ARTICLE IN PRESS

0360-5442/$ - se

doi:10.1016/j.en

�Tel.: +1 80

E-mail addr

Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457

www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Bulk energy storage potential in the USA, current developmentsand future prospects

Septimus van der Linden�

BRULIN Associates LLC, 14418 Old Bond Street, Chesterfield, VA 23832, USA

Abstract

Stored energy can provide electricity during periods of high demand, as currently demonstrated with bulk storage

systems such as pumped hydro storage (PHS), which accounts for only 2.5% of the current installed base load in the USA.

Sites for future developments have become less available, and environmental siting issues, as well as high costs have

stopped further prospects. This paper looks at the potential beyond PHS, with bulk storage systems such as compressed air

energy storage (CAES) flow-batteries and 1MW flywheel systems that can provide system stability/support at the grid,

substations and distributed level. Current developments in bulk energy storage will be reviewed as well as some storage

project developments incorporating wind energy and the impact on base-loaded coal and natural gas fired GT combined

cycle plants. The large potential and the economic benefits for energy storage in the US will be examined.

r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Compressed air; Stored energy; Bulk storage

1. Introduction

The demand for electricity has considerable daily and seasonal variations and the maximum demand mayonly last for a few hours each year. As a result, some power plants are only required to operate for shortperiods each year—an inefficient use of expensive plants. Without any additional storage above the present2.5%, mainly PHS, of the installed base load in the USA, base-loaded plants are being detrimentally cycled athigher frequency and the situation is further exacerbated with the latest growing demand for renewable energysuch as wind energy. In the US, this capacity has now reached 9200MW and the American Wind EnergyAssociation (AWEA) project up to 30GW by the year 2020.

Storage allows energy production to be de-coupled from its supply, self generated or purchased. By havinglarge-scale electricity storage capacity available over any time, system planners would need to build onlysufficient generating capacity to meet average electrical demand rather than peak demands. The differentstorage technologies can be used in different combinations to suit the specific needs of site, not only in plantoutput capacity, but in response times as well. The response systems such as flywheels or flow batteries(seconds or milliseconds) can be combined with larger bulk systems (minutes and hours) such as CAES, or

e front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

ergy.2006.03.016

4 639 5679; fax: +1 804 639 5361.

ess: brulinassoc@comcast.net.

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457 3447

with surface storage CAES (SSCAES) 60MW/h systems or larger 135 and 300MW units in severalconfigurations up to 1000MW or more depending on storage cavern volume.

In theory, a typical plant could operate with 40% less generating capacity than would otherwise be required.This represents considerable financial savings in peaking and intermediate plants. Additional reductions inemissions and capital investment can occur due to the base load generators operating more efficiently atsteady-state output.

Geological suitable identified sites for bulk energy storage using salt domes, hard rock or aquifer can bereadily exploited for 20/30GW capability by 2020 or sooner, a fact not fully recognized by power entities.While less is known about storage capabilities in Mexico, energy storage should be investigated. Certain bulkstorage technologies might find early acceptance in the Mexican grid, even applicable to GT/CC plantscurrently being installed. Air Injection Technology could increase installed power by 15% or more.

Grid instability does lead to regional blackouts. This does open the door for more consideration for energystorage, while this is encouraging, there is however institutional hurdles to overcome—one being the lack ofunderstanding the value and benefits of bulk energy storage and some perceived concepts that simply addingmore new power plants and transmission capability will cure blackout problems experienced August 14 (2004)in the USA. Storage is probably the better solution! Storage of electricity (energy) will significantly change thepower industry for the better—better utilization of resources—better system efficiency—lower emissions—better reliability and security.

2. Bulk energy storage systems—CAES

Energy (electricity) storage is well-known primarily on smaller scale systems such as batteries or capacitors,and in bulk storage systems such as pumped hydro systems (PHS). Bulk systems such as CAES, are lesserknown, however two large systems, Huntorf Germany, 290MW [1] and McIntosh, Alabama ElectricCooperative 110MW have been operating successfully and reliably for over 25 and 11 years, respectively.

