Posted on Leave a comment

Autonomous production of methane on Mars using microbial electrolysis and algal oxygen for a safe return to Earth

How do we shape human exploration on Mars to minimize what we must bring with us and to maximize the value and utility of what we bring, and augment it with what is already there?

To provide sufficient fuel for a safe return of the Mars crew, we can produce methane and oxygen on Mars which could be aided by microbes that are brought to Mars. We suggest lightweight perovskite solar panels that may be transported to Mars. In the optimistic scenario, about 18 months are required for the installation of surface solar power and fuel production for the failsafe return after which the crewed mission com­mences. The pessimistic scenario takes 4 years. To save oxygen, we also suggest Martian perchlorates as rocket fuel component. For later missions’ food supply, we suggest to use lichens as primary colonizers to produce organic rich soil.

Procedure to produce energy on Mars

We suggest the use of in situ Martian resources for the production of methane as ascent and return propellant. Since oxygen generated during electrolysis is not sufficient for a safe return, we also suggest to use algae for the pro­duction of oxygen. Algal biomass will be used as soil for food production. Methane producing microbes will be contained in methanogenic electrolysis reactors (MER) while algae will grow in covered craters. The produc­tion of methane on Mars is to be car­ried out autonomously by robots and reactors that will land near the ice-rich polar regions to melt wa­ter as elec­trolyte for low temperature electrolysis. The Mars lander will autonomously construct facili­ties with the purpose of propellant production to fuel the Mars transfer vehicle which enables transport between Mars surface and Earth orbit. Only when enough propellant for a safe return to Earth has been produced, shall a manned Mars mission begin. Furthermore, meth­ane will be used as energy storage should there be failure of energy collectors such as solar panels. Goal is to erect a 3.5 MW solar power plant on Mars by the end of the first manned mission.

Schematic of the fuel production process. Red circles highlight the end products steel (top) and CH4/O2 (bottom). Top: 1, Lander on ice, 2, Nuclear fission reactor (NFR) with heat exchanger to melt ice, 3, mining unit, 4, iron/nickel ores, 5, induction steel foundry with energy supply from the NFR (2), 6, algae enrichment tank with water supply from the NFR (2), 7, crater algae reservoir producing O2 and biomass for 8, dehydrator separating water and 9, biomass pellets, 10, carbon steel for Bottom: 11, solar heat collector melting ice and producing water for 12, microbial electrolysis reactor (MER) producing methane and oxygen collected by 13, degasser, 14, solar panels mounted on carbon steel producing electricity for MER (11), 15, gas storage tank, 16, Mars orbit transfer vehicle fueled by CH4/O2

To sustain the life of 6 crew members a power production capacity of 170 kW (see “Surface habitat energy needs”) is required and has highest priority along with fuel production for a safe journey home. The procedure is sketched out in the figure above. It is a stepwise process during which most steps are interdependent and therefore self-accelerating as power production in­creases. To minimize risk of failure, we recommend at least four independent landers in the circum-polar region of Mars. The polar regions bear the highest surface water content which is crucial for manned explorer missions, methanogenic electrolysis as well as the production of oxygen and biomass. The landers will carry a small nu­clear fission device that will begin mining for iron and titanium ores⁠ to produce the steel required as structural support for solar panels. First, the lander begins mining for iron ores so that steel production can begin. Graphite or other reduced forms of carbon for steel production will be shipped from Earth because or­ganic matter production on Mars by algae is a slow process. Alternatively, lightweight modular carbon fiber elements to mount solar panels will be brought from Earth to Mars. Once the 170 kW solar plant is estab­lished, melting ice for the methanogenic elec­trolysis reactors (MER) begins. Combined power from the nuclear fission reac­tor (NFR) and the solar plant will be used. Only when the amount of methane for a failsafe return (Orion capsule size) has been produced, power will be diverted into three equal parts: continue to melt ice for algae, start or continue to mine ores for thermal collectors, continue to produce methane. After enough thermal collectors are produced to pace ice melting with algal growth, electrical ice melting will be shut off. Now, electrical energy is used for steel production to install more solar panels and meth­ane production until sufficient for a comfortable (more payload) return. By this time, the crew is arriving and decides what the highest priorities are. We recommend to focus on accelerating algal growth for oxygen and biomass production as complete independence from Earth requires the production of or­ganic carbon from CO2.

The composition of Martian soil as analyzed by NASA’s Curiosity and other rovers (Source: NASA 2012)

Energy need for the Mars Transfer Vehicle

Fuel produced on Mars will serve 3 purposes:

  • Failsafe: return of one Orion-sized vehicle
  • Desired: production of return fuel allowing for less stress (more comfort) during transit
  • Energy storage at night or power failure

Two options for Mars-Earth return seem possible. (1) Option one was suggested by NASA’s DRA 5.0 and involves one Orion-like vehicle of about 12 tons and a travel speed of 14 km/s⁠. This option requires only one vehicle but provides less comfort for the long journey home and hence, it exposes the crew to higher stress. However, it uses less fuel therefore enables a faster completion of the first Mars mis­sion. (2) We envision a second option that involves two vehicles, one Orion-like lift-off vehicle for transport of 6 crew members into a Mars orbit of 250 km and one transit vehicle to return to Earth. As option two is the preferred option, we recommend to use option one, the Orion-only scenario, as fail­safe scenario.

We assume the capacity of a manned Orion capsule with Dragon thrusters (Draco) as reference. The Orion-sized vehicle can carry 6 crew members and has a weight of 12 tons including fuel. For a Mars lift-off, a thrust-mass ratio of at least 5 N/kg will be needed resulting in 60 kN thrust or 150 Draco thrusters to lift 6 crew members. The travel time from Martian surface to a 250 km orbit would be 7 minutes at full thrust. About 600 m3 methane (at Earth atmospheric pressure) would be required for the lift-off. To produce this amount of methane at 210 kW (40 kW nuclear fission and 170 kW solar power, see “Surface habitat energy needs”), 3 years of dedicated fuel production are necessary. The proposed solar power installations of 1,400 m2 perovskite solar cells can produce ef­fectively 170 kW during a Mars day of 8h (that is, 20 kW/m2 can be captured by perovskite panels). Using the same Orion capsule also for the Mars-Earth transit, another 7 minutes or 17,000 km are required to reach the travel speed of 14 km/s and approximately the same for full stop. To produce enough fuel for the Mars-Earth transit, only 3 more days are required. Once enough fuel for the failsafe scenario has been produced, the crew will leave the lower Earth orbit heading for Mars.

