Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

LTA-CAES – A low-temperature approach to Adiabatic Compressed Air

Energy Storage
Daniel Wolf a,1, Marcus Budt b,⇑
a
Heliocentris Industry GmbH, R&D Clean Energy Solutions, Rudower Chaussee 29, 12489 Berlin, Germany
b
Fraunhofer Institute for Environmental, Safety, and Energy Technology UMSICHT, Division: Energy, Energy Systems Engineering, Osterfelder Str. 3, 46047 Oberhausen, Germany

h i g h l i g h t s

 We develop a plant layout for Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage (A-CAES) aiming at lower thermal storage temperatures.
 We show that roundtrip efficiency of A-CAES is independent of the temperature level of the stored heat of compression.
 The proposed plant concept delivers fast cycling capabilities allowing for a plant start-up <5 min.
 Compared to high temperature A-CAES the proposed plant concept shows better profitability due to fast cycling capabilities.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Most of the recent approaches on Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage (A-CAES) aim at Thermal
Received 17 September 2013 Energy Storage (TES) at high temperatures. High TES temperatures together with high pressures intrinsic
Received in revised form 3 February 2014 to CAES are not easy to handle. In order to avoid this technical challenge, we introduce a low-temperature
Accepted 8 March 2014
Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage (LTA-CAES) plant. We select and design multistage radial com-
Available online 16 April 2014
pressors and expanders with single stages rotating with different speeds allowing for intermediate cool-
ing and reheating of the air flow. The proposed LTA-CAES design shows roundtrip efficiencies in the range
Keywords:
of 52–60%, slightly lower compared to those envisioned for high temperature A-CAES. However, it can be
Compressed Air Energy Storage
Adiabatic
shown in an economic analysis that its fast start-up characteristics and wide-ranging part load ability
Thermal Energy Storage overcompensates the lower cycle efficiencies with regard to plant profitability.
Two-tank system Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
GOMES
LTA-CAES

1. Introduction service use solution mined underground salt caverns as pressurized

Similar to Pumped Hydro Energy Storage (PHES) Compressed
Air Energy Storage (CAES) represents a promising storage technol-
ogy especially at larger scale. It shows a greater siting flexibility
compared to PHES together with relative low specific investment
cost [1].
The basic principle how CAES works is relatively simple. In times
of surplus electricity production, CAES plants can absorb electricity
while compressing ambient air by an electrically driven compressor
(compare Fig. 1). The compressed air can then be stored in a pres-
surized containment of any kind. CAES plants currently being in
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 208 8598 1293; fax: +49 208 8598 1423.
E-mail addresses: daniel.wolf@heliocentris.com (D. Wolf), marcus.budt@
umsicht.fraunhofer.de (M. Budt).
URL: http://www.umsicht.fraunhofer.de (M. Budt).
1
Tel.: +49 30 340 601 732; fax: +49 30 340 601 599.
containment [2,3]. Other types of containment such as lined rock
caverns are currently subject to investigation [4].
When the stored energy shall be reconverted to electricity, the
compressed air is released from the containment and heated up
before being expanded in a turbine. The turbine is connected to
an electric generator which supplies electric power back to the
grid. For the heating of the compressed air conventional CAES
plants require the use of additional energy sources like natural
gas similar to open gas turbine cycles [5–7]. Even if there are many
new diabatic CAES concepts in discussion today, they still relay on
the use of fossil fuels [8–10].
In order to avoid the use of additional energy the heat of com-
pression can be stored during the charging process and can later be
reused for heating up the compressed air before its expansion
within the turbine. Such a CAES plant incorporates a Thermal
Energy Storage (TES) and is therefore called Adiabatic Compressed
Air Energy Storage (A-CAES) [11–14].

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.03.013
0306-2619/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 D. Wolf, M. Budt / Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164
Fig. 1. Simplified block diagram of the first compressed air energy storage plant located in Huntorf, Germany.
2. Current A-CAES design approaches
Up to now A-CAES plants have only been realized on laboratory
scale [15]. Recently, several design approaches for A-CAES plants
on larger scale have been proposed [16,17]. These approaches are
characterized by applying TES at comparably high temperatures
of around 600 °C. At such elevated temperatures the TES comprises
a pressurized packed bed being operated in thermocline mode
[18]. The concrete jacket of the pressurized TES container has to
be cooled actively in order to guarantee a safe operation. Main
advantage of such a design approach is the usage of relatively inex-
pensive solid TES material. Furthermore, there is no need for addi-
tional heat exchanging devices, since the TES material is in direct
contact with the compressed air [19]. Howsoever, this high-tem-
perature TES also leads to some technical challenges such as:
– Currently available turbo compressors are limited to outlet tem-
peratures far below 600 °C. Consequently, new compressors
have to be designed and developed with high interstage and
discharge temperatures [16].
