Converting water to ice is a means of removing heat from H20, physicist Jan Olaf Gunderson explained. The heat is then expelled through the back of the freezing unit, warming homes.
"In Norway almost all new homes are heated by heat pumps built into the wall, with the 'back of the freezer' on the inside of the home and the 'freezer' on the outside of the home," said Gunderson, a Norwegian national. "A home freezer is a typical heat pump, and the cheapest way to heat your home is to fill the freezer with water, then when the water is in the form of ice, throw out the block of ice outside of your house, then fill the freezer with water again."
Ice Energy seems intent on capitalizing on the same sort of simple system in the inverse, and Ramirez readily admits his technology applies best to warm climates. Energy is lost in the conversion process from ice back to water (as much as 15 percent), but Ramirez said a temperature gradient of 15 degrees Fahrenheit or more from day to night makes the product energy neutral.
"In most of California, the average gradient [the difference between day and night temperatures] is 22 degrees," Ramirez said. "We have a natural advantage provided by cooler temperatures to reject heat, instead of running the AC that has to overcome heat during the day."
As for water supply, the Ice Bear is filled once and never filled again. And Ramirez insists the concept is storage by any other name, just not the kind of storage people tend to anticipate.
"It's a battery filled with water," Ramirez said, taking up the hybrid-car analogy. "I think you can draw the conclusion that nothing will ever be cheaper as a storage medium."
Visit to Capitol Hill
Ramirez said California is an ideal venue for bring his Ice Bears to market for another reason: The state has on the books a renewable portfolio standard of 20 percent by 2010 and to 33 percent by 2020.
Citing a report on wind power by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Ramirez said what nobody wants to admit in California that an intermittent source like wind tends to be weakest during peak power periods. When it is hottest, in other words, the wind tends not to blow as hard.
This would make wind an unreliable source during hot, windless days when some sort of storage medium might counteract that reality. "The greatest output of wind occurs 180 degrees out of phase with the peak," Ramirez said. "It's variable in nature and typically blows when you don't need it."
So to this executive, the answer is pairing ice storage with renewables as complementary technologies. He also said the distributed nature of his machines means less loss of electricity through transmission and distribution, in addition to more reliance on baseload power, which is more efficient than peaking power.
"Air conditioning demand is the root cause of the peaking power problem," Ramirez said, noting that 14 peaking units have been stymied recently in Southern California by environmental justice activists who do not want the plants built in low-income neighborhoods.
At least one prominent lawmaker, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), has become a believer. Pelosi recently invited Ramirez to address the House Democratic caucus, where he gave Democrats much the same pitch he presented to this reporter.
Up next? Ramirez said he is talking to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power -- the largest public utility in the United States -- about signing a deal that could potentially dwarf the Southern California Public Power Authority arrangement. On the table in those discussions is building a manufacturing facility in Southern California, which is a high priority for a state facing 12 percent unemployment.
See what we're tweeting about
8 Comments
Add CommentJust one of SCPPA's many power stations can produce 4,000 megawatts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBut these 6000 heat storage units all together could sustain (assuming they were perfectly efficient) less than 79 megawatts over half a day.
6000
* 450 gallons
* 3.7854 liters per gallon
* 999.84 grams per liter
* 333.55 joules per gram
/ 3600000000 joules per megawatt hour
/ 12 hours
= 78.901 megawatts
Someone please tell me that my math is wrong.
BillSmith:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIts not the 79 megawatts that's important its the reduction in peak power demand.
Most energy is generated by large coal fired power plants. Problem with coal fired power plants: no matter what the energy output, they still consume almost the same amount of coal, to use some of this surplus energy when there is no demand, users get off peak discounts. Now you know why.
Power stations are built to cope with peak demand. This system increases demand when there is none and reduces demand at peak times by cooling buildings with melting ice.
Lets hope they recycle the water too and use additives to increase the thermal capacity of water when heating from zero centigrade to 20 centigrade. I don't know if they can improve the latent heat of melting.
You have a point about the peak power not being a whole 12 hours.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've gone back to look for a comparable system currently in operation. The Credit Suisse building in New York claims to have reduced their peak power by 900 kilowatts (17.578 watts/gallon).
Similar results from this proposed system would shave 47 megawatts off SCPPA's peak power. To be fair, this is a warmer climate, so maybe double the savings to 95 megawatts.
Compared to the 4000 megawatt peak capacity of just one power plant, this still looks like a pretty slim improvment to me. But 95MW is comparable to the capacities of SCPPA's wind turbine projects, and I suppose every little bit helps.
Perhaps a better way to tackle this would be to use solar thermal panels to power absorption cycle air conditioning. That way you get the maximum cooling when the temperature is highest.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.solarpanelsplus.com/solar-air-conditioning/
Note: I have no commercial interest in the above organisation!
Did they ever think about bringing back the old Swamp Cooler? When I went to college there, I lived in Handford and my apartment had a Swamp Cooler that kept to whole apartment cool when the temp outside was over a hundred.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat the Swamp Cooler consisted of was, a rust proof box, a thick straw filter, and a fan. A certain amount of water soaked the straw at a given time, the fan pulled outside air through the soaked straw and pumped the cooled air into the apartment. The temp inside stayed around seventy degrees and my power bill was very low; and if you purify the water, you do not have to worry about bacteria build up.
This makes a lot of sense. However, is not exactly a new idea. At my company we installed a similar system over 15 years ago.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJamesDavis thats to simple... swamp coolers are all over Florida but no one thinks about em in the rest of the country
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe have Swamp Coolers here in the California Desert (Palm Springs). Although they do not work very well when the humidity gets high (so I do not understand their popularity in Florida.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn fact, during the summer, the weather cast always include the dew point, and a statement of whether swamp coolers can work.