For the comfort scenario, we assume the proposed 63-ton crewed payload option from the Mars DRA 5.0 used for Earth-Mars transit⁠. This seems reasonable as most equipment will be left behind on Mars and only the transit habitat, the Orion capsule (for emergencies), engines and fuel are needed. This scenario, however, requires considerably more fuel for which the 210 kW surface power generators must produce methane for at least 42 years. Since this is out of scope, we recommend an extension of the surface power production to 3,500 kW which would reduce the required production of methane to 30 months at 14 km/s travel speed or 12 months at 9 km/s. The reduced stress on the crew justifies the lower travel speed and the higher investment. How­ever, 6.3 tons (corresponding to 0.18 km2) of perovskite solar panels will be required to produce sufficient fuel. About 280 tons of steel are necessary as structural support for this sce­nario. Since 900 kWh/ton of steel will be con­sumed for electric smelting⁠, only about one year of steel production using a 40 kW NFR (or 2 months using the full combined 210 kW) justify the increased comfort. The shipment of carbon fiber elements form Earth may completely eliminate the need for steel production in this stage of the mission. The process will be self-accel­erating as power production increases during the solar panel as­sembly process.

To produce methane sufficient for one lift-off, a 200,000 liter MER is required using steel mesh/brush electrodes (anode and cathode) of 2,200 m2 pro­jected surface (see figure below). A modular redundancy system of smaller dimension will improve safety but requires more material. MERs have the theoretical capacity to produce sufficient ascent fuel for one Orion capsule within less than one or two days, if power sup­ply were sufficient. At maximum performance, this reactor would con­sume about 100 GWh or 220 kWh/mol methane. Microbes will facilitate electrolysis at low temperatures and these microbes will be carried by the Mars lander in small (100 mL) redundant batches. Since the limit for methane production is not the reactor capacity but the electrical power available, doubling the amount of solar panels will half the time required for methane production and so on. To store the so produced methane we recommend to first pressurize water to 200 bar before it is injected into the MER. To extract as from the electrolyte, a small pressure reduction is needed and the so obtained gas phase is then conducted into pressurized steel tanks for later use.

An experimental MER needs to be constructed on Earth to prove this concept. Like the Mars reactor, this experimental MER will be a 5 x 5 m cylindrical reactor of ei­ther one or two chambers each. The advantage of the two-chamber system is the separation of oxygen and methane but it requires more water while the single chamber reactor is easier to build and holds less water but O2/CH4 separation is required after production. Unfortunately, the ratio of oxygen to methane is difficult to predict as it depends on the anodic pH. A mass ration greater than 2:1 is required. We therefore propose the use of algae as additional oxygen source (see “Photosynthesis crater to produce oxygen and biomass”). As electrodes brush or spiral steel mesh electrodes will be used. Steel mesh (40 x 40 mesh) produced on Mars will be used having a 1,100 m2 projected surface of each electrode.

A detailed description of the reactor can be found here.

Alternative oxidants in cold methane fuel cells or rocket fuel

It is anticipated that oxygen scarcity imposes severe limitations on any manned Mars mission. Oxygen is crucial as propellant and for any human presence. The use of methane for energy storage makes only sense if there is an adequate electron acceptor. While methane can be burnt in turbines at acceptable efficiencies for electricity production, it may also be used in fuel cells. However, no catalysts exist that oxidize methane on electrodes at room temperature or below. The only possible exception are anaerobic methane oxidizing consortia that naturally use biological electron transport chains. The use of biological electron transport chains opens the possibility to capture the energy stored in electrons during transport. Since this is electron acceptor independent, oxidized metal minerals, which are abundant on Mars, can be used as electron acceptors. The disadvantage of this methane fuel cells is that less energy will be captured compared with oxygen. Also, they only exist in theory.

(1) CH4 + 2 O2 → HCO3 + H+ + H2O ;∆G°’ = −830 kJ/molCH4

(2) CH4 + 4 Fe2O3 + 15 H+ → HCO3 + 8 Fe2+ + 9 H2O ;∆G°’ = −250 kJ/molCH4

The high acidity on Mars, however, is in favor of reaction, forming additional water from iron oxides and protons using the reductive power of methane. Soluble Fe2+ may be used for electric steel production as the reduction of Fe2+ to Fe0 requires a considerably lower redox potential and therefor lower energy.

Martian perchlorate salts may serve as oxidant in rocket fuel. Ammonium perchlorate and, on Mars, the more prevalent calcium perchlorate are explosive oxidizers. To transform calcium perchlorate into the ammonium salt, ammonium can be produced by a variety of microbial process such as nitrogen fixation (by way of the nitrogenase enzymes) and catabolic ammonification of amino acids or waste urea (by the urease enzyme). Should collection and compression of the photosynthetically derived O2 gas prove impractical for in rocket fuel, our solid oxidizer approach is also submitted. This dual oxidizer strategy will provide for far greater flexibility and more breathable oxygen. Mined perchlorate may also be used to disinfect water.

Photosynthesis crater to produce oxygen and biomass

Oxygenic biophotolysis of water using psychrophilic (cold-loving), dinitrogen fixing cyanobacteria, i.e. blue green algae, grown in covered craters is one proposed plausible means of generating the need for oxygen and biomass. The surplus of oxygen will be required as propellant and component of artificial air in the SHAB. While initially not crucial for a Mars mission, the production of organic matter is useful for more extended missions with larger teams and longer presence. Organic matter is essential for rich soil which, in turn, is pivotal for vegetable food production on Mars. Moreover, cyanobacteria and algae require little engi­neering and energy which makes them ideal for autonomous production of utility compounds such as organic matter and oxygen.