– Due to the coexistence of high temperatures (600 °C) and
pressures (70 bar) in the TES, a high constructional and main-
tenance effort has to be accepted [17].
– Thermal and mechanical stress may lead to attrition of TES
material releasing small particles into the air, which could cause
damage to the inlet blading as well as the expander wheels
[19,20].
– High temperatures require a rather slow start-up from cold
start limiting the A-CAES plant to applications with a start-up
time of 15 min and above [18].
Summarizing current high-temperature TES approaches, A-
CAES can be considered promising but they also involve high
development and testing efforts along with considerable technical
challenges.
One possible way to overcome these challenges is to lower the
TES temperature. Therefore, different A-CAES concepts on a mid-
temperature level around 400 °C were presented during the last
years [21,22]. In these concepts the challenges concerning the
TES and compressor technology are avoided, while the rather slow
start-up behavior remains.
The latest development on this road to lower temperatures fo-
cuses on TES temperatures in the range of 80–200 °C [23–26].
The low-temperature Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage
(LTA-CAES2) presented in this paper aims to avoid all the challenges
Ò
2
LTA-CAES is a registered trademark of Fraunhofer UMSICHT.
159
of the A-CAES designs mentioned above, including a significant fas-
ter start-up behavior and will be described in detail in the following.
3. Idea behind low-temperature A-CAES
Conventional thermal power plants applying Rankine and Joule
cycles can be considered pure heat engines. Here, heat as the only
input energy stream is transferred into useful work. The intrinsic
nature of heat engines dictates that an increase in maximum
process temperature directly translates into an increase in thermal
efficiency. This especially holds true for gas turbines, where the
temperature of the hot combustion gases mostly determines the
thermal efficiency to be achieved. While 30–40 years ago hot gas
temperatures below 900 °C were still common, current gas
turbines are designed for hot gas temperatures of more than
1400 °C [27].
The direct relation of maximum process temperature and
theoretically attainable thermal efficiency of any heat engine can
be expressed by the Carnot efficiency gCarnot.
T min
gCarnot ¼ 1  ð1Þ
T max
Herein, the ratio of minimum process temperature Tmin and
maximum process temperature Tmax gives an upper efficiency
limit, which can be approached but never be achieved by real
processes. The Carnot relation governs all heat engines, in which
heat as only energy source is transformed into useful work. This
includes Rankine cycles (steam power plants) and Joule cycles
(gas turbines).
Diabatic CAES being derived from an open cycle gas turbine in
part can be considered a heat engine. Here, an increase in turbine
inlet temperature still results in a higher thermal efficiency. How-
ever, for pure electric storage devices such as A-CAES plants the
magnitude of interest is not the thermal efficiency but the cycle
or round trip efficiency. Identical to any other pure electrical stor-
age device the cycle efficiency g cycle of an A-CAES is calculated by
the ratio of electrical energy delivered while discharging Edch,el to
energy consumed for charging the storage Ech,el.
Edch;el
gcycle ¼ ð2Þ
Ech;el
Having only electrical input and output energy streams A-CAES
plants cannot be classified as heat engines. Therefore, the overall
A-CAES cycle efficiency is not governed by the Carnot efficiency
[28]. The next question to ask would be if cycle efficiency of
A-CAES is dependent on the maximum process temperature at
all. This question can be answered simply by using the ideal gas
law,
160 D. Wolf, M. Budt / Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164
pv ¼ RT ð3Þ
and assuming an ideal adiabatic change of state from a lower pres-
sure level p1 to a higher one p2 with j being the isentropic expo-
nent. For air as an ideal gas j can be set to 1.40.
 j1
T2 p2 j
¼ ð4Þ
T1 p1
Now we apply the first law of thermodynamics on an ideal adi-
abatic change of state in order to obtain the specific technical work
needed to perform this compression process.
Z 2
wt12 ¼ v dp ð5Þ
1 Fig. 2. Carnot efficiencies (light line) and cycle efficiencies of individual A-CAES
Combining Eqs. (3)–(5) yields the specific technical work
needed to go from state 1 to 2,
" j1 #
j p2 j
wt12 ¼ RT 1 1 ð6Þ
j1 p1
with the corresponding final temperature T2 calculated by trans-
forming Eq. (4):
 j1
p2 j
T2 ¼ T1  ð7Þ
p1
Consequently, an ideal adiabatic compression of air from ambi-
ent pressure and 25 °C to 5 bar would lead to a final air tempera-
ture T2 of 197.3 °C. The specific technical work wt12 needed
amounts to 173.2 kJ/kgair.
