PDF Publication Title:
Text from PDF Page: 044
the chemical and electrochemical environment of both their original half-cell as well as the opposing half-cell. Thus, these chemistries can often be employed with the spectator strategy, where the electrolytes are mixed (i.e., contain both active species) to make the chemistry pseudo- symmetric and enable electrolyte rebalancing [16]. However, the spectator strategy decreases energy density and increases electrolyte cost by reducing the active species solubility and adding inactive chemicals, respectively, but if employed by suitable chemistries for stationary applications, these drawbacks may not be critical. An alternative approach to preventing capacity fade due to crossover is the use of a perfectly-selective membrane, such as a non-porous single- ion conductor (e.g., a ceramic). This strategy has received limited attention in the RFB field as experimental campaigns have been hampered by the cost, robustness, and increased resistance of available ceramics, as compared to polymeric membranes, all of which are anticipated to limit cell performance and system cost [115–119]. Note that both the spectator and perfect separation strategies are also viable approaches for finite-lifetime chemistries as well, but do not address active species degradation (unless the degradation primarily results from crossover), which limits their value to these systems. Here, we use a simple levelized cost of storage (LCOS) model to evaluate the techno-economic benefits and limitations of low-cost, asymmetric chemistries with active species of finite and infinite lifetimes. Previously, we developed an LCOS model for VRFBs to assess the value of capacity recovery, and used the framework to explore practical operating considerations, such as sizing, rebalancing schedule, and electrolyte leasing [60]. While LCOS analyses consider the lifetime costs of the system for the optimal long-term solution, short-term metrics like the capital cost are also important in evaluating considerations around project investment and financing. Indeed, capital cost targets are a key metric cited when contemplating the economic viability of different energy storage solutions [9,10]. Recognizing the need for RFBs with low capital costs, we extend our LCOS model to explore the methods and associated costs for capacity-loss remediation for asymmetric chemistries using active species of finite and infinite lifetimes. For the former, we explore the logistics and costs of the active-species replacement process. For the latter, we explore the spectator strategy, using iron-chromium as a case study, as well as the use of zero- crossover membranes as capacity remediation and elimination techniques, respectively. These systems are compared to the VRFB system, the incumbent solution (i.e., an RFB with higher capital costs and the ability to recover capacity at low costs) to determine the conditions under 44PDF Image | Bringing Redox Flow Batteries to the Grid
PDF Search Title:
Bringing Redox Flow Batteries to the GridOriginal File Name Searched:
Rodby-krodby-phd-chemE-2022-thesis.pdfDIY PDF Search: Google It | Yahoo | Bing
Salgenx Redox Flow Battery Technology: Salt water flow battery technology with low cost and great energy density that can be used for power storage and thermal storage. Let us de-risk your production using our license. Our aqueous flow battery is less cost than Tesla Megapack and available faster. Redox flow battery. No membrane needed like with Vanadium, or Bromine. Salgenx flow battery
CONTACT TEL: 608-238-6001 Email: greg@salgenx.com (Standard Web Page)