Similar tech, I expect:<p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/startup-says-it-can-make-compressed-air-energy-storage-scheme-dirt-cheap/" rel="nofollow">https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/start...</a><p><a href="https://www.thenational.ae/uae/compressed-air-the-battery-of-the-future-1.338460" rel="nofollow">https://www.thenational.ae/uae/compressed-air-the-battery-of...</a><p><a href="https://www.engadget.com/2013/09/16/sustainx-turns-on-first-modern-megawatt-scale-air-battery/" rel="nofollow">https://www.engadget.com/2013/09/16/sustainx-turns-on-first-...</a>
Assuming about 300K ambient temperature (on site, above ground), 800K working temperature (store the heat at 500°C) and that the second law of thermodynamics still holds, the roundtrip efficiency can not be 70%. It must be below 40%, and not just a bit below.
I am missing a profound description of the technology. Where is the innovation? The website containing only some key words is too sparse to arouse serious interest.
They claim 0.05€ (~0.06USD) per KWh lifetime cost. Anybody know how that compares to current prices of grid-scale batteries? I can't find a up-to-date source.
The issue with storing energy is that en investment of building infrastructure to transport the energy where it is deficit of energy is a more market safe solution.
forgive me if this is totally petty, but: "thermodynamic" is an adjective, not a noun.<p>"Storing Renewable Energy Using Thermodynamic" ... what, exactly?