The concept of a CAES system is to decouple the compression and expansion cycle of a combustion turbine.The compression cycle can now be independently operated, compressing air for storage, to be released, heatedby the turbine combustion process and expanded generating a much larger output with out the normalcompression parasitic load. Lower cost off-peak or excess power, from nuclear, coal fired or wind energy isused to drive the compression cycle. Full power recovery with the Turbine expander can now be accomplished2.5 times greater without the compressor load. This is further enhanced with recovery of the storage airpressure, in a high pressure expander installed in front of the gas turbine expander. With the same amount ofpremium fuel such as natural gas, the power density is substantially increased by a factor of 3 or more (Fig. 1).

Improvements in the turbo machinery and heat recovery unit (HRU) have enabled improved performancein 60Hz sizes 135 and 300MW units, with heat rates below 3900Btu/kW/h lower heating value (LHV) lowemission combustion systems and selective catalytic reactors (SCR) in the HRU allow nitrous oxides (NOx)values to be maintained below 5.0 volumetric parts per million (vppm) or as low as 2.5 vppm. While both unitsare similar in turbo-machinery layout, single shaft with disengaging clutches, they were intended for differentpurposes. Huntorf [7] primarily for short fast responses, to support a nuclear power station, the system nowoperationally modified to provide overall grid support for 3 h daily (Fig. 2) The compression cycles and powerdelivery cycles are clearly illustrated on a 24 h basis.

McIntosh, with a much larger cavern storage volume, and the application of an HRU to preheat the cavernair, has a better heat rate and can generate continuously for 26 h (2600MW/h) before reaching cavern drawdown.

Decoupling the compressor trains from the generating train allows for more flexibility in compressionoptimization and utilization. Motor driven compressors in 50MW or lesser increments allow sites and storagevolume to best serve the transmission grid needs, as well as act as load sinks of 100/200 or 300MW, to avoidunnecessary cycling at base-loaded plants.

With today’s emphasis on new clean-coal plants, a modern 500 or 800MW clean coal plant can be extendedby 300MW or more during the day time or high demand periods up to 16 h a day. The compression load of200MW in such a system will allow a large ‘‘virtual’’ turndown of the clean coal plant at night from its 85%

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Modern CAES Cycle

Typical CAES Cycle

Separate Motor Driven CompressorsInter and After CooledCharge the Cavern to 1500psiStored Air is Heated & ExpandedIn the Power Generation Train

Compressor Trains

M

M

M

M

Cavern

G

Recuperator

Duct Burner(If required)

LPT HPT

CombustionChamber

MainTransformerTo HV Lines

Low PressureTurbine

High PressureAir Turbine

Stack

Power Train

Cavern sized tomatch operating hours1500 psi

Reduced PressureTo match Air expander

FuelGenerator

Fig. 1. CAES basic cycle. Source: Alstom Power.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–34573448

maximum continuous rating (MCR), enabling 800MW to be delivered from a 500MW clean coal plant, withthe equivalent premium fuel, such as natural gas, addition of only a 90MW gas turbine.

The chart (Fig. 3) shows the aging generation fleet in the USA, the retirement of such plant with CAEStechnology, will improve overall efficiency and lower emissions per MW/h generated. This displacement ofolder capacity will have a tremendous impact lowering greenhouse gases.

3. Projects in development

Several large CAES projects, with different storage media, are in development, two are fully permitted andof particular note, even if the financial climate for new projects, requiring major investments, has slowed downfor such innovative concepts.

