Batteries or silos: Optimizing storage capacity in direct air capture plants to maximize renewable energy use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Direct air capture (DAC) of carbon dioxide is among the technologies that is forecast to play a major role in achieving the global ambition to constrain atmospheric temperature rise to below two degrees Celsius by 2100. However, DAC is an energy intensive chemical process, whose designs are currently incompatible with intermittent renewable energy (RE) sources. This research develops a model to enable the flexible operation of DAC, to maximize RE usage. A new model of the chemical process flow of a liquid solvent DAC that includes silos to store CaCO 3 and CaO is developed. A linear programming optimization model that minimizes energy costs while achieving the CO 2 capture targets of the DAC plant is developed. Scenario analysis establishes the storage silo size and battery storage size needed to reduce renewable energy curtailment to zero for a given RE profile. Simulations with a representative 336-hour RE profile reveal that two silos of sizes 660 tons and 370 tons would be needed to support flexible DAC plant operations and reduce RE curtailment to zero. For the same profile, a 355 MWh/65 MW battery would be required to achieve zero renewable curtailment. The results demonstrate that flexible operation of DAC is achievable, and DAC plants can adapt to variable RE without the need for battery energy storage . Furthermore, considering the scale of storage needed to minimize RE curtailment in a commercial-scale DAC plant, the results suggest that using physical storage silos could be more cost-effective than using battery energy storage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".