World’s Biggest Battery In California Overheats, Shuts Down

[ronwagn + 6,290]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/worlds-biggest-battery-in-california-overheats-shuts-down_3998519.html

It seems that batteries should be confined to smaller uses until their flaws are actually fixed! Automakers can't even get their small batteries to stop burning. So much for the timeline on renewable battery use for energy backup. RCW

World’s Biggest Battery In California Overheats, Shuts Down

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

It did not catch on fire. It did not explode (like that natural gas power plant in Hayward a few months ago).

Not going to slow down anything. I wonder how many fossil fuel plants tripped and went off line in the past week? 

Oh here is a coal plant about the same size that caught on fire for the third time this year:

"According to its website, the OG&E River Valley Power Plant, also known as the Shady Point Generation Plant, is a 350.0-megawatt coal-fired power station near Panama, Oklahoma. It has two units, both of which were put into service in 1990. 

Incident Description: 
On August 27, 2021, 4029 News reported a fire at a coal-fired power plant near Panama, Oklahoma. 

Firefighters were called to the plant around 9:00 a.m. for a fire in a coal chute. Oklahoma Gas and Electric described the fire as a “hot spot” in a coal silo.

Volunteer firefighters were on scene for close to five hours. Two of them were treated for heat exhaustion and one needed intravenous fluids.

There was no information about property damage.

Previous Incidents:
According to firefighters, it was the third time in a year they responded to similar calls at the plant. "

https://dustsafetyscience.com/coal-dust-fire-panama-oklahoma/

Edited September 16, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[nsdp + 449]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It did not catch on fire. It did not explode (like that natural gas power plant in Hayward a few months ago).

Not going to slow down anything. I wonder how many fossil fuel plants tripped and went off line in the past week? 

Oh here is a coal plant about the same size that caught on fire for the third time this year:

"According to its website, the OG&E River Valley Power Plant, also known as the Shady Point Generation Plant, is a 350.0-megawatt coal-fired power station near Panama, Oklahoma. It has two units, both of which were put into service in 1990. 

Incident Description: 
On August 27, 2021, 4029 News reported a fire at a coal-fired power plant near Panama, Oklahoma. 

Firefighters were called to the plant around 9:00 a.m. for a fire in a coal chute. Oklahoma Gas and Electric described the fire as a “hot spot” in a coal silo.

Volunteer firefighters were on scene for close to five hours. Two of them were treated for heat exhaustion and one needed intravenous fluids.

There was no information about property damage.Previous Incidents:
According to firefighters, it was the third time in a year they responded to similar calls at the plant. "e.com/coal-dust-fire-panama-oklahoma/

Remember the USS Maine . Oh McKinley was a liar too. Coal bunker caught fire next to the magazine.

https://dustsafetyscienc

[turbguy + 1,397]

22 minutes ago, nsdp said:

Remember the USS Maine . Oh McKinley was a liar too. Coal bunker caught fire next to the magazine.

https://dustsafetyscienc

Yeah.

Transporting coal at sea can be quite bothersome.  Depends on the coal.

https://knowledgeofsea.com/coal-cargo-know-the-hazards/

 

[Rob Plant + 2,608]

10 hours ago, turbguy said:

Yeah.

Transporting coal at sea can be quite bothersome.  Depends on the coal.

https://knowledgeofsea.com/coal-cargo-know-the-hazards/

 

Yeah and did you know the Titanic had a coal bunker fire for days before it set sail?

https://medium.com/s/story/the-titanic-was-on-fire-for-days-before-the-iceberg-hit-94fa26471dfa

[turbguy + 1,397]

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

Yeah and did you know the Titanic had a coal bunker fire for days before it set sail?

https://medium.com/s/story/the-titanic-was-on-fire-for-days-before-the-iceberg-hit-94fa26471dfa

If not while it was underway.

Just imagine the same thing happening in a powerhouse, where the bunkers may be 6 or more stories tall.

Or in an outdoor coal pile 3 or 4 stories tall.   At least you have dozers to use when outdoors.

Coal SUCKS!

Edited September 16, 2021 by turbguy

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

15 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It did not catch on fire. It did not explode (like that natural gas power plant in Hayward a few months ago).

Not going to slow down anything. I wonder how many fossil fuel plants tripped and went off line in the past week? 

Oh here is a coal plant about the same size that caught on fire for the third time this year:

"According to its website, the OG&E River Valley Power Plant, also known as the Shady Point Generation Plant, is a 350.0-megawatt coal-fired power station near Panama, Oklahoma. It has two units, both of which were put into service in 1990. 

Incident Description: 
On August 27, 2021, 4029 News reported a fire at a coal-fired power plant near Panama, Oklahoma. 

Firefighters were called to the plant around 9:00 a.m. for a fire in a coal chute. Oklahoma Gas and Electric described the fire as a “hot spot” in a coal silo.

Volunteer firefighters were on scene for close to five hours. Two of them were treated for heat exhaustion and one needed intravenous fluids.