3.1. Norton energy storage, Ohio

One of the first potential CAES projects in the USA, developed by Haddington Ventures Inc., is the hugefacility at Norton in Ohio, which is permitted for 2700MW of capacity, and as a commercial project whencompleted, will be one of the largest Bulk Energy Storage facilities, including PHS, to be built in the USA. Ascurrently planned this will consist of 9� 300MW nominally rated CAES units, supported by an undergroundstorage cavern volume of 338 million ft3 (120 million m3) 2200 ft (722m) below the surface, originally mined ina limestone formation.

Using 200MW (4� 50MW) compression trains for each 300MW power train, will allow for 16 hgeneration by day for 5 days a week. Four units 1200MW could operate for 4� 16 h days with out requiringrecharging of the cavern. With more available surface space, cavern volume could support 5400MW or morefor 8–10 h operation, 5 days a week (270,000MW/h). This cavern was originally permitted for a PHS thatwould only support a small fraction of that capacity.

Using a modular approach this capacity could be added over 5 years allowing full integration in Ohio andthe East Central Area Reliability (ECAR) region. Moreover, CAES technology would not only providereliable full electric power service for midrange and peaking hours, but would extend the capabilities of largelow-cost base load generation. This would also allow older less efficient and polluting power plants to beretired.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Fig. 2. (A) Huntorf, power production versus time. (B) Example of utility 24 h load profile and CAES operation. Source: Crotogino.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457 3449

3.2. Project Markham, Texas

This 540MW project in Matagorda County Texas, developed by Ridge Energy Services, will consist of four135MW CAES units, with separate LP and HP motor driven compression trains. This site has Salt Dome

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Fig. 3. Age and year of commissioning of US coal power plants. The red portion represents conventional steam plants.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–34573450

cavern storage suitable for high pressure air storage and unique in that natural gas storage is available on thesite as well. This is ideal, as energy can be arbitraged either as electrons (electricity) or Btu’s (natural gas) or acombination of both. Compression trains totaling 300MW, for the required shorter off-peak charging period,will also act as a very large load sink on the system.

The smaller 135MW units in this project, provides a very wide load range from 10MW minimum per unitand incremental output until all four units provide the system 540MW. The full 540MW can be delivered inless than 15min this is a tremendous value to the grid, providing reserve capacity, before cycling of base-loaded plant is required. The variable capacity range would be 840MW (300MW compressor+540MWgenerator) NOx emissions will be controlled to 5.0 vppm with SCR in the HRU.

3.3. Iowa stored energy project (ISEP)

This project under development by Iowa Association of Municipal Utilities, promises to be exciting andinnovative. The compressed air will be stored in an underground aquifer, and wind energy will be used tocompress air, in addition to available off-peak power.

A separate section of the underground aquifer is being investigated, to be utilized for the storage of naturalgas, allowing the CAES facility and other utilities to purchase gas when prices are lower.

The plant configuration is for 200MW of CAES generating capacity, with 100MW of wind energy. Whilewind might be the lowest cost generation system, it is variable and not reliable as a constant source. CAESprovides the ‘battery’’ storage for wind energy and makes wind energy a dispatch resource. CAES will expandthe role of wind energy in the region generation mix, and will operate to follow loads and provide capacitywhen other generation is unavailable or non-economic. The underground aquifer near Fort Dodge has theideal dome structure allowing large volumes of air storage at 525 psig (36 bar) pressure (Fig. 4).

Other States such as Illinois, ‘‘Energy Storage Options for Central Illinois’’ [4] also have this potential forWind & Storage, but Iowa is in the forefront possessing a site ideal for a CAES power plant and wind farm.These development plans have a future vision for the value of carbon reduction—adding reliable renewableresources with storage concepts such as CAES.

3.4. Smaller bulk storage systems

Two smaller ‘‘bulk’’ storage systems are noteworthy: (a) flow batteries—also known as regenerative fuelcells in MW ratings to 12 MW and (b) flywheel energy storage—high speed flywheels that can be grouped in a

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Fig. 4. Compressed air energy storage in Iowa. Source: ISEP.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457 3451

standard container, capable of 1MW capacity. Multiple containers can be placed at critical sites to addressfrequency and voltage drop.