The amount of damaging cosmic rays and UV can be higher due to the lack of an ozone layer and protective magnetosphere. The amount of cosmic radiation (est. 0.076 Grays per year) is certainly within the tolerable range for many Earthly microbes as it is only around what the interior of the international space station is exposed to. UV light, with its shorter wavelength, can be readily blocked by a thin covering of Martian soil whereas longer wavelengths of photosynthetically active radiation can penetrate further. The microbes will be selectively enriched in their survival zones. Alternatively, a UV protective cover could be used over the crater. The lightweight but durable and robust crater coverings could take the form of an inflatable inverted dome anchored around the crater edge by cables and spikes. The clear upper canopy would admit sunlight but have coating to block harmful radiation while the curved lower surface could be reflective (to maximize photosynthesis) or black to absorb heat. Solar powered gas pumps could adjustably increase the internal gas pressure to accelerate carbon and nitrogen fixation rates and water accumulation from the trace water vapor available.

Conversion of limited amount of solar energy and frozen water plus copious CO2 into biologically generated oxygen plus organic matter will require a phototroph capable of survival at extremely low temperatures consistent with the Martian surface. We propose to identify terrestrial cyanobacteria capable of this by selectively enriching them from mixed biofilm consortia obtained from the Earth’s Arctic and Antarctic regions⁠. Samples obtained from rocky coastal brines will be subjected to intensive evaluation in selective enrichment freezers outfitted to replicate the polar Martian habitat. The finding that the lichen Pleopsidium chlorophanum (gold cobblestone lichen) can survive⁠, adapt and grow under Martian environmental conditions bodes well for this approach.

During the initial surface resource utilization phase (see figure above), the growth of algae is the most time consuming step and therefore the production of liquid water has highest priority. The use of craters will eliminate the need for containers for growing and there reduce the amount of material brought to Mars. Ideally, such craters are equatorial flat water ponds that ensure maximum sunlight capture and minimum water reheating. These preconditions do not align with the initial mission setup (landing near polar ice caps) but should be prepared during the first mission. That is, water pipes from the circum polar regions to the equatorial areas must be constructed. The pipes may need to be heated which requires additional energy or heating the melted water to high temperatures and pressures to prevent ice formation during transport.

Production of water as medium for methanogenic electrolysis and algae

The lack of liquid water is a major hindrance since active metabolism requires a fluid aqueous medium. In addition to the production of methane fuel, melting ice is the greatest challenge for the first manned Mars mission. Liquid water is essential for MERs and algae craters. Hence, all excess of heat or electrical power produced should be directed to melting of ice after methane fuel production is secured. The obtained CO2-rich brine is the electrolyte for MERs. The high acidity is not inhibitory for microbial growth as acidophilic methanogens⁠ and algae⁠ were reported from terrestrial environments. Fortunately, the low pH will reduce the electrical overpotential needed for hydrogen generation, which is the intermediate step during methanogenic electrolysis⁠. The low pH, on the other hand, inhibits oxygen formation which is why corrosion of steel anodes is anticipated to become a possible problem. Anode corrosion must be monitored and shall not exceed a certain, yet to be determined, threshold before spent anodes are recycled in steel foundries brought with the first mission.

The low temperatures on Mars that reach only 20°C in equatorial regions also impose a major hurdle on liquid water maintainance. That is, water may need to be heated by parabolic heat collectors to remain liquid. However, Fischer et al. recently found that “when the salts are in contact with water ice, liquid brine forms in minutes, indicating that aqueous solutions could form temporarily where salts and ice coexist on the Martian surface and in the shallow subsurface.” If our crater canopy is fitted with an internally reflective coating in the infrared spectrum small green houses can be created an the brine will remain liquid longer.

The MERs use methanogenic microorganisms for methane production which will be brought to Mars along with algae seeds by the landers. The methanogenic microbes are highly efficient in methane production, resulting in electricity capturing efficiencies close to 100%⁠. Precious metal catalysts are not required. In contrast, for effective oxygen production, platinum or palladium coating may be required on the anodic side of the MERs. Anodic algae appear to be an alternative but need to be further explored. Since the amount of platinum used is very low, it may be transported as salt to Mars and electroplated on steel electrodes once they are ready. Electroplating is an easy procedure so that a robot can accomplish this task within few minutes. However, platinum recycling requires 1-2 days of work of one crew member.

About 280 tons of steel for structural support of solar panels are required (see “Production of steel for structural support of Mars surface components”). The carbon content of steel should not exceed 2.1% to guarantee high stability and therefore we chose 1.5% carbon for Mars steel. That is, about 4 metric tons of carbon are required for steel produc­tion. This is the bottleneck of steel production. Assuming cold conditions on Mars comparable to the Antarctic, a good approximation for biomass concentration in brine is 5 mg/m3. At this concentration, nearly 1 billion m3 water need to be processed. While the existing amount of 821,000 km3 would be more than sufficient, it is impossible to melt this amount of ice within the mission’s timeframe using an NFR of 40 kW even if other power sources were counted in. Therefore, parabolic heat collec­tors could be shipped from Earth as well. At an energetic efficiency of parabolic heat collectors of 80%, 300 tons would be required to melt this amount water within 2 years. Using 10 tons of parabolic collectors, one can melt only 26,000 m3 for algae during 2 years. This is enough to produce 130 g algal carbon in little more than 2 years assuming a constant concentration of 5 mg/m3. It is more efficient to bring 4 tons of graphite to Mars for initial steel production or consider reflecting surfaces other than polished steel.

Alternative use of covered craters to accumulate water using native perchlorates

In light of the considerable difficulties associated with installing long water pipelines to fill craters with water, we outline an elegant alternative strategy for gradually capturing water from the atmosphere using native perchlorates in the Martian sediments.

Perchlorate salts have been detected in Martian sediments and craters such as the Dale Crate and at concentrations of 0.5-1% globally. Calcium perchlorate is an extremely hygroscopic component of the Martian soil that was recently discovered to cyclically draw H2O from the Martian atmosphere into the soil by night to form saline liquid brine⁠. By sealing the crater covers by day, when the water normally sublimates off, and then opening in-current or one way valves by night after photosynthetically formed O2 has been recovered, atmospheric water vapor can slowly be accumulated as brine liquid/ice inside of the crater at zero or minimal energetic cost.

Halophilic algae tolerate high salt concentrations and low temperatures. Due to the high concentration of CO2 in the native atmosphere the crater covering will amplify the warming effects of this greenhouse gas to prolong the duration of liquid state water needed for nitrogen and carbon fixation. By transporting more soil-derived perchlorates, possibly with crushed water ice deposits, into the covered crater, water can slowly be accumulated. Biologically formed nitrous oxide gas might further accentuate the internal greenhouse warming and thus biological rates of activity.