There was no information about property damage.

Previous Incidents:
According to firefighters, it was the third time in a year they responded to similar calls at the plant. "

https://dustsafetyscience.com/coal-dust-fire-panama-oklahoma/

Right so when we have hundreds of fossil fuel plants and a couple explode or burn we can say "odds are with that many plants we'll have a few failures".

How many battery installations are there? Not nearly as many. So, statistically, they have a higher failure rate than fossil fuel plants. 

I mean, I'm sure they'll iron out the issues eventually, but it doesn't seem rational to act like fossil fuel plants are in the same fail rate category. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 hour ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Right so when we have hundreds of fossil fuel plants and a couple explode or burn we can say "odds are with that many plants we'll have a few failures".

How many battery installations are there? Not nearly as many. So, statistically, they have a higher failure rate than fossil fuel plants. 

I mean, I'm sure they'll iron out the issues eventually, but it doesn't seem rational to act like fossil fuel plants are in the same fail rate category. 

You can't separate out the technological maturity from the equation. Fossil fuel is super mature but fails at a fairly high rate. Numerous power plants trip every day across the grid yet batteries are brand new technology. Ron claimed in his first post that  "It seems that batteries should be confined to smaller uses until their flaws are actually fixed! "    Well I am just making the point that fossil fuel plant flaws haven't been completely fixed.

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

Perhaps somebody can tell me why flow batteries aren't used yet. Large lithium ion battery farms seem like wanton waste. 

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

You can't separate out the technological maturity from the equation. Fossil fuel is super mature but fails at a fairly high rate. Numerous power plants trip every day across the grid yet batteries are brand new technology. Ron claimed in his first post that  "It seems that batteries should be confined to smaller uses until their flaws are actually fixed! "    Well I am just making the point that fossil fuel plant flaws haven't been completely fixed.

Do you think these battery systems are going to have a lower rate of failure once they're mature?

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Do you think these battery systems are going to have a lower rate of failure once they're mature?

Absolutely. Not only will software and control procedures continue to improve but new chemistries will be used. LFP has a much lower thermal potential and is just being introduced to the market. Following it will be the sodium and other metal batteries that have yet lower thermal potential. 

In the case at hand a battery pack began to overheat but wasn't taken off line. However when it reached a higher heat point the suppression systems kicked in and did a great job at cooling it down. It seems to me that the initial heat sensor failed but the secondary worked. So I don't think it was really a battery problem but a sensor and control problem.

[notsonice + 1,067]

17 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Absolutely. Not only will software and control procedures continue to improve but new chemistries will be used. LFP has a much lower thermal potential and is just being introduced to the market. Following it will be the sodium and other metal batteries that have yet lower thermal potential. 

In the case at hand a battery pack began to overheat but wasn't taken off line. However when it reached a higher heat point the suppression systems kicked in and did a great job at cooling it down. It seems to me that the initial heat sensor failed but the secondary worked. So I don't think it was really a battery problem but a sensor and control problem.

LFP has a much lower thermal potential ????? what is lower thermal potential....never heard of the term before?? do you mean a lower overpotential???? I did my grad work in Electrochemisty and on a daily basis worked with the inefficiencies of electrochemical reactions in reversible scans done on PAR eguipment (standard equipment used in electrochem research).  In other words to understand a reaction you ran it in both directions (reversed the polarity repetitively at really high speeds and watched to see if any unwanted side reactions are occurring which shows up in overpotential losses (heat) and formation of other products on the cathodes /anodes  ie gassing oxygen or hydrogen, insouluble products .. complex metal products etc.. For your info overpential is ...... the potential difference (voltage) between a half-reaction's thermodynamically determined reduction potential and the potential at which the redox event is experimentally observed.^[1] The term is directly related to a cell's voltage efficiency. In an electrolytic cell the existence of overpotential implies the cell requires more energy than thermodynamically expected to drive a reaction. In a galvanic cell the existence of overpotential means less energy is recovered than thermodynamics predicts. In each case the extra/missing energy is lost as heat. The quantity of overpotential is specific to each cell design and varies across cells and operational conditions, even for the same reaction. Overpotential is experimentally determined by measuring the potential at which a given current density (typically small) is achieved.

Jay , lower thermal potential. ???? you got me on that one

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

10 minutes ago, notsonice said:

LFP has a much lower thermal potential ????? what is lower thermal potential....never heard of the term before?? do you mean a lower overpotential???? I did my grad work in Electrochemisty and on a daily basis worked with the inefficiencies of electrochemical reactions in reversible scans done on PAR eguipment (standard equipment used in electrochem research).  In other words to understand a reaction you ran it in both directions (reversed the polarity repetitively at really high speeds and watched to see if any unwanted side reactions are occurring which shows up in overpotential losses (heat) and formation of other products on the cathodes /anodes  ie gassing oxygen or hydrogen, insouluble products .. complex metal products etc.. For your info overpential is ...... the potential difference (voltage) between a half-reaction's thermodynamically determined reduction potential and the potential at which the redox event is experimentally observed.^[1] The term is directly related to a cell's voltage efficiency. In an electrolytic cell the existence of overpotential implies the cell requires more energy than thermodynamically expected to drive a reaction. In a galvanic cell the existence of overpotential means less energy is recovered than thermodynamics predicts. In each case the extra/missing energy is lost as heat. The quantity of overpotential is specific to each cell design and varies across cells and operational conditions, even for the same reaction. Overpotential is experimentally determined by measuring the potential at which a given current density (typically small) is achieved.