3.4.1. Flow batteries

Regenerative fuel cells, which through a reversible electro-chemical reaction between two electrolytes, canstore and release energy continuously at a high rate of discharge, for up to 10 h, which is determined by theelectrolyte storage volume.

Three different electrolytes form the basis of existing designs of flow batteries currently in demonstration orlarge-scale project development. These electrolytes, sodium bromide (NaBr) by Regenesys in the UK ,vanadium bromide (Vbr) by VRB Power Systems, Inc. Canada and Zinc Bromide (ZnBr) by ZBB EnergyCorporation. All these systems function in a similar manner, charging occurs when electrical energy from thegrid is converted into potential chemical energy. Release of this potential energy occurs within anelectrochemical cell compartmented for each electrolyte separated by an ion-exchange membrane. Theelectrolyte circulates in a closed-loop, going from charge to discharge mode. In a standby mode, these flowbatteries have responses in seconds (Fig. 5).

The VRB and Regenesys systems can be configured in 12–15MW plants with electrolyte storage tankssuitable for 10 h of continuous discharge. Regenesys went for an ambitious 120MWh project with TVA forthe Arnold Air force base. Before entering the commissioning phase, which was to follow a similar project inthe UK, the German Utility investor, RWE withdrew all financial support. VRB has since acquired all rightsto the Regenesys technology. Surely this project will be salvaged.

VRB power systems that have a smaller one MW demonstration system at PacifiCorp Castle Valley, Utahsubstation, which is at the end of an 85miles 25 kV feeder line, that led to reliability and power qualitycustomer complaints. Feeder voltage/reactive power (Var) support will be provided by the VRB energystorage flow battery. VRB are also capable of supplying bulk storage systems up to 12MvA or 120MWhgeneration.

3.4.2. Flywheel energy storage

Not a new technology, however with development of composite materials, flywheel diameters could bereduced and speeds increased up to 80,000 rpm, storing energy as inertial energy, resulting in small high

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Fig. 6. MW containerized flywheels. Source: Beacon Power.

Fig. 5. Schematic of cell stack flow battery. Source: VRB Power.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–34573452

density storage devices. The motor that spins the wheel up to speed, acts as generator when the wheel releasesthe stored energy, this will slow the wheel down to a discharged rpm, at which point it will revert to the motormode and draw energy from the supply source to achieve a charged status. These compact wheels rotate in avacuum enclosure and use magnetic bearings—resulting in very low losses in the charged standby mode.

There are several suppliers pursuing this technology, one supplier in particular, Beacon Power realized theneed for larger capacity systems, interconnected flywheels in an array wherein modular flywheel/converterunits are integrated to form a large-scale sustainable energy storage facility capable of delivering megawattsfor minutes. These containerized MW modules can be rapidly dispatched to sub-stations in appropriatenumbers to meet the site specifics (Fig. 6).

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457 3453

Such systems are competitive compared to diesel generators used for similar support services, and inaddition, do not require the storage of fuel oil at the sites. Flywheels have much lower life-cycle cost thanbattery systems—especially in demanding high cycle discharge operations.

3.4.3. Superconducting magnetic energy storage (SMES)

SMES systems have been used for several years at utility and industrial sites in the United States, Japan,Europe and South Africa to provide both transmission voltage support and power quality to customersvulnerable to fluctuating power quality. It is estimated that since the 1970s over 100MW of these units inthese two markets are in operation worldwide (the average rating of 3MW or less per unit) These units canrespond within a few milliseconds at high power output (similar to flywheels), but only for short periods oftime. Costs are considered high compared to other technologies, but cost competitive with other FACTSequipment or solutions for transmission upgrades. In 2000, Wisconsin Public Service Corporation installed 6of the American Superconductor D-SMES units to handle voltage disturbances in the WPS Northern Loopsystem.