The framework of equations set up so far in principle holds true
in the same way for an expansion process as it did for a compres-
sion process. In an A-CAES process we would then enter the expan-
sion process ideally at the exact same temperature T3 and pressure
p3 as the final state after the compression. The specific work ob-
tained by such an ideal adiabatic expansion from p3 to ambient
pressure p4 = p1 is determined as follows:
" j1 # due to a higher number of heat exchanging processes necessary
j p4 j
wt34 ¼ RT 1 ð8Þ
j  1 3 p3
Assuming inlet parameters of T3 = 197.3 °C and p3 = 5 bar while
expanding down to ambient pressure, wt34 results in 173.2 kJ/
kgair. This is exactly the same specific work as needed for compres-
sion, which is self-evident for an ideal reversible meaning isentro-
pic state of change. Nevertheless, this result also tells us that the
ratio between specific input and output work stays constant inde-
pendent of the maximum process temperature T2 and T3. For an
A-CAES plant this means that we would obtain the same cycle effi-
ciency if we compress and expand in one adiabatic change of state
or if we cut down the overall pressure difference into several adi-
abatic processes of smaller pressure difference and thus lower
compressor exhaust temperatures. This shows that theoretically
the cycle efficiency of an A-CAES plant is completely independent
of the maximum process temperature and therefore of the storage
temperature.
However, in order to realize such a concept heat has to be trans-
ferred several times to and from the air throughout the process.
These elevated number of heat transferring processes come along
with an increased exergy loss when compared to A-CAES processes
with high storage temperatures and consequently a smaller num-
ber of heat transferring processes involved [29]. That is why the cy-
cle efficiency of real A-CAES plants at lower storage temperatures
but identical storage pressures results to be somewhat lower when
compared to high temperature A-CAES. Fig. 2 gives an overview of
the range of cycle efficiency to be obtained for real A-CAES plants
plant layout in the literature (1–4: 1 = [17], 2 = [21], 3 = [30], 4 = [26]) and in
general (hatched area) plotted over the maximum process or storage temperature
respectively.
considering all relevant exergy losses as a function of storage
temperature.
In comparison Fig. 2 shows the Carnot efficiency (light line)
according to Eq. (1) assuming 25 °C as lower process temperature.
As expected, a drastic decrease towards lower process tempera-
tures can be observed for the Carnot efficiency unlike the cycle
efficiencies of A-CAES plants.
While the Carnot efficiency is a theoretical value, cycle
efficiency of A-CAES plants as defined here is not. Consequently,
A-CAES cycle efficiency depends on the technical design of the
plant, on the electrical, mechanical and thermodynamical efficien-
cies of the involved components. That is why for the attainable cy-
cle efficiencies of A-CAES plants a value range and not a single
curve is shown in Fig. 2. Depending on the individual plant design
a higher or lower value can be attained. The points within the
hatched area of Fig. 2 each correspond to a cornet plant design.
Altogether, a general trend is visible: there is a slight decrease in
cycle efficiency towards lower temperatures. As pointed out al-
ready, this decrease can be ascribed to enhanced exergy losses
for maintaining lower process temperatures. Nevertheless, it is
possible to achieve comparatively high cycle efficiencies even for
lower storage temperatures, which opens space to apply a substan-
tially different A-CAES plant layout as current high temperature
solutions propose.
4. Technical realization of LTA-CAES
In a recent research project3 we develop a LTA-CAES plant layout
aiming at TES temperatures from 90 to 200 °C being considerably
lower compared to current A-CAES design approaches. Based on
the general plant layout we also develop a corresponding turboma-
chinery design. The turbomachinery is designed in detail for two dif-
ferent LTA-CAES plant configurations of 5 MW/72 bar and 50 MW/
150 bar. The turbomachinery concept chosen for the LTA-CAES is de-
rived from proven technology used for Air Separation Units (ASU),
Urea- and other chemical plants [31]. The thermal management
comprises a two-tank TES configuration with liquid TES medium.
This TES concept is well-known and proven e.g. within Concentrat-
ing Solar Power (CSP) plants [32].
4.1. Plant layout
Fig. 3 exemplarily shows an LTA-CAES plant layout as developed
for the 50 MW/150 bar system. The TES material is liquid and
3
http://forschungsjahrbuch.de/FKZ/0325211/
 D. Wolf, M. Budt / Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164
Fig. 3. Process scheme of a 50 MW/150 bar LTA-CAES plant.
stored without thermal stratification in a two-tank system – one
tank for the cold, one for the hot TES liquid. As can be seen in
Fig. 3 the compression and expansion processes are desired to con-
sist of several individual stages each comprising aftercooling or
preheating, respectively.
The process scheme of Fig. 3 essentially shows two different
types of heat exchangers being applied in the compression process.