Perchlorates salts from inside the crater can be recovered from the liquid brine to gradually reduce the salinity of the water. This could be done using parabolic evaporation troughs periodically lifted above the briny surface. Since perchlorates are considered a human toxin, they can be removed by some microbes such as perchlorate reducing bacteria (PRBs) which use percholorates as alternative electron acceptors. Such PRBs could be introduced at a later stage to eventually render the water-filled covered craters non toxic to higher forms of life.

Soil conditioning through phototrophic primary productivity

Lichen and blue green algae have both been used as foods on Earth for hundreds of years. Spirulina is one example of a widely consumed cyanobacterium that uses sunlight to synthesize essential vitamins, antioxidants like beta-carotene and fatty acids from CO2. One major advantage of using a nitrogen fixing cyanobacterium is that they can use solar energy to convert atmospheric nitrogen gas directly into the essential amino acids that future manned missions will need to build and maintain muscle on the Red planet. This will reduce the amount of fuel spent on shuttling food supplies in. Surprisingly, some species of cyanobacteria contain 60% protein per dry gram which is more protein than beefsteak, without the high amount of deleterious cholesterol. Gaseous nitrogen makes up roughly 2.7% of Mars’ thin atmosphere and is available globally. Nitrogen gas is not the only bioavailable form of nitrogen needed to grow oxygenic phototrophs. Nitrates are an ideal fertilizer. The Curiosity rover identified bioavailable nitrates as a significant component of the sediment on Mars⁠. Trace elements are also present in rocks and soil but may require processing.

Soil conditioning of the Martian landscape initiated by this pioneer mission would be required for subsequent longer term human habitation and colonization. Lichen and cyanobacteria are common pioneer species on Earth that grow in the rocky wake of retreating glaciers. These phototrophs are known to accelerate rock weathering and to facilitate the release of essential minerals. Phosphorous, much like nitrogen, is an important macro-phytonutrient that is now known to be a significant component of the Martian surface. Indeed, some nitrogen fixing cyanobacteria can up-regulate their expression of phosphorous liberating phytase enzymes when exposed to phosphorus limitation⁠. Cyanobacteria also build and stabilize soils by reducing their susceptibility to wind erosion through formation of organic extracellular polysaccharides that help trap and retain moisture. Lichen can also release acids and metabolites that contribute to rock break down and soil formation. While lichens and cyanobacteria may adapt to higher UV light dosages on Mars, they can be protected initially by a thin cover as described in “Photosynthesis crater to produce oxygen and biomass”.

Production of steel for structural support of Mars surface components

Steel cannot be brought to Mars as there will be at least 2.2 tons of steel necessary for structural support for 1,400 m2 perovskite solar panels. While lightweight carbon fiber modules could be used as structural support, it is possible to produce steel in situ. Steel production on Mars seems an apparent alternative to transport of construction material given the abundance of iron, nickel and titanium on Mars. However, it also requires organic carbon which is to be produced by CO2-fixing algae that grow first in enrichment tanks (transparent plastic bags) and later in covered craters. After dehydrating the algae medium, recycling and reheating it, dry algae pel­lets will be used as supplement for steel production. The dehydration and reheating process require additional energy which can be provided as heat using parabolic collectors. Parabolic collectors are more efficient in terms of energy capturing and easier to construct as polished steel can be used as opposed to organic Pb/I composites in perovskite solar cells. Steel is then shaped and pol­ished to build parabolic thermal collectors to melt more ice and provide more energy until the NFR and solar panels can be fully replaced by parabolic collectors that can also produce electricity. The produc­tion of steel is limited by the amount of organic carbon available. Therefore, we recommend to ex­plore the possibility to use methane gas as reductant and carbon source for steel production. Methane gas production is faster and requires less water resources than algae.

The Mars landers will also mine iron ores and silicates for the production of wires, solar panels and construction materials. Steel will be produced in an induction furnace using iron ores and graphite or organic biomass. Organic biomass from algae tanks will be used for steel production. This organic biomass will also be used for graphite production at a later stage of the mission. Alterna­tive furnace concepts are possible. For example, methane can be used as reductant. Another alterna­tive would be an electric arc furnace or sacrificial graphite electrodes. Graphite can be produced from organic carbon as follows

  1. Organic carbon from CO2 by cold adapted algae
  2. Organic carbon + 800ºC → C
  3. C + SiO2 + 1,400ºC → SiC
  4. SiC + 4,200ºC → graphite

The steel and graphite induction furnaces will be carried by the landers

Energy for initial steel production for the construction of the 170 kW solar plant (see “SHAB energy needs”) is produced by an NFR. A 40 kW reference NFR is recommended. Steel production from iron ore using electric smelting requires 900 kWh per ton of steel⁠. That is, to produce enough structural support for solar panels for 6 people, about 2,000 kWh are necessary or about 3 days of energy production at full performance. This is based on the assumption that steel of 2 mm thickness and 10% of the perovskite area of 1,400 m2 is sufficient. To produce enough structural support for 3.5 MW (0.18 km2) perovskite solar cells needed for the comfortable return option, 280 tons of steel are required. At 50 days of steel production using the entire 210 kW (40 kW NFR + 170 kW solar per­ovskite life support) are anticipated. To add 1.5% carbon, 4 tons of graphite are necessary which will be carried as cargo from Earth.

Steel is necessary for parabolic heat collectors on site as well. Parabolic heat collectors are required for melting ice for algae growth. The production of steel sufficient for parabolic collectors to melt 1 billion m3 of ice is approximately 600 tons, i.e. 9 additional tons of graphite need to be shipped. To make this amount of steel on Mars another 2 years will be necessary at least. This appears to be the best trade-off between cargo transport and waiting time for a Mars mission but is still an approximation. The algal side product oxygen, also justifies this approach. Since the launch of a manned mission is not dependent on algae production, it is not counted as wait time, which would add another 4 years prior to launch. This shall only demonstrate the feasibility of in situ steel production on Mars. As alternative, the use of methane produced on Mars as carbon and electron source for steel needs to be explored as this may eliminate the need for graphite transport or carbon fiber construction materials are transported to Mars.

