Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iron fuel shows its mettle

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 227 posts

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#81

Post by rootusrootus »

SmooL wrote: post #71
Tade0 wrote: post #50

> “Places that have excess energy could make iron, and others can buy it. This way, you could commodify renewable energy so it can be globally distributed without the need for transmission lines. Metals can solve a big problem in the renewable energy transition: long-duration energy storage.” My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper. That being said long-term storage seems to be the value prop…

> My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper Transmission lines are great for moving electricity, but only if there's demand for that electricity _right now_. Otherwise, you have to store it - which is a problem, because battery tech right now isn't great (or rather, it's not good enough for grid-scale requirements) . This iron powder could be thought of as a "battery". It might be harder to mov…

> not good enough for grid-scale requirements

Is that still true? Aren't there a number of very successful grid battery installations now? And given the steady decline in battery costs, it ought to just get better and better.

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#82

Post by TSiege »

alex_young wrote: post #80

If they require Hydrogen to complete the loop, you're going to create a lot of CO2 in the process. 4% of H is produced using renewables today: https://rmi.org/the-truth-about-hydrogen/

Yes. "Green hydrogen" is largely vaporware at this point. The majority of hydrogen we produce is from fossil methane

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#83

Post by dgacmu »

rootusrootus wrote: post #81
SmooL wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper Transmission lines are great for moving electricity, but only if there's demand for that electricity _right now_. Otherwise, you have to store it - which is a problem, because battery tech right now isn't great (or rather, it's not good enough for grid-scale requirements) . This iron powder could be thought of as a "battery". It might be harder to mov…

> not good enough for grid-scale requirements Is that still true? Aren't there a number of very successful grid battery installations now? And given the steady decline in battery costs, it ought to just get better and better.

Batteries are amazing for short term supply / grid stabilization. They can supply massive current on very short notice. But the cost per kilowatt hour is still painfully high if we're talking about more than a handful of hours. Fortunately, it's still headed downward.

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#85

Post by cogman10 »

SmooL wrote: post #71
Tade0 wrote: post #50

> “Places that have excess energy could make iron, and others can buy it. This way, you could commodify renewable energy so it can be globally distributed without the need for transmission lines. Metals can solve a big problem in the renewable energy transition: long-duration energy storage.” My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper. That being said long-term storage seems to be the value prop…

> My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper Transmission lines are great for moving electricity, but only if there's demand for that electricity _right now_. Otherwise, you have to store it - which is a problem, because battery tech right now isn't great (or rather, it's not good enough for grid-scale requirements) . This iron powder could be thought of as a "battery". It might be harder to mov…

> or rather, it’s not good enough for grid-scale requirements

I disagree with this point. LFP batteries are cheap, high density, and have huge cycle life. The big drawback of LFPs is manufacturing is just starting to ramp up on them. That is, they aren’t available.

LFPs just came out of patent protection last year and you are already starting to see them everywhere. The biggest problem with LFPs today is demand is outstripping supply.

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#86

Post by Tade0 »

chasil wrote: post #64
Tade0 wrote: post #50

> “Places that have excess energy could make iron, and others can buy it. This way, you could commodify renewable energy so it can be globally distributed without the need for transmission lines. Metals can solve a big problem in the renewable energy transition: long-duration energy storage.” My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper. That being said long-term storage seems to be the value prop…

"Altiro gets around this problem by adding a little natural gas to ignite the iron powder when the boiler first starts up." You will also need a very specialized furnace, and supplies of CH4.

I suppose it's not more complicated than an LPG system in a car, which fires up on gasoline and switches to gas only after warm-up.

My Uber today was a Corolla hybrid and at one point I heard the telltale clunk of the LPG system engaging. Apparently you can have that on a hybrid as well.

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#87

Post by GlibMonkeyDeath »

Sounds like one of the least efficient energy storage ideas I've heard in a long time, I wonder how this is getting funded? Hmm, let's check to see who is behind this...the founding professor https://www.tue.nl/en/research/researchers/philip-de-goey/ is a fellow/awardee of the Combustion Institute, gets funding from ERC, etc. OK, so I guess all that European taxpayer money won't spend itself, and if you have a hammer blah blah nails...

Meanwhile, stationary class (i.e. relatively poor energy density) iron air batteries are making commercial progress. https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2023/06/12/form-energy-to-deploy...

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#88

Post by baybal2 »

cogman10 wrote: post #85
SmooL wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper Transmission lines are great for moving electricity, but only if there's demand for that electricity _right now_. Otherwise, you have to store it - which is a problem, because battery tech right now isn't great (or rather, it's not good enough for grid-scale requirements) . This iron powder could be thought of as a "battery". It might be harder to mov…

> or rather, it’s not good enough for grid-scale requirements I disagree with this point. LFP batteries are cheap, high density, and have huge cycle life. The big drawback of LFPs is manufacturing is just starting to ramp up on them. That is, they aren’t available. LFPs just came out of patent protection last year and you are already starting to see them everywhere. The biggest problem with LFPs today is demand is ou…

[dead]

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#89

Post by xyzzyz »

rootusrootus wrote: post #81
SmooL wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My gut feeling is that transmission lines would still be cheaper Transmission lines are great for moving electricity, but only if there's demand for that electricity _right now_. Otherwise, you have to store it - which is a problem, because battery tech right now isn't great (or rather, it's not good enough for grid-scale requirements) . This iron powder could be thought of as a "battery". It might be harder to mov…

> not good enough for grid-scale requirements Is that still true? Aren't there a number of very successful grid battery installations now? And given the steady decline in battery costs, it ought to just get better and better.

There are successful grid battery installations, but as far as I know, there are no grid-scale battery installations. Existing installations have really small capacity, and are only used for things like demand smoothing. The only energy storage solution deployed at scale is pumped hydro storage.

Re: Iron fuel shows its mettle

#90

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

rsaesha wrote: post #79
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It needs to prove that it can be competitive with the other methods. I think the one thing is that iron storage would be a potential long term form of storage, while all those other methods that you mentioned are really short term, designed primarily just to deal with the daily peaks and troughs of renewable production, but not as much the "it's been completely overcast for 3 weeks" problem. The only other form of…

If using Fe why not iron batteries? Keep the redox, remove the energy from the system via eletrical current instead of low efficiency heat, boiler and steam engine combo.

Great point. Fe batteries are very new so I'm not aware of the cost/benefit or if Fe batteries still slowly discharge over time, but yeah in both cases you're just oxidizing iron, so why not take the more direct route to generate electrical current directly.
Post reply on HN