The intercooler (IC) type rejects a small part of the absorbed heat to
the ambience. The other type discharges the extracted heat of com-
pression to the hot TES tank, where the heat exchanging liquid is
stored as is. The same heat exchangers are applied to preheat the
air during expansion process.
The intended fast plant start-up limits the compressor dis-
charge temperature to a maximum of 200 °C. Therefore the maxi-
mal TES temperature lies, depending on the heat exchangers
terminal temperature difference, slightly below this point. The
lower boundary of the hot TES temperature range is set to 95 °C.
This corresponds to the highest temperature water at ambient
pressure can be dealt with safely at liquid state. In any case the
TES medium has to be pumpable, because of the determination
to conventional heat exchanger technologies. Furthermore, the
TES medium has to deliver defined inlet temperatures to the heat
exchangers during the charging and discharging process and hence
has to be stored in at least two separated tanks. The number of
applicable media under these boundary conditions and in this tem-
perature range is rather small. Only water and thermal oil can be
used, whereby thermal oil is much more expensive and has a lower
heat capacity at the same time. Therefore, water is the first choice.
It provides a high heat capacity, is generally available, cheap and
not endangering the environment. The main difficulty is that water
needs to be pressurized for temperatures above 95 °C to prevent
evaporation.
Depending on the system temperature the LTA-CAES plant con-
cept applies up to four heat exchangers (IC) to recool the com-
pressed air (compare Fig. 3). These auxiliary heat exchangers use
normal cooling water rejecting the heat to the ambience. The heat
rejected here comprises only a small portion of the overall heat of
compression. The auxiliary heat exchangers are designed as a
cross-counter-flow shell-tube configuration and are of well proven
design.
In contrast, the main heat exchangers required to charge and
discharge the TES of the LTA-CAES are components especially
161
designed for this application. However, they do not require signif-
icant testing efforts or new materials to be applied. The LTA-CAES
system as depicted in Fig. 3 requires four of these pure counter-
flow heat exchangers. Because of the need to reach TES tempera-
tures as close as possible to the air temperature at the compressor
outlet, the main heat exchangers need a transfer surface up to five
times larger than usually. Of course, the required transfer surface
depends on the desired terminal temperature difference, which is
directly linked to the resulting TES temperature and therefore to
the achievable cycle efficiency of the storage. Hence, the heat ex-
changer dimensioning is carefully optimized in the present project.
This optimization is of special importance, since the main heat ex-
changer components represent a significant part of the capital cost
not as high but in the same range as the cost of the turbomachinery
itself. Therefore, a well balanced solution taking into account cap-
ital cost against possible plant revenues has to be found. Depend-
ing on the chosen thermal solution roundtrip efficiencies from 0.52
to 0.60 can be achieved [30].
4.2. Turbomachinery
The aim of low TES temperatures requires recooling of the air at
various points throughout the whole compression process. For this
purpose large single-shaft trains with axial blading or radial inline
compressors are not appropriate. Axial turbo compressors de-
signed for high pressure ratios consist of many stator and rotor
disks, arranged one after the other. Such types of compressors do
not allow intermediate recooling of the air, which is a prerequisite
for maintaining low TES temperatures. Radial type inline compres-
sors can be intercooled between the stages, but the number of
stages is limited to five and very special intercoolers are integrated
parts of the compressor with low accessibility. Therefore, the most
appropriate compressor types for LTA-CAES-plants are integrally
geared radial turbocompressors allowing for up to ten intercooled
stages. This kind of turbocompressor has a clear advantage when
realizing low storage temperatures and is chosen as basic turboma-
chinery concept for the LTA-CAES plant. With this turbomachinery
concept it is possible to recool the air after each stage. Fig. 4 shows
a 3D rendering of the designed LTA-CAES plant in the configuration
of 50 MWComp/30 MWTurb and 150 bar. The shown plant works at a
TES temperature of 150 °C. Therefore the compressor is recooled
after each stage and both machines are connected to the same heat
162 D. Wolf, M. Budt / Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164
Fig. 4. 3D rendering of a LTA-CAES plant configuration [30].
exchangers by a complex piping system as shown previously in
Fig. 3.
Moreover, such a concept allows integration of variable inlet
guide vanes at each radial stage resulting in a wide control range
with extensive part load capabilities. In CAES plants a wide control
range is of great importance because of two reasons. First, a wide
control range allows for a rather large pressure level variation in
an isochoric Compressed Air Storage (CAS). In turn, a large allow-
able pressure level variation increases the overall energy density
of the plant [33]. Secondly, in case of a reserve market participation
high operational flexibility is required and large part load operat-
ing shares are to be expected [34].