Possible perovskite production and reuse of lead produced by the nuclear fission reactor

Lead remnants from the 235U nuclear fission reactor aboard the landers can be used as they are a side product of the radioactive decay of contaminating 238U. There are no confirmed higher concentrations of iodine on Mars and this element needs to be brought in the form of elemental iodine, KI or NaI with the lander to produce the PbI and methyl ammonium iodide. However, since iodine can be re­placed by the element chlorine for perovskite production, the initial amount iodine may not need to be replenished because chlorine is an abundant element on Mars.

Solvents required for perovskite cells can be produced in situ using methane gas and acetic acid (also a possible side product of MERs) as precursors as soon as they become available. To bridge the intermediate gap, solvents and organic reactants brought to Mars by the landers may be used. These materials are⁠:

  • N,N-dimethylformamide (solvent)
  • 2-propanol (solvent)
  • <ethylammonium iodide (reactant)
  • 2,2′,7,7′-tetrakis(N, N-di-p-methoxyphenylamine)-9,9′-spirobifluorene (spiro-MeOTAD, reactant)

As synthesis of perovskite cells may still be to difficult on Mars, we recommend the transport of these components. As shown below (Surface habitat [SHAB] energy needs), only 9 kg perovskite solar panels will be required. As photo voltaic systems are constantly improved, one can expect better performance and lighter weights in future.

Devices included in this chart of the current state of the art have efficiencies that are confirmed by independent, recognized test labs (NREL, AIST, JRC-ESTI, and Fraunhofer-ISE) and are reported on a standardized basis (Source: NREL 2019)

Surface habitat (SHAB) energy needs

The average energy need per capita in the European Union was 150 GJ/year. Although this estimate is likely too high for a permanent colony on Mars we used this as reference herein. A perovskite solar panel operating at 12% efficiency⁠ can produce 14 MJ/day/m2 from Mars aphelion 8 hour solar radiation assuming 170 W/m2⁠. That is, 240 m2 methyl ammonium lead halide perovskite solar panels are required to sustain the presence of one person on Mars. This requires 350 g mesoporous TiO2, 370 g Au per capita. The light weight of about 720 g per capita makes a transport of these components from Earth to Mars feasible (8.5 kg total). Mounting the thin solar power collector on a stable steel surface can be achieved on Mars but only if steel is produced in situ. NASA’s Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture recommends a mission of 6 explorers. That is, at about 1,400 m2 perovskite solar panels or 170 kW capacity will be required only to sustain life of one manned explorer mission. Before installation of these panels, steel will have to be produced on which they can be mounted. For the envisioned larger energy needs, 3.5 MW are necessary and for this, about 6.3 tons of perovskite may be shipped to Mars.

Compounds produced on Mars (purpose in brackets)

  • Iron, Fe0 (steel)
  • Steel (construction, wires, electrodes)
  • Graphite (steel, electrodes)
  • Silicium dioxide, SiO2 (silicon carbide, graphite)
  • Silicon carbide, SiC (graphite)

Compounds brought to Mars (with optional later in situ production):

  • Graphite (for initial steel production)
  • Or carbon fiber elements (for construction without steel)
  • Platinum chloride (for electroplating anodes, alternative to steel)
  • Perovskite solar panels (3.3 tons)
  • Mesoporous titanium dioxide, TiO2 (perovskite solar cells, photon trap)
  • Gold (perovskite solar cells, conductor)
  • Lead iodide (perovskite solar cells)
  • N,N-dimethylformamide (perovskite solar cells, solvent)
  • Methylammonium iodide, CH3NH3I (perovskite solar cells, reactant)
  • 2-propanol (perovskite solar cells, solvent)
  • Hydroiodic acid (perovskite solar cells, reactant)
  • Spiro-MeOTAD (perovskite solar cells, reactant)

(Prof. John Pisciotta of the West Chester University contributed to this article. Image: NASA/Wikipedia)

Posted on

Energy storage market in the United Kingdom

The UK’s Electricity Portfolio

In our last post about the EU energy storage market we gave a brief overview of Germany’s situation. Now, we show how the United Kingdom prepared itself for its energy transition. Traditionally, the UK’s energy mix has been dominated by fossil fuels. This remains the status quo today, as approximately 60% of the electricity generated in the UK comes from fossil fuel sources, with another 20% coming from nuclear.

UK electricity production 2015 (Source: The UK Government)

While the UK has been heavily dependent on carbon-intensive sources of electricity, in 2008 they committed to a 15% renewable energy target (by 2020) and 80% reduction in CO2 emissions (by 2050; Department of Energy & Climate Change). However, the UK has stated that they will miss the 15% renewable target for 2020, due to the lack of properly designed policy measures. There has been considerable pressure to transition to a low carbon market and with one-quarter of existing generating capacity (mainly coal and nuclear) expected to close by 2021; it is expected that growth in renewable energy will lead to more energy storage capacities.

In 2011 the UK government, acknowledging that their current market structure would not be able to accommodate the scale or rate of investment in clean energy needed, proposed a shift to a capacity-based market, that is, a market in which a central agency procures capacity years in advance, in order to adequately plan for and control future generation. The proposed market reform would help drive the transition to low carbon energy by providing renewable energy producers revenue stability through carbon pricing and feed-in-tariffs (FITs). The capacity market was operational after the first energy auctions in late 2015.

The UK has made excellent progress on its short-term clean energy goals and there is optimism that this trend will continue. Large-scale development of low carbon generation technologies such as wind and solar is expected to continue.

Energy Storage Facilities – UK

As of late 2016, there were 27 non-PHS EES plants representing 430 MW of installed capacity in the UK (Sandia National Laboratories). The UK’s energy storage portfolio is dominated by electro-chemical based technologies (primarily lead-acid and lithium-ion battery installations). This is shown below.

Number of Existing & Planned Energy Storage Facilities in the UK, by Type (Source: Sandia National Laboratories)

The prevalence of electro-chemical technologies appears to be continuing the short-term as well; five of the seven energy storage projects currently under development in the UK are electro-chemical. While this is a rather small sample size, the decreasing costs of lithium-ion battery storage is a point of focus for the UK.