SMES systems store energy in a magnetic field created by the flow of DC current in a coil of cryogenicallycooled, superconducting material. The major components of a SMES system are, a superconducting coil, apower conditioning system, a cryogenic refrigerator, and a cryostat/vacuum vessel to keep the coil at lowtemperature, to maintain the coil in a superconducting state.

4. Applications

Stored energy integration into the generation-grid system is best illustrated in (Fig. 7) ‘‘Energy StorageApplications on the Grid’’ this covers a wide field in every aspect of generation-transmission and distribution.The ability of the various technologies to react quickly converting the stored energy back to electricity readilyprovides three primary functions; Energy Management (hours of duration) load leveling, or peak period needs.Bridging Power (seconds or minutes duration) assuring continuity of service, contingency reserves or UPS(uninterruptible power supply); Power Quality & Reliability (milliseconds to seconds duration) in support ofmanufacturing facilities, voltage and frequency controls.

Pearl Street, Inc. 2002

D

C

A

E

A Renewable Energy

B Commodity Arbitrage

C Transmission Support

D Distribution Deferral

E Power Quality

F DG Support

G Off-Grid

FG

Load

Storage

Power Plant

B

Fig. 7. Energy storage applications on the grid.

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–34573454

5. Benefits from energy storage

The market or economic benefits from Energy Storage can be quantified in four major areas of theelectricity supply chain, namely: generation, transmission and distribution, energy services and renewableenergy storage. Projected benefits over a 15-year period for the USA Generation and T&D system couldexceed $100 billion.

One of the first benefits would be to fully utilize capital assets, considering that the National average forgeneration capacity factor is 58/50% and transmission 50/52%. Bulk energy storage will allow the mostefficient units to be fully utilized, and allow optimization of the generation mix. Furthermore, it will avoid theuse of inefficient units using premium fuels during peak periods. Needle peaks can be readily met with Storageat the distribution level, or with current installed ‘‘peaking’’ unit capacity.

6. Market potential

Current studies and CAES projects in advanced stages of development clearly indicate that Power Modulesfrom 100 to 300MW are competitive at $500 to $600/kW with CC power plants for Mid-Range or Mid-Meritgeneration up to 4200 h/year, most base load capacity is provided by coal fired power plants and nuclearaccounting for 72% of the electric energy production in the US. This readily translates to a lot of daily cyclingof base-load plants and in particular GT/CC power plant, this increases wear and tear as well as maintenancecosts, such costs quantified in a study by Aptech [2]. The bottom line is higher energy production costs withoutStorage facilities. It is to be noted that the installed base of GT/CC plant represents 34% of the installedcapacity, providing only 17% of the MW/h, in a competitive environment many of these plants will not earnsufficient revenue to pay off their debt financing.

With the installed generating capacity in the US heading for 1000GW, a simple goal of a modest addition of5% of the installed capacity assigned to bulk energy storage, a potential of 50GW could be realized in the nearfuture. Present available storage sites readily account for 15/20GW of bulk energy storage a reality in the next10/15 years. The technologies considered in this paper can readily address these projected needs, and meet apotential of 65GW by 2020. This is a lofty goal, but achievable with a National Policy advocating loweremissions and lower premium fuel consumption.

7. Future prospects (developments)

Pumped Hydro has clearly demonstrated the value of bulk energy storage, while these benefits arerecognized and utilized, new facilities have languished; projects in development do show promise andopportunities for implementation. New concepts are being proposed especially with the growing capacity ofwind energy, currently backed by tax incentives, however at 6500MW and projected to grow substantially,energy storage and wind energy integration using flow batteries, ganged flywheels or CAES could lead tobetter economic utilization of a substantial resource operating at below 30% capacity factor—storage coulddrive this capacity factor to 65% or higher. Concepts outlined in a recent paper at EESAT 2003 Conference [3]suggested sub-surface storage using large diameter pipe such as typically used for natural gas transportation.Using a storage complex of 2000m of pipe a system that will provide 60MW/h (15MW� 4 h) could enhancepower supply at remote wind farms. These costs were established at $550/kW (Fig. 8).

