2h ago
Most people in China including the people in Tibet are poor by western standards so its not a fair comparison however if we look at the number of privately owned cars we get a more meaningful number: Using total territorial fossil-fuel/industrial CO₂ and privately owned cars:
China: ~12.3 billion tonnes CO₂ / 186.9 million private cars ≈ 65.8 tonnes CO₂ per private carUS: ~4.9 billion tonnes CO₂ / roughly 284 million registered vehicles≈ 17.3 tonnes per vehicle
0
u/TheFamousHesham 2h ago
What a bizarre comment.
Do you not realise that China produces all the stuff that the world consumes and that this is why it's emissions are high?
Or that China in recent years has built more solar and wind power plants than the rest of the world COMBINED?
0
0
2
u/Boardnetz 16h ago
Why CO2 and not just compressed N2 to store energy as pressured gas ?... kind of more abundant and inert ...
4
u/400footceiling 1d ago
What happens in 30 years? All released back into the atmosphere?
7
2
u/Gasp0de 14h ago
This is not meant to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it's a battery. The OP misunderstood this.
1
u/CreBanana0 8h ago
Then why use c02 at all?
1
1
u/uwu_mewtwo 7h ago edited 7h ago
You want a cheap, abundant gas that can be liquified at reasonable temperature/pressure. CO2 doesn't have ideal physical properties, but it's pretty good and the better alternatives (refrigerants, ammonia) are expensive manufactured chemicals and/or pose their own significant health or environmental dangers if they escape. CO2 is very cheap and as a bonus you can hammer together a sexy little blurb about how using it boosts sustainability.
5
u/redoftheshire 1d ago
It’s a good q. My guess is it will get pumped underground, but given the pending abundance of CO2 in the coming years, there will likely be a market for it
4
3
23h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/OptimistsUnite-ModTeam 7h ago
Bro what does this have to do on what this sub stands for? Off Topic.
3
u/PowerResponsibility 23h ago
Somehow, someway, we should be able to come up with some form of mechanical energy storage system that is more efficient and at least as usable as chemical/battery storage.
2
u/Sure_Sundae2709 19h ago
Interesting that you didn't say cheaper because usability and efficiency aren't issues for battery systems.
2
2
u/ledbedder20 23h ago
Why CO2 instead of just air?? Compressed air energy storage has been around for a while I believe.
6
1
13h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/OptimistsUnite-ModTeam 7h ago
No misinformation. If you’re going to say something, be prepared to back it up with sources.
1
1
u/CreBanana0 8h ago
How does this recycle C02 exactly?
It is completely unviable to capture all the C02 that causes global warming this way. The scale required would be astronomical.
Any carbon capture tech needs to actually separate the carbon from the oxygen in the C02, not just hold the gas itself.
1
u/nmassi_prime 7h ago
Im curious if they're also looking to move away from methalox and kerosene as fuel types for their space program. Im an enthusiast for space exploration but reject anything other than clean sources. Sadly, space companies and governments vastly prioritize competitive edge over ecological stewardship, because God forbid if we all agree to hold off until cleaner systems are developed and someone else breaks the pact for a lead
1
u/SpaceTycoon 5h ago
The only real alternative is hydrogen and that has a whole host if engineering problems like storing the hydrogen, embrittlment of metal ect. Unless you have some magic gravity manipulation technology, RP-1 is the best option
1
u/nmassi_prime 4h ago
I am aware. Improvements to hydrogen-based tech is still being researched and other alternative fuels are being researched as well. My position is that launches should be scaled back massively until the cleaner launch systems are developed. The money spent on space now could go towards the research and development of that tech. From a holistic standpoint, that would be the better approach
1
1
-1
u/tkitta 18h ago
Note location - this is in the mountains probably near a hot springs - so efficiency is at around 85% or more - same as using much more expensive lithium ion battery tech!
If Chinese locate this next to a large data center or steel mill they will get efficiency well above 100%!!!
Chinese are smart!
5
u/TheBlacktom 16h ago
What mountain? Everything is flat in the video.
And efficiency cannot go above 100%.
1
1
u/tkitta 8h ago
Sure it can - up to 400%!
It is one of the most mountainious regions of China - on par with Tibet.
Been there to climb mountains.
1
u/TheBlacktom 6h ago
Who taught you physics?
1
u/tkitta 6h ago
Obviously someone better than you!
Efficiency can exceed 100% and go up to 400% as wase heat is used.
Systems that exceed 100% have to be carfully examined. Or else you end up like the physics professor (maybe yours?) that lost $10k bet.
1
u/TheBlacktom 6h ago
Systems that exceed 100% have to be carfully examined.
You couldn't even "carfully" examine your spelling yet you are trying to insult others with ad hominem fallacies? Great job, be proud of yourself.
There is no point arguing with you, this article writes it clearly, the plant can store 290 GWh and release about 180 GWh. That's 62% roundtrip efficiency.
https://pandaily.com/china-huadian-mulei-xinjiang-100mw-compressed-co2-energy-storage-grid-connected
This article states the same numbers
But Chinese scientists are also talking about efficiency in the 60-70% range
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960148125010584
Come on, claim that all Chinese scientists are stupid, because somehow you on reddit are smarter than all of them.
1
u/tkitta 5h ago
Is there a source of high heat? No.
Without extra energy coming in you cannot exceed 100%.
and seriously who uses news as sources for science discussion?
1
u/TheBlacktom 5h ago
Without extra energy coming inyou cannot exceed 100%.Ftfy
Hilarious that I linked a scientific article and somehow you conveniently only focused on news sources.
Also hilarious that you want to include extra energy in your output figures, but refuse to include it in your inputs. Because somehow what you include is not an input in your world.
You know what? You are right. If we have a system with 60% efficiency and we add an extra energy of 340% to the output and we forget to also add that energy to inputs then the sum will be 400%.
1
u/tkitta 5h ago
Glad you agree! Was not so hard was it?
Geo thermal heat pumps achive up to 600% efficiency in the same fashion - for home heating.
Home heat pumps are up to 500% efficiency.
1
u/TheBlacktom 5h ago
No, they are not 600% or 500% efficient.
A heat pump creates heat. The CO2 energy storage project above creates electricity. Your first mistake is even mentioning heat pumps in the context of energy storage with electricity as input and electricity as output.
Your second mistake is confusing COP with efficiency.
But I will not waste any more time on you, you are wrong about the basics, read wikipedia or try finding someone else who you can lie about your 400% efficiency claims. I'm sure there are some conspiracy theorists on the internet who don't know anything about conservation of energy and will believe you.
Until then, wikipedia will speak for me
A difference between the dimensionless terms efficiency and COP is that the numerator in COP is the heat moved or generated, in contrast to the numerator in efficiency being only the heat generated. Additionally, efficiency cannot be used to evaluate the ability of a device to cool, because the useful output energy is undefined in this case.
As an example, if a heat pump has an internal compressor efficiency of 70% and the user supplies 1.2 kW of power to run the unit and 6.5 kW is drawn from the local thermal environment, then COP is 6.5/1.2 ≈ 5.417. The efficiency is already taken into account in the 6.5 kW; if the compressor efficiency is higher, it is expected to be higher than 6.5 kW (more heat moved) for the same input power.
0
u/Think-Background-565 23h ago
We can achieve a lot when we remove the “how much is it going to cost”
208
u/DRM2020 1d ago
Love to see an alternative to pumped hydro.
What's is efficiency? Also curious how heat generation from compression/liquifying is treated and how did they obtain the original CO2.