Service Uses of Energy Storage – UK

UK Energy Storage Facilities by Service Use Type (Source: Sandia National Laboratories)

As was shown for Germany, only a very small fraction of EES facilities are dedicated to renewables capacity firming. The existing EES capacity is almost exclusively dedicated to critical transmission support (on-site power). While nearly all of the EES capacity under development is dedicated to bulk energy storage (electric energy time shift).

There is still considerable uncertainty around the growth of EES in the UK, and with such a small sample size it is difficult to infer any correlation from the data in the figure above. According to the previous UK government, however, being geographically isolated and a net importer of electricity, one would expect the UK to place a heavier focus on renewables capacity firming in the long-term.

Energy Storage Market Outlook – UK

The UK is in the midst of a major restructuring of their electricity generating portfolio and the market under which these assets operate. With a large portion of the existing capacity due for retirement in the next 10-15 years, the UK faces challenges in meeting energy needs while balancing decarbonization efforts. As part of this, major investment is needed in all areas of the electrical grid, including energy storage.

In its Smart Power publication, the National Infrastructure Commission outlined that while the UK is being faced with challenges to cover aging infrastructure this represents an opportunity to build efficient and flexible energy infrastructure. The Commission stated that energy storage was one of the three key innovations for a “smart power revolution”.

Many other official government bodies have expressed similar thoughts regarding energy storage. In its Low carbon network infrastructure report, the Energy and Climate Change Committee stated that “storage technologies should be deployed at scale as soon as possible”, while urging the Government to eliminate the outdated and unfair regulations that have been handcuffing energy storage development in the UK (Garton and Grimwood).

In April 2016, the Government acknowledged concerns regarding the regulatory hurdles facing energy storage projects (primarily double-charging of network charges) and stated that they would begin working with the National Infrastructure Commission and ECCC to investigate the issue. While there may be regulatory hurdles hindering energy storage in the UK, the Government has shown commitment through funding. Since 2012, the government has contributed over £80 million to energy storage research. In addition to this, the Department of Energy and Climate Change have developed a new £20 million fund to help drive innovation in energy storage technologies.

Overall, the outlook for energy storage in the UK is positive. There is considerable pressure to begin developing energy storage facilities at scale from not only industry, but also many government bodies. Investors are ready as well. As stated by the National Infrastructure Commission: “businesses are already queuing up to invest”.

Simply put: regulatory hurdles are holding back growth in the UK energy storage market. With the Government making major strides in renewable energy development and being vocal about its commitment to making the UK a leader in energy storage technology, these regulatory hurdles will likely be relaxed and there should be considerable growth in the UK energy storage market in the near-term.

At this point, specific technology types and service uses have not been hypothesized in detail. However, with the UK being geographically isolated and a net importer of electricity, logic would suggest an emphasis on renewables capacity firming in the long-term to maximize domestic consumption of renewable energy. Rapidly decreasing costs in electro-chemical technologies, coupled with the fact that much of the existing gas-fired capacity will be reaching end of life by 2030 suggest that the UK EES market would not be ideal for P2G technologies.

(Jon Martin, 2019)

Posted on

Bioelectrically engineered fuel produced by yeasts

Yeasts such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae are, as the name suggests, used for large scale production of beer and other alcoholic beverages. Their high salt and ethanol tolerance not only makes them useful for the production of beverages, but also suitable for the production of combustion fuels at high alcohol concentrations. Besides ethanol, long-chain fusel alcohols are of high interest for biofuel production as well. Bioethanol is already mixed with gasoline and thus improves the CO2 balance of internal combustion engines. This liquid biofuel is made from either starch or lignocellulose. The production and use of bioethanol supports local economies, reduces CO2 emissions and promotes self-sufficiency. The latter is especially important for resource-depleted landlocked countries.

In order to efficiently produce ethanol and other alcohols from lignocellulose hydrolysates, yeasts must use both glucose and pentoses such as xylose and arabinose. This is because biomass is rich in both lignocellulose and thus glucose and xylose. However, this is also the main disadvantage of using Saccharomyces cerevisiae because it does not ferment xylose. Consequently, the identification of another yeast strains capable of fermenting both these sugars could solve the problem. Highly efficient yeasts can be grown in co-cultures with other yeasts capable of lignocellulose fermentation for ethanol production. Such a yeast is, for example, Wickerhamomyces anomalous.

To further improve ethanol production, bioelectric fermentation technology supporting traditional fermentation can be used. The microbial metabolism can thus be controlled electrochemically. There are many benefits of this technology. The fermentation process becomes more selective due to the application of an electrochemical potential. This, in turn, increases the efficiency of sugar utilization. In addition, the use of additives to control the redox equilibrium and the pH is minimized. Ultimately cell growth can be stimulated, further increasing alcohol production.

Such bioelectric reactors are galvanic cells. The electrodes used in such a bioelectric reactor may act as electron acceptors (anodes) or source (cathodes). Such electrochemical changes affect the metabolism and cell regulation as well as the interactions between the yeasts used. Now, a research group from Nepal (a resource-depleted landlocked country) has used new yeast strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Wickerhamomyces anomalous in a bioelectric fermenter to improve ethanol production from biomass. The results were published in the journal Frontiers in Energy Research.

For their study, the researchers chose Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Wickerhamomyces anomalus as both are good ethanol producers. The latter is to be able to convert xylose to ethanol. After the researchers applied a voltage to the bioelectrical system, ethanol production doubled. Both yeasts formed a biofilm on the electrodes, making the system ideal for use as a flow-through system because the microorganisms are not washed out.

Saccharomyces cerevisiae cells in a brightfield microscopic image of 600-fold magnification (Foto: Amanda Luraschi)

The researchers speculated that the increased ethanol production was due to the better conversion of pyruvate to ethanol − the yeast’s central metabolic mechanism. The researchers attributed this to accelerated redox reactions at the anode and cathode. The applied external voltage polarized the ions present in the cytosol, thus facilitating the electron transfer from the cathode. This and the accelerated glucose oxidation probably led to increased ethanol production.

Normally, pyruvate is converted into ethanol in fermentation yeast. External voltage input can control the kinetics of glucose metabolism in Saccharomyces cerevisiae under both aerobic and anaerobic conditions. Intracellular and transplasmembrane electron transfer systems play an important role in electron transport across the cell membrane. The electron transfer system consists of cytochromes and various redox enzymes, which confer redox activity to the membrane at certain sites.