4.3. Integrally geared compressor/expander drive
The drive type chosen is an integrally geared turbomachinery
configuration, a reliable well proven type of turbomachinery
widely applied in the air separation/urea industry and other com-
mon chemical plants [31]. Such a unit has several rotors with nor-
mally two impellers mounted at the ends. The rotors are driven by
a central ‘‘bullgear’’. A ten stage machine has five rotors, an eight
stage machine four rotors. All rotors run with optimal speed
depending on volume flow and pressure ratio. Using the latest
‘‘state of the art’’ gears, speed ratios up to 40 are achievable. In con-
trast, the compression train of the Huntorf and McIntosh plant is
designed for only two rotational speeds for the used single shaft in-
line compressors with a transmission ratio of about 2.
Furthermore, a very high overall pressure ratio can be realized
with such a configuration with feasible final outlet pressures of
up to 220 bar and more. Such high outlet pressures again increase
storage density. But even more important, high outlet pressures in
the three-digit range open up the possibility to use underground
cavities at greater depths, too. Being able to set the pressure freely
between 70 and 220 bar a far greater range of possible CAS under-
ground formations are made accessible. This way the siting restric-
tions of the storage plant are reduced considerably. Additionally,
there is less competition with other technologies using under-
ground storage like natural gas or hydrogen.
5. Economic analysis
Having developed the technical characteristics of the LTA-CAES
concept, in a final step we now show its economic performance un-
der recent German market conditions. We therefore perform a
detailed economic analysis by optimizing its dispatch taking part
in spot and reserve markets simultaneously. To facilitate classifica-
tion of the results, a comparison to a adiabatic CAES with high
temperature TES is drawn. The high temperature A-CAES plant
concept as presented in [14–16] were used together with its corre-
sponding roundtrip efficiencies (compare Table 1).
5.1. Model and scenario
The economic performance of both A-CAES systems mentioned
above are determined by their maximal annual revenue and the
corresponding short term marginal cost. Both values result in an
annual profit, which is calculated by the Generic Optimization
Model for Energy Storage GOMES4 [34–36]. This model is imple-
mented in the modeling language GAMS and uses the mixed-integer
linear optimization solver CPLEX5. It was developed at Fraunhofer
UMSICHT to economically optimize the unit commitment of differ-
ent storage technologies while operating at several energy and
reserve markets simultaneously. Because of its modular design
GOMES is able to calculate a wide range of scenarios. Different stor-
age technologies can be considered as well as energy markets or
renewable energy producers.
One critical aspect to perform a sound economic analysis is to
have knowledge of the capital cost of the technologies to be con-
sidered. Today the capital costs of many energy storage technolo-
gies are not well known. This is mainly due to their immature
development status. Taking into account this lack of information,
GOMES uses a capital cost independent economic indicator, the
so called break-even capital cost [36]. This indicator is directly
derived from the net present value (NPV) according to Eq. (9). It
is assumed that the life-time of the system is equal to the observed
time period. Therefore the term of the residual value (Ln) is ne-
glected. Furthermore the NPV is set to zero to get the break-even
point. This way the equation can be rearranged to solve the capital
cost (CO0). The resulting value of CO0 is equal to the sum of the
incoming (CI) and outgoing (CO) payments discounted with the
interest rate (i) over the observed time period (Y) and named
break-even capital cost [36].
ð9Þ
Modified this way, the break-even capital costs can be taken as
a value to compare the real or expected capital costs with. If the ex-
pected costs lie above the break-even capital costs the investment
is likely not to be paying off within the considered period and
interest rate assumed.
Having answered the question how to deal with the cost side of
the analysis, we now have to define the possible revenue streams
or markets to take part in. Beside the day-ahead spot market trade,
the described short start-up time of the LTA-CAES concept enables
its participation in the Secondary Control Reserve (SCR) market.
Both markets should be considered simultaneously. Hence, a new
model component was added to GOMES to take into account addi-
tional restrictions compared to the usual mode of operation as de-
scribed in [36]. In order to ensure the ability of the storage to serve
the SCR calls, the provision of sufficient storage capacity is just one
demand. The usual permissible range of provided reserve power is
restricted as well.
Fig. 5 shows the considered scenario set-up of a LTA-CAES con-
nected to the German electricity grid without any grid capacity
restrictions. The storage is therefore able to trade at the day-ahead
spot market and to participate in the SCR market at the same time.
4 Ò
GOMES is a registered trademark of Fraunhofer UMSICHT.
Ò
5
CPLEX is a registered trademark of International Business Machines Corp.
 D. Wolf, M. Budt / Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164
Table 1
Scenario parameters.
