Yes, that’s the term I was looking for - I should have looked at the title of this thread.
The described ‘bricks’ appear to simply be able to store energy (heat) - presumably for a reasonably lengthy period of time. They rely upon external sources of energy. So what makes them better than existing storage technologies - be they naturally occurring (ocean temperature differentials are effectively a storage mechanism) or constructed (water + gravity i.e. pumped hydro)?
Because they can be installed into an existing coal fired power station in place of the boilers whilst all the steam turbines, generators, cooling systems and switch yards can be reused.
The former Collinsville power station was commissioned in 1968 and closed down in 2013 thus leaving the infrastructure as stranded assets after 45 years of operation.
There is a solar farm right next door and HV distribution lines running North to Townsville and South to the Bowen Basin so it should be relatively easy to be able to recommission the station to be able to provide power 24/7.
The other major power stations in the North are the Kareeya Hydro Power sation commissioned in 1957 and the Barron Gorge Hydro Power Station commissioned in 1963.
After some 64 years and 58 years respectively, they are still going strong as there were no high wear, limited life boilers and coal feeders.
In fact, both hydro stations now produce 10% more output after their high voltage transformers were replaced in recent years.
Better or equal to in which applications? The technology is still being developed. Until it’s proven in a number of different applications, and the economics established we can only speculate.
There may be a number of ways to exploit it to lower carbon emissions. It’s competing directly with other ways to store thermal energy such as molten salt, aqueous solutions, bulk metal, ceramics etc. plenty of scope.
Compared to some of the alternative thermal storage options, it’s potentially efficient, simple and adaptable. It is like many of these alternatives best suited to short term storage needs - tens of hours. The working temperature of the blocks, in the electricity generation suggestion is around 660C. This is also a determinant.
Using the stored thermal energy to generate mechanical or electrical power is a limited opportunity. The conversion losses to convert thermal energy to electrical are significant. On the performance indicated by MGA it will typically consume 3kWh of (renewable generation) electricity to deliver 1kWh of electricity from storage. In the instance of repurposing an older technology thermal coal power station, the older the plant the less efficient it will be. For the less technically inclined it’s like buying a premium sliced loaf of 100% zero carbon bread, and then throwing 2 out of every 3 slices away because they’ve gone mouldy.
Alternately if used in processing or industry, the same 3kWh of electrical consumption could deliver up to 2.5kWh of stored thermal/heat energy. In this type of application it’s a more direct storage option. If the costs are similar, the thermal energy storage blocks are a local storage option. The MGA designed blocks do have the advantage of being made from common materials (carbon + aluminium).