The authors also found that an increased salt concentration improved conductivity and therefore ethanol production. The increased ethanol production from lignocellulosic biomass may have been also be due to the presence of various natural compounds that promoted yeast growth. When the cellulose acetate membrane was replaced by a Nafion™ membrane, ethanol production also increased. This was perhaps due to improved transport of xylose through the Nafion™ membrane as well as the decrease of the internal resistance. A further increase of ethanol production was observed when the bioelectrical reactor was operated with fine platinum particles coated on the platinum anode and neutral red deposited on the graphite cathode.

Several yeast cultures from left to right: Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Candida utilis, Aureobasidium pullulans, Trichosporum cutaneum, Saccharomycopsis capsularis, Saccharomycopsis lipolytica, Hanseniaspora guilliermondii, Hansenula capsulata, Saccharomyces carlsbergensis, Saccharomyces rouxii, Rhodotorula rubra, Phaffia rhodozyba, Cryptococcus laurentii, Metschnikowia pulcherrima, Rhodotorula pallida

At Frontis Energy, we think that the present study is promising. However, long-chain fusel alcohols should be considered in the future as they are less volatile and better compatible with current internal combustion engines. These can also be easily converted into the corresponding long-chain hydrocarbons.

Posted on

Energy storage market in Germany

Germany’s electricity portfolio

In our last posts we introduced electrical energy storage (EES) and the EU market for EES. Now, we focus on some important EU members, beginning with Germany. The country’s electrical energy portfolio reflects its status among the most progressive countries in the world in terms of climate action. As of November 2016, Germany had produced ~35% of its 2016 electricity needs from renewable sources as outlined in the Figure below.

Electricity Production in Germany (Source: Fraunhofer ISE)

The growth of renewable energy has been driven by Germany’s strong energy transition policy – the “Energiewende” – a long-term plan to decarbonize the energy sector. The policy was enacted in late 2010 with ambitious GHG reduction and renewable energy targets for 2050 (80-95% reduction on 1990 GHG levels and 80% renewable-based electricity).
A major part of the 2010 Energiewende policy was the reliance on Germany’s 17 nuclear power plants as a “shoulder fuel” to help facilitate the transition from fossil fuels to renewables. In light of the Fukushima disaster just six months after the enactment of the Energiewende, the German government amended the policy to include an aggressive phase-out of nuclear by 2022 while maintaining the 2050 targets. This has only magnified the importance of clean, reliable electricity from alternative sources like wind and solar.

Existing Energy Storage Facilities – Germany

As of late 2016, there is 1,050 MW of installed (non-PHS) energy storage capacity in Germany. The majority of this capacity is made up of electro-mechanical technologies such as flywheels and compressed air energy storage (CAES; see figure below).

Capacities of EES Types in Germany (Source: Sandia National Laboratories)

However, these numbers are somewhat skewed based on the fact that the electro-mechanical category is essentially two large capacity CAES plants. In reality, electro-chemical projects (mainly batteries) are much more prevalent and represent the vast majority of growth in the German storage market. There are currently 11 electro-chemical type energy storage projects under development in Germany and no electro-mechanical projects under development (see figure below).

Number of EES Projects by Type (Sandia National Laboratories)

Services Uses of Energy Storage – Germany

As outlined earlier, there are a multitude of service uses for EES technologies. Currently the existing EES fleet in Germany serves grid operations and stability applications (black start, electric supply capacity), and on-site power for critical transmission infrastructure. A breakdown of service uses in the German market is shown below.

Service Uses of Energy Storage Facilities in Germany (Sandia National Laboratories)

Most notable in is the fact that renewables capacity firming only represents 0.3% of EES currently operating in Germany, excluding pumped hydro storage. In order to understand this, it must be noted that Germany is a net exporter of electricity (next figure below). Having one of the most reliable electrical grids in the world and an ideal geographical location give Germany excellent interconnection to a variety of neighboring power markets; making it easy to export any excess electricity.

This “export balancing” is a primary reason why the EES market has not seen similar growth as renewable energy in Germany − it is easy for Germany to export power to balance the system load during periods of peak renewable production. However, there are negative aspects of this energy exporting such as severe overloading of transmission infrastructure in neighboring countries.

Net Exports of Electricity with Average Day-Ahead Market Pricing for Germany in 2015 (Source: Fraunhofer ISE)

Energy Storage Market Outlook – Germany

Logic seems to indicate that with aggressive renewable energy targets, a nuclear phase-out, and increased emphasis on energy independence Germany will need to develop more EES capacity. However, many have conjectured that the lagging expansion of EES in the short and medium term will not pose a barrier to the Energiewende. In fact, some claim that EES will not be a necessity in the next 10-20 years. For example, even when Germany reaches its 2020 wind and solar targets (46 GW and 52 GW, respectively), these would generally not exceed 55 GW of supply and nearly all of this power will be consumed domestically in real-time. Thus, no significant support from EES would be required.

The German Institute for Economy Research echos these sentiments and argue that the grid flexibility needed with significant renewable energy capacity could be provided by more cost-effective options like flexible base-load power plants and better demand side management. Additionally, innovations in power-to-heat technologies which would use surplus wind and solar electricity to feed district heating systems present significant opportunity, while creating a new market of energy service companies.

Power-to-Gas

Germany’s Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure found that P2G is ideally suited for turning excess renewable energy into a diverse product that can be stored for long periods of time and Germany has been the central point for P2G technology development in recent years. There are currently seven P2G projects either operating or under construction in Germany.

While there is work being done, economically feasible production of P2G is currently not achievable due to limited excess electricity and low guaranteed capacity. This limited excess electricity, is an example of the effect of power exports discussed earlier. While there may not be a significant commercial market in the short-term, introduction of P2G for transport could act as an additional driver behind continued renewable energy development in Germany.

In our next post, we cover the energy storage market of the United Kingdom.