Parameters LTA-CAES HTA-CAES
Representative time series period 2008–2011
Inst. compressor power and part load ability 50 MW, 50–100%
Inst. expander power and part load ability 30 MW, 30–100%
Cycle efficiency (AC–AC) 56% [30] 70% [17]
Storage capacity 8 h of turbine operation at
full load
Stand-by storage losses 0.5% per day [21]
Variable operation costs 2 €/MWh [38]
Start-up cost 4 €/MW [39]
Capacity price (SCR) bid period average value
Positive and negative energy bid (SCR) bid period average value
Fig. 5. Scheme of a LTA-CAES participating in energy and reserve markets.
In terms of grid connection the same scenario has been considered
for the high-temperature adiabatic CAES (HTA-CAES). The decisive
difference is that the start-up time of the HTA-CAES is too long to
allow SCR market participation. Participation in the minute reserve
market would be possible, but is not carried out here due to the re-
sult of other studies already showing that it does not lead to an
economic operation [37]. So, there are three scenarios examined
in the following, a LTA-CAES and a HTA-CAES each trading at the
day-ahead spot market and a LTA-CAES additionally participating
in the SCR market. The assumed scenario parameters are shown
in Table 1.
5.2. Key results
5.2.1. Mode of operation
Depending on the type and value of the offer at the SCR market,
the mode of operation is differing significantly. The unit commit-
ment of LTA-CAES is dominated by the provision restrictions in
the bid periods. According to this fact, spot market trade is clearly
limited if carried out simultaneously to SCR market participation.
Because of the restricted purchase in off-peak periods or sale in
peak periods there are also effects on periods without any SCR of-
fer. While these effects are valid for the LTA-CES, they are not for
the HTA-CAES since no simultaneous energy and reserve market
participation is carried out.
5.2.2. Economic results
Fig. 6 shows the specific break-even capital costs of the three
scenarios for the time period 2008–2011. An interest rate of 5%
and an payback period of 20 years are assumed. It can be seen, that
both scenarios just trading at the day-ahead spot market show
decreasing specific break-even capital costs along the years. The
HTA-CAES clearly reaches higher values due to its higher cycle effi-
ciency compared to the LTA-CAES. While for the HTA-CAES a cycle
efficiency of 70% is assumed, for the LTA-CAES are taken into ac-
count (compare Fig. 2 and Table 1). Altogether it can be stated, that
the cycle efficiency has a major influence on the revenue of a stor-
age trading at the day-ahead spot market. At the same time it is
obvious, that neither the HTA-CAES nor the LTA-CAES can operate
economically within the given framework conditions. Both do not
amortize during the considered time period of 20 years at an inter-
est rate of 5%.
In contrast, the scenario results of the LTA-CAES simultaneously
trading at the day-ahead spot and the SCR market lead to
163
1,800
specific break-even capital cost [€/kWTurb]
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
2008 2009 2010 2011
year
LTA-CAES day-ahead spot market HTA-CAES day-ahead spot market LTA-CAES SCR + day-ahead spot market
Fig. 6. Specific break-even capital costs calculated for the time period from 2008 to
2011.
considerably higher and perhaps even more important to more
stable specific break-even capital costs. Comparing the usually as-
sumed capital costs of an A-CAES of 1,000 €/kWTurb [1] with the
average break-even investment value of 1,210 €/kWTurb one can
see, that the investment would be economic. Taking capital cost
of 1,000 €/kWTurb as a basis the LTA-CAES shows a payback period
15 years again at an interest rate of 5%.
6. Conclusion
Low-temperature Adiabatic Compressed Air Energy Storage
(LTA-CAES) represents a new approach to realize non-fuel consum-
ing CAES. The approach aims at comparatively low storage temper-
atures of 95–200 °C. It makes use of the fact that cycle efficiency of
A-CAES plants is not governed by the Carnot efficiency. Conse-
quently, low thermal storage temperatures still result in accept-
ably high roundtrip efficiencies.
The main plant subsystems of the proposed concept are derived
from already proven technologies guaranteeing minimal develop-
ment effort on the component level. The Thermal Energy Storage
(TES) is designed as a non-thermocline two-tank system similar
to those applied in Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plants. The
turbomachinery is based on individually cased integrally geared
radial stages as already successfully deployed in air separation
units and other process industry plants.
LTA-CAES as proposed here offers the following general
advantages:
– Fast plant start-up of <5 min qualifying LTA-CAES plants to pro-
vide Secondary Control Reserve (SCR)
– Inexpensive, highly available and environmental friendly TES
medium water applicable
– No interaction between air and TES medium keeping the com-
pressed air completely free of particles
– Broad control range and good part load behavior
– High outlet pressures of 150 bar and beyond feasible allowing
for higher storage densities und less siting restrictions
A roundtrip efficiency of 52–60% is to be expected for the LTA-
CAES concept. Concerning an average cycle efficiency of 56% and a
scenario with a LTA-CAES system participating in day-ahead spot
and SCR market simultaneously an payback period of 15 years
could be shown in this study for an interest rate of 5%. This result
bases on market data from German energy and reserve markets
during the years 2008–2011. Especially, the ability to provide
SCR contributes substantially to the overall plant revenue.
