Flow Batteries for grid-scale energy storage

Joep Pijpers

1
Why Flow Batteries?
Upgrade deferral Bulk Power
Power Quality Renewables Integration Management

Pumped Hydro

Flow Batteries Below Ground CAES

Hours NaS, NaNiCl Sealed Battery

Other Sealed Batteries
(Li-ion, Pb-acid)
Discharge Time
Minutes

Flywheels
Seconds

1 kW 10 kW 100 kW 1 MW 10 MW 100 MW 1 GW

System Power

Flow batteries can provide high power output and long discharge times at low-cost, anywhere
Schematics of a Flow Battery System
Active Materials:
Negolyte Tank Cell Stack Posolyte Tank
• Redox-active compounds
(Posolyte, Negolyte)

Cell Stack:
• Membranes
• Electrodes
• Bipolar plates

Balance of Plant (BOP):

• Pumps, tanks, piping
Power Conversion
• Control and power
conversion hardware

• Decoupling power and energy capacity makes for flexible design

• High footprint  envisioned for stationary storage applications
How could a Flow Battery System look like?

Source: Lockheed Martin

Requirements for a successful flow battery technology

1. Low cost (in terms of Levelized Cost of Storage)

(σ 𝐶𝐴𝑃𝐸𝑋𝑡 + σ 𝑂&𝑀𝑡 + σ 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑔𝑡 )
𝐿𝐶𝑂𝑆 =
σ 𝑘𝑊ℎ´𝑠𝑡
2. Safe

3. Environmentally benign

4. Low foot print

The incumbency: all-Vanadium Flow Batteries
Source: www.echemion.com
Hokkaido, Japan (2013 pilot)
Sumitomo, 40 MW, 60 MWh
Pros:
• Well-established technology
• Good durability
• Decent energy density
Cons:
• Corrosive electrolytes
• Cross-over across membranes must be
managed
• Vanadium is expensive
Companies: Vionx, Sumitomo, UniEnergy
Technologies, Primus Power, Solibra, GEC, etc
The incumbency: Zinc-Bromine Flow Batteries

Pros:
• Many years of development
• Very cheap active materials
• High voltage (~1.8V, good energy density)

Cons:
• Bromine highly corrosive
– reduced lifetime, expensive BOP
www.echemion.com
– complicate regulations, customer perception
• Zinc plating at negative electrode
– only partial decoupling of power and energy
capacity
– danger of membrane pinching by dendrites

Companies active: Gelion, Redflow,

Levelized Cost of Storage: flow batteries vs. Lithium

Application Power Duration LCOS LCOS Zinc-Br LCOS Lithium

(MW) (h) Vanadium FB FB ($/kWh)
($/kWh) ($/kWh)
Peaker Replacement 100 4 0.21-0.41 0.29-0.32 0.28-0.35
Distribution 10 6 0.18-0.34 n/a 0.27-0.34
Microgrid 1 4 0.27-0.41 n/a 0.36-0.39
Source: Lazard, 2017

At 2017 costs, flow batteries exhibit similar LCOS values

relative to lithium ion batteries for long discharge applications
Project decrease of CAPEX cost: flow batteries vs. Lithium

Source: Lazard, 2017

In light of decreasing costs of Lithium batteries, flow battery

research should focus on using significantly cheaper materials
Cost breakdown Vanadium Flow Batteries

Source: Fraunhofer Institute, 2016

Materials dominate cost, especially vanadium ore/processing

and stack components (membrane, electrode, etc)
Novel developments: focus on cheaper materials

A. Aspuru-Guzik, M. Aziz, Nature, 505, p195, 2014

Ligand A

e–

Ligand B
Metal Ion

Sun Catalytix – Lockheed Martin Harvard University and others

Coordination complexes as active material All-organic redox active materials
Status: prototype (250 kW / 1 MWh) realized 2017 Status: significant academic research
 Novel developments: focus on cheaper materials

J. Power Sources, 310, 1-11, 2016

Source: Fumatech

Aalto University Finland Future research project: INEEL and Fumatech

All-copper redox chemistry Electrodialysis using abundant salts
Status: Albufera Energy involved in commercialization Status: innovation on membranes needed
Guiding Questions (1)

• What are the main technological challenges of redox batteries?

• Focus on cheaper materials, for electrolytes and stacks
• Durability often yet unproven (membranes, electrolytes)
• Of the different redox batteries, which are the most suitable to be used as an
interconnected energy storage system to the network?
• Lowest cost technology will dominate. Safety also important, but is
related to cost
• What basic research topics are necessary and relevant to make redox
batteries more competitive?
• Cheaper materials: low-cost effective electrolytes (aqueous!),
membranes, stack components, etc
• What is the environmental impact of this technology?
• Material abundancy not expected to be a problem (compared to Co, Li)
• Corrosive substances may pose a SHE risk
• Footprint of flow battery systems will be large
• Possibility of H2 released in atmosphere due to parasitic reactions
Guiding Questions (2)

• What challenges exist in the integration, monitoring and maintenance of these

batteries?
• End customers may be risk-averse: a flow battery may be more complex to
operate than a large Li-ion system
• Controls systems need to be developed specifically for flow battery
operation
• MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure) values for some flow battery
components doe not exist. Development of reliability engineering
• Cost and application models need to be more refined
• Human resources need to be developed for FB operation and maintenance
• What implementations should a country like Mexico do to be competitive in the
manufacture of this battery technology and which one (s) are the most
attractive redox battery technology (s)?
• Develop its own flow battery research programs
• Engage with international flow battery companies to explore the possibility
of manufacturing in Mexico
Thank You!

15
 Flow batteries based on ‘Electrodialysis’
Animal plant cells: high concentration K+ ions inside
cell, high concentration of Na+ ions outside cell

𝑅𝑇 [𝐾+ ]𝑜𝑢𝑡
𝐸𝐾+ = ln( + )
𝑧𝐹 [𝐾 ]𝑖𝑛

Typical cell: 5mM K+ outside cell and 140mM K+

inside cell: EK = -85mV

Bipolar membrane
Proposal: dissociate water into H+ and OH- ions C A
using bipolar membranes - +
H+ OH-
- +
𝑅𝑇 [𝐻 + ]𝑎𝑐𝑖𝑑 - +
𝐸𝐻+ = ln( + ) H+ OH-
𝑧𝐹 [𝐻 ]𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 - +
- +
For 1M acid and 1M base production, EH+ = 830mV H+ - + OH-
- +
- +
- +