(Jon Martin, 2019)

Posted on

Energy storage in the European Union

Grid integration of renewables

In our previous post of this blog series on Electrical Energy Storage in the EU we briefly introduced you to different technologies and their use cases. Here, we give you a short overview over the EU energy grid.  Supplying approximately 2,500 TWh annually to 450 million customers across 24 countries, the synchronous interconnected system of Continental Europe (“the Grid”) is the largest interconnected power network in the world. The Grid is made up of transmission system operators (TSOs) from 24 countries stretching from Greece to the Iberic Peninsula in the south, Denmark and Poland in the north, and up to the black sea in the east. The European Network of Transmission System Operators (ENTSO-E) serves as the central agency tasked with promoting cooperation between the TSOs from the member countries in the Grid. The ENTSO-E, in essence, acts as the central TSO for Europe. With over 140 GW of installed wind and solar PV capacity, the EU trails behind only China in installed capacity. A breakdown of the individual contributions of EU member states is shown below in the figure above.

Energy Storage in the EU

For this study a number of European countries were selected for more detailed investigation into energy storage needs. These countries were selected based on a combination of existing market size, intentions for growth in non-dispatchable renewable energy and/or energy storage, and markets with a track record of innovation in the energy sector.

On a total capacity basis (installed and planned MW) the top three energy storage markets within the EU are: Italy, the UK, and Germany. These countries were selected on the basis of these existing market sizes.

Spain and Denmark were selected based on their large amounts of existing renewable energy capacity and − in the case of Denmark − the forecasted growth in renewable energy and energy storage capacity.

While still lagging behind the rest of the EU in terms of decarbonization efforts and having a small portion of their energy from renewable sources, the Netherlands were also selected for further investigation.

Each of the selected countries (Germany, UK, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Netherlands) are discussed in the proceeding sections, providing a more detailed overview outlining their current electricity portfolios and decarbonization efforts, current energy storage statistics, and a brief discussion on market outlook.

Pumped Hydro Storage

With over 183 GW of installed capacity worldwide, pumped hydro storage is the most widely implemented and most established form of energy storage in the world. Due its extensive market penetration, technology maturity, and the fact that this blog is aimed at emerging new storage technologies, the data presented in the following posts excludes this technology.

Find more details about the energy storage market of selected European countries in our next postings.

(Jon Martin, 2019)

Posted on

Electrical energy storage

Electrical Energy Storage (EES) is the process of converting electrical energy from a power network into a form that can be stored for converting back to electricity when needed. EES enables electricity to be produced during times of either low demand, low generation cost, or during periods of peak renewable energy generation. This allows producers and transmission system operators (TSOs) the ability to leverage and balance the variance in supply/demand and generation costs by using stored electricity at times of high demand, high generation cost, and/or low generation capacity.
EES has many applications including renewables integration, ancillary services, and electrical grid support. This blog series aims to provide the reader with four aspects of EES:

  1. An overview of the function and applications of EES technologies,
  2. State-of-the-art breakdown of key EES markets in the European Union,
  3. A discussion on the future of these EES markets, and
  4. Applications (Service Uses) of EES.

Table: Some common service uses of EES technologies

Storage Category

Storage Technology

Pumped Hydro

Open Loop

Closed Loop

Electro-chemical

Batteries

Flow Batteries

Capacitors

Thermal Storage

 

Molten Salts

Heat

Ice

Chilled Water

Electro-mechanical

Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES)

Flywheel

Gravitational Storage

Hydrogen Storage

 

Fuel Cells

H2 Storage

Power-to-Gas

Unlike any other commodities market, electricity-generating industries typically have little or no storage capabilities. Electricity must be used precisely when it is produced, with grid operators constantly balancing electrical supply and demand. With an ever-increasing market share of intermittent renewable energy sources the balancing act is becoming increasingly complex.

While EES is most often touted for its ability to help minimize supply fluctuations by storing electricity produced during periods of peak renewable energy generation, there are many other applications. EES is vital to the safe, reliable operation of the electricity grid by supporting key ancillary services and electrical grid reliability functions. This is often overlooked for the ability to help facilitate renewable energy integration. EES is applicable in all of the major areas of the electricity grid (generation, transmission & distribution, and end user services). A few of the most prevalent service uses are outlined in the Table above. Further explanation on service use/cases will be provide later in this blog, including comprehensive list of EES applications.

Area

Service Use / Case

Discharge Duration in h

Capacity in MW

Examples

Generation

Bulk Storage

4 – 6

1 – 500

Pumped hydro, CAES, Batteries

Contingency

1 – 2

1 – 500

Pumped hydro, CAES, Batteries

Black Start

NA

NA

Batteries

Renewables Firming

2 – 4

1 – 500

Pumped hydro, CAES, Batteries

Transmission & Distribution

Frequency & Voltage Support

0.25 – 1

1 – 10

Flywheels, Capacitors

Transmission Support

2 – 5 sec

10 – 100

Flywheels, Capacitors

On-site Power

8 – 16

1.5 kW – 5 kW

Batteries

Asset Deferral

3 – 6

0.25– 5

Batteries

End User Services

Energy Management

4 – 6

1 kW – 1 MW

Residential storage

Learn more about EES in the EU in the next post.

(Jon Martin, 2019)

Posted on

EU market summary for energy storage

Electrical energy storage (EES) is not only a vital component in the reliable operation of modern electrical grids, but also a focal point of the global renewable energy transition. It has been often suggested that EES technologies could be the missing piece to eliminating the technical hurdles facing the implementation of intermittent renewable energy sources. In the following blog posts, selected EES markets within the European Union will be evaluated in detail.

With over 80 MW of installed wind and solar capacity, Germany is by far the leading EU nation in the renewable energy transition. However, experts have argued that Germany’s need for widespread industrial scale energy storage is unlikely to materialize in any significant quantity for up to 20-years. This is due to a number of factors. Germany’s geographic location and abundance of connections to neighbouring power grids makes exporting any electricity fluctuations relatively easy. Additionally, when Germany reaches its 2020 targets for wind and solar capacity (46 GW and 52 GW, respectively) the supply at a given time would generally not exceed 55 GW. Nearly all of this would be consumed domestically, with no/little need for storage.

When evaluating energy storage in the UK, a different story emerges. Being an isolated island nation there is considerably more focus on energy independence to go along with their low-carbon energy goals. However, the existing regulatory environment is cumbersome, and poses barriers significant enough to substantially inhibit the transition to a low-carbon energy sector – including EES. The UK government has acknowledged the existence of regulatory barriers and pledged to address them. As part of this effort, a restructuring of their power market to a capacity-based market is already underway. The outlook for EES in the