The paper also demonstrates that an economical assessment
using mixed integer linear programming is a very helpful means
164 D. Wolf, M. Budt / Applied Energy 125 (2014) 158–164

to guide technical research and development efforts. By connecting technology as a balancing tool in interconnected grids. In: Proceedings of 40.
Kraftwerkstechnisches Kolloquium, 2008 October 14–15, Dresden, Germany,
the two worlds, meaning economic and thermodynamic modeling
2008.
it is possible to figure out which are the most important plant [19] Dreißigacker V, Müller-Steinhagen H, Zunft S. Thermo-mechanical
parameters that should be taken into consideration when carrying investigation of packed beds for the large-scale storage of high temperature
out technical development. In the present case it could be heat. In: Proceedings of effstock, 2009 June 14–17, Stockholm, Sweden, 2009.
[20] Dreißigacker V, Zunft S, Müller-Steinhagen H. A thermo-mechanical model of
demonstrated with regard to adiabatic CAES that the focus should packed-bed storage and experimental validation. Appl Energy
be shifted from high roundtrip efficiencies towards short start 2013;111:1120–5.
up-periods. Without carrying out the economical assessment in [21] Wolf D. Methods for design and application of adiabatic compressed air energy
storage based on dynamic modeling. Oberhausen: Karl Maria Laufen; 2011.
parallel this finding would have hardly been possible. [22] Freund S, Schainker R, Moreau R. Commercial concepts for adiabatic
compressed air energy storage. In: Proceedings of the 7th international
References renewable energy storage conference and exhibition IRES, 2012 November 12–
14, Berlin, Germany; Eurosolar, 2012.
[23] Wolf D, Budt M, Prümper H-J. LTA-CAES – low-temperature Adiabatic
[1] Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Electric energy storage technology
Compressed Air Energy Storage. In: Proceedings of the 6th international
options: a white paper primer on applications, costs, and benefits. Palo Alto, CA
renewable energy storage conference IRES, 2011 November 28–30, Berlin,
Washington, DC; 2010.
Germany; Eurosolar: 2011.
[2] Quast P, Lorenzen H. The Huntorf 290-MW CAES power plant: design,
[24] Budt M, Wolf D, Span R. Modeling a low-temperature compressed air energy
construction and commissioning of underground facilities. Erdöl-Erdgas-
storage with modelica. In: Otter M, Zimmer D, editors. Proceedings of the 9th
Zeitschrift 1979;95(3):90–5.
international modelica conference, 2012 September 3–5, Munich,
[3] Raju M, Kumar Khaitan S. Modeling and simulation of compressed air storage
Germany. Linköping: Modelica Association; 2012. p. 791–800.
in caverns: a case study of the Huntorf plant. Appl Energy 2012;89(1):474–81.
[25] Budt M. LTA-CAES: a low-temperature approach to adiabatic compressed air
[4] Kim HM, Rutqvist J, Ryu DW, Choi BH, Sunwoo C, Song WK. Exploring the
energy storage. In: Proceedings of innostock, 2012 May 16–18, Lleida, Spain,
concept of compressed air energy storage (CAES) in lined rock caverns at
2012.
shallow depth: a modeling study of air tightness and energy balance. Appl
[26] Buffa F, Kemble S, Manfrida G, Milazzo A. Exergy and exergoeconomic model
Energy 2012;92:653–67.
of a ground-based CAES plant for peak-load energy production. Energies
[5] BBC. Huntorf air storage gas turbine power plant. In: Energy supply.
2013;6(3):1050–67.
publication no. D GK 90202 E; 1979, p. 1–14.
[27] Drenckhahn W, Rukes B, Riedle K. Konventionelle Kraftwerkstechnologien:
[6] Radgen P. 30 years compressed air energy storage – experiences and outlook.
Eine Frage der Effizienz. BWK 2009;61(7/8):72–8.
In: Proceedings of the 3rd international renewable energy storage conference
[28] Kreid DK. Technical and economic feasibility analysis of the no-fuel
IRES, 2008 November 24–25; Berlin; Germany; Eurosolar, 2008.
compressed air energy storage concept; NASA STI/recon technical report N
[7] Nakhamkin M, Andersson L, Swensen E, Howard J. AEC 110 MW CAES plant:
04/1976; 77:19643. Richland, (WA, USA): Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs;
status of project. J Eng Gas Turb Power 1992;114:695–700.
1976.
[8] Nakhamkin M, Chiruvolu M, Patel M, Byrd S, Schainker R. Second generation of
[29] Grazzini G, Milazzo A. A thermodynamic analysis of multistage adiabatic CAES.
CAES technology: performance, operations, economics, renewable load
Proc IEEE 2012;100(2):461–72.
management, green energy. In: Proceedings of power-gen international,
[30] Doetsch C, Budt M, Wolf D, Kanngießer, A. Adiabates Niedertemperatur-
2009 December 8–10, Las Vegas, NV, USA; 2009.
Druckluftspeicherkraftwerk zur Unterstützung der Netzintegration von
[9] Zafirakis D, Kaldellis J. Autonomous dual-mode CAES systems for maximum
Windenergie. Final report, research project FKZ 0325211, Oberhausen, 2012.
wind energy contribution in remote island networks. Energy Convers Manage
[31] Bloch HP, Soares C. Turbo expanders and process application. Stoneham, (MA,
2010;51(11):2150–61.
USA): Butterworth Publishing; 2001.
[10] Succar S, Denkenberger DC, Williams RH. Optimization of specific rating for
[32] Gil A, Medrano M, Martorell I, Lázaro A, Dolado P, Zalba B et al. State of the art
wind turbine arrays coupled to compressed air energy storage. Appl Energy
on high temperature Thermal Energy Storage for power generation. Part 1 –
2012;96:222–34.
concepts, materials and modellization. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2010;14(1):31–
[11] Maton J, Zhao L, Brouwer J. Dynamic modeling of compressed gas energy
55.
storage to complement renewable wind power intermittency. Int J Hydrogen
[33] Rouzeyre M. Adiabatic CAES: efficiency improvements & industrial
Energy 2013;38(19):7867–80.
considerations. In: Proceedings of the 6th international renewable energy
[12] Glendenning I, Chew PE, Grant R, Glanwille R, Moye MH. Technical and
storage conference IRES, 2011 November 28–30, Berlin, Germany: Eurosolar;
economic assessment of advanced compressed air storage (ACAS) concepts.
2011.
EPRI EM, No.-1289, Palo Alto, CA, USA; 1979.
[34] Wolf D, Kanngießer A, Budt M, Doetsch C. Adiabatic compressed air energy
[13] Hobson MJ. Conceptual design and engineering studies of adiabatic
storage co-located with wind energy – multifunctional storage commitment
compressed air energy storage (CAES) with thermal energy
optimization for the German market using GOMES. Energy Systems 2012(03/
storage. Richland, (WA, USA): PNNL; 1981.
2012):181–208.
[14] Bullough C, Gatzen C, Jakiel C, Koller M, Nowi A, Zunft S. Advanced Adiabatic
[35] Kanngießer A, Doetsch C. Optimized operation and system design of an energy
Compressed Air Energy Storage for the integration of wind energy. In:
storage device for post-feed-in-tariff sales of wind energy at the spot market.
Proceedings of the European wind energy conference, 2004 November 22–
In: Proceedings of the 6th international renewable energy storage conference
25, London, UK; 2004.
IRES, 2011 November 28–30, Berlin, Germany: Eurosolar; 2011.
[15] Sander F, Span R. First results of an adiabatic compressed air energy storage
[36] Kanngießer A. Entwicklung eines generischen Modells zur Einsatzoptimierung
power plant in laboratory scale. In: Latsis symposium 2006 – research
von Energiespeichern für die techno-ökonomische Bewertung stationärer
frontiers in energy, 2006 October 11–13, Zurich, Switzerland; 2006.
Speicheranwendungen. Oberhausen: Karl Maria Laufen; 2014.
[16] Jakiel C, Zunft S, Nowi A. Adiabatic compressed air energy storage plants for
[37] Madlener R, Jochen L. Economics of centralized and decentralized compressed
efficient peak load power supply from wind energy: the European project AA-
air energy storage for enhanced grid integration of wind power. Appl Energy
CAES. Int J Energy Tech Policy 2007;5(3):296–306.
2013;101:299–309.
[17] Bieber M, Marquardt R, Moser P. The ADELE project: development of an
[38] Gatzen C. The economics of power storage: theory and empirical analysis for
adiabatic CAES plant towards marketability. In: Proceedings of the 5th
central Europe. München: Oldenbourg Industrieverlag; 2008.
international renewable energy storage conference IRES, 2010 November
[39] Swider DJ. Compressed air energy storage in an electricity system with
22–24, Berlin, Germany; Eurosolar, 2010.
significant wind power generation. IEEE Trans Energy Convers
[18] Marquardt R, Hoffmann S, Pazzi S, Klafki M, Zunft S. AA-CAES: opportunities
2007;22(1):95–102.
and challenges of advanced adiabatic compressed-air energy storage