Jay , lower thermal potential. ???? you got me on that one

Here is an example but most seem to say "potential of thermal runaway".

For comparison, a lithium cobalt oxide battery cell has a nominal voltage of about 3.6 Volts. This results in higher energy capacity but can produce more heat in the electrolyte that causes break down and reduces the capacity. The higher thermal potential reduces stability and increases the possibility of gassing which can lead to rapid venting and combustion. LiFePO4 batteries have a lower nominal voltage of about 3.2 Volts resulting in slightly less energy capacity. They produce less heat resulting in better stability in the electrolyte solvent. LiFePO4 batteries provide higher thermal stability making them virtually incombustible and safe with a long service life – even in high-temperature environments. https://www.falconups.com/lifepo4-why-is-it-safer-for-a-ups.html

Edited September 16, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Wombat1 + 33]

17 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Perhaps somebody can tell me why flow batteries aren't used yet. Large lithium ion battery farms seem like wanton waste. 

Because flow batteries don't flow below the freezing point of water. Lithium has a greater operating temperature range. 

[turbguy + 1,397]

You want a fire?

Just put a pile of coal in an enclosed space, and wait a while...

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

3 hours ago, Wombat1 said:

Because flow batteries don't flow below the freezing point of water. Lithium has a greater operating temperature range. 

What about using solvents with lower freezing points? 

Edited September 17, 2021 by KeyboardWarrior

[ronwagn + 6,290]

3 hours ago, Wombat1 said:

Because flow batteries don't flow below the freezing point of water. Lithium has a greater operating temperature range. 

Well, in temperate conditions, or with lots of insulation the temperature can be controlled. Maybe not cost effective in cold climates though. 

https://www.powermag.com/flow-batteries-energy-storage-option-for-a-variety-of-uses/

Edited September 17, 2021 by ronwagn
reference

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

12 hours ago, turbguy said:

You want a fire?

Just put a pile of coal in an enclosed space, and wait a while...

Coal self combusts? Like linseed oil? 

[notsonice + 1,067]

On 9/16/2021 at 4:12 PM, KeyboardWarrior said:

Perhaps somebody can tell me why flow batteries aren't used yet. Large lithium ion battery farms seem like wanton waste. 

because large scale commercial  flow batteries do not exist.........the small scale flow batteries (vanadium based) out there  are more expensive than Lithium batteries. Vanadium is not cheap ...within the same range as lithium  per kg IE $20 per kg.. Than said Lithium is so much lighter (molecular weight   wise) that it packs much more energy storage potential per Kg  Molecular  weights  Lithium 7  Vanadium  51. If you can make a flow battery with Iron (pig iron costs 50 cents per kg..... you will have a winner

[notsonice + 1,067]

13 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

What about using solvents with lower freezing points? 

 

16 hours ago, Wombat1 said:

Because flow batteries don't flow below the freezing point of water. Lithium has a greater operating temperature range. 

the freezing point of pure water is 32 degrees F  or 0 degrees centigrade........add salts IE Metallic salts and the freezing point decreases  The freezing point of seawater is 28.4 degrees F and seawater has a low salt concentration (3.5%)  Na Cl (sodium is a metal).....Add a lot of salt  (think deicing compounds (road salt) and the freezing point decreases to 0 degrees and less. A flow battery will have 10 times the concentration  of metallic  salts than seawater lowering the freezing point to ???? closer to the 0 degrees F

 

A flow battery will work  below the freezing point of pure water and remember adding metallic salts to water raises the boiling point

[turbguy + 1,397]

9 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Coal self combusts? Like linseed oil? 

Yup.

All the time.

[KeyboardWarrior + 527]

7 hours ago, notsonice said:

 

the freezing point of pure water is 32 degrees F  or 0 degrees centigrade........add salts IE Metallic salts and the freezing point decreases  The freezing point of seawater is 28.4 degrees F and seawater has a low salt concentration (3.5%)  Na Cl (sodium is a metal).....Add a lot of salt  (think deicing compounds (road salt) and the freezing point decreases to 0 degrees and less. A flow battery will have 10 times the concentration  of metallic  salts than seawater lowering the freezing point to ???? closer to the 0 degrees F

 

A flow battery will work  below the freezing point of pure water and remember adding metallic salts to water raises the boiling point

What's the magnitude of freezing point depression for flow battery liquid?