This storage pipe concept could be applied to existing GT/CC plant increasing the hot day output 20/25%,by injecting the stored air into the combustors with or without humidification. By applying the humidificationconcept, the air supply in a CAES plant could reduce the required storage volume (8 h) by 50%, or increase theoperating hours by 50% of the specific cavern storage volume. Pipe storage at approx. $30/kWh versus Cavernstorage $3/kWh would still be economic for GT installed power plants with gas fuel prices above $6/mm Btu(Fig. 9).

In another hybrid concept proposed, a conventional gas turbine could be coupled with storage and aseparate unfired air expander [5] for increased flexibility of operation, Using a 180MW GT the plant outputwould exceed 400MW. The advanced technology GT with 38% efficiency can be operated independentlywhen the cavern air supply has been drawn down.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

Fig. 8. Pipe air storage-integrated wind/with air humidification. A total of 60MWh and low emissions. Source: ESPC Inc.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457 3455

The requirement for efficient clean coal concepts, such as IGCC (gasification) can be enhanced with storagesystems to keep the plant at 80% or better load factor during the off-peak demand periods, and deliver theadded stored capacity during high demand.

Advanced concepts of adiabatic compression and expansion, requiring thermal energy storage (TES) areprogressing with studies in Europe [6] such systems would ideally benefit renewable energy systems such assolar bio-mass and wind, adding capacity with no premium fuel consumption. Plant sizes for centralizedstorage (300MW generating capacity), storage adjacent to wind farms (150MW), and on isolated grids(30MW).

Further developments and cost reduction in multi MW flow batteries or MW concept of highpower density flywheels in the next 5 years could greatly impact the value of the electricity supplychain.

ARTICLE IN PRESS

CAES-CT Concept with Humidification basedon GE 7FA CT

G

GE7FA COMBUSTION TURBINE

Fuel

C T

COMPRESSOR TRAINPower = 12.3 MW

CM

HRU

AIRSATURATOR

Make-up Water

STACK

Ambient Air95 F, 58 Lb/sec

Ambient Air95 F, 896 Lb/sec

Moist Air (36% H2O)373 F, 88 Lb/sec

5.5% H2O (M)

ESTIMATED PERFORMANCE AT 95 F: (Max. Power)

CT CT-HAINET POWER, MW 150.4 190INCREMENTAL POWER, MW 0 40NET HEAT RATE, Btu/kWh (LHV) 9,760 6200

Compressed Air Storage

Fig. 9. Compressed air storage and humidification increases GT power plant hot day MW and lowers emissions. Source: ESPC Inc.

Installation vs. Operating Costs

Pearl Street, Inc. 2002

Ope

ratin

g C

ost

($/k

Wh)

100 1,000 10,000

LeadAcid

Battery

High-SpeedFlywheels

PHS

Low-SpeedFlywheels

300 3,00010

100

1,000

10,000

CAES

Flow

Batteries

NAS

Capital Cost per unit of Power ($/kW)

Fig. 10. Storage systems. Installation versus operating cost.

S. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–34573456

8. Conclusion

The current storage concepts are ready for deployment (Fig. 10)—storage needs to be implemented, not justhere in the US, but in all developed and developing countries. The biggest impact is probably the flexibility ofoperation. Economic dispatch to meet markets needs, absorb excess capacity, or large load swings withcompression—this is a powerful market tool. Improve energy management, and obtain better value from bulkpower purchase and sales. Reduce risks and vulnerabilities from fuel price shocks, the volatility in particular inthe US will always be a factor, long-term projections show that natural gas prices will continue to rise, withincreased demand, which cannot readily be met from new sources other than LNG imports.

ARTICLE IN PRESSS. van der Linden / Energy 31 (2006) 3446–3457 3457

The trend of increased harvesting of wind energy will put further stress on the grid reliability. This is alreadymanifested in Europe that has a far greater percentage of its generating base committed to the variances ofwind power production.

Bulk energy storage will most importantly ‘‘buffer’’ utilities from the lack of spinning reserve and loadfollowing capability as a result of many independent power plants (IPP) installed in the last 5 years. It willremove concerns about power quality, and new threats to reliability.

Energy storage provides—security—reduces transmission constraints-extends (optimizes) the capabilities ofefficient clean coal plants-reduces emissions, enhances renewable energy. It provides load management (rapidresponse) frequency and voltage control, spinning reserve, black start capabilities, and supports distributedgeneration.

References

[1] van der Linden S. CAES for Today’s Market. Electrical Energy Storage Applications & Technology (EESAT) Conference, San

Francisco, CA, April 15–17, 2002.

[2] Grimsrud P, Lefton S, Besuner P. True cost of cycling power plants enhance the value of compressed air energy storage (CAES)

systems. Electrical Energy Storage Applications & Technology (EESAT) Conference, San Franciso, CA, October 27–29, 2003.

[3] Nakhamkin M, Wolk R, van der Linden S, Hall R, Bradshaw D. New compressed air energy storage concept can improve the

profitability of existing simple cycle, combined cycle, wind energy, and landfill gas combustion turbine-based power plants. EESAT

2003 Conference San Francisco, CA, October 27–29, 2003.

[4] Makansi J, van der Linden S, Schien K. Energy storage options for Central Illinois. Electrical Energy Storage Applications &

Technology (EESAT) Conference, San Francisco, CA, October 27–29, 2003.

[5] Nakhamkin M, van der Linden S. Integration of a gas turbine (GT) with compressed air energy storage (CAES) provides the best

alternative for mid range and daily cyclic generation needs. ASME/IGTI Congress, Munich, Germany, May 2000. Paper 2000-GT-82.

[6] Bulloch C, Gatzen C, et al. Advanced adiabatic compressed air energy storage for the integration of wind energy. Wind Energy

Conference, EWEC, London, UK, November 2004.

[7] Crotogino F, Mohmeyer K-U, Scharf R. Huntorf CAES: more than 20 years of successful operation. Spring 2001 Solution Mining

Research Institute (SMRI), Technical Conference, Orlando, FL, USA. April 23–24, 2001.

Further reading

[1] Additional Energy Storage Information: Websites: www.energystoragecouncil.org: www.espcinc.com

Septimus van der Linden has more than 45 years experience in power generation technology, most recently with Alstom Power Inc. His

responsibilities span application engineering, engineering studies, strategic planning, sales and marketing management, cost estimating,

and supervisory responsibility of engineering service and equipment installation. He is a member of, and contributor to, American Society

of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) and the International Gas Turbine Institute (IGTI), and past Chair of its Electric Power Committee. He

has numerous technical and industry related publications to his credit. He is considered a ‘‘pioneer’’ in the engineering design, project

development, and technology evaluation for large-scale energy storage systems. Gas turbine, combined cycle and cogeneration power

plants as well as new technology development in these areas have been a primary focus, Since his retirement in 2002, he has formed his own

company, Brulin Associates LLC., an independent consultant, serving the Power Industry in the application and evaluation of new and

advanced technologies, for improved efficiency and lower emissions. In addition to Bulk Energy Storage, another area of current interest is

the integration of renewable energy (Wind) with energy storage for improved capacity factors and timely power delivery during high

demand and low wind velocities. Staff Consultant, Energy Storage Council. www.energystoragecouncil.org, IGTI Board of Advisors-

2004-2006, Past Chair IGTI Electric Power Committee-2001-2004, Keynote Speaker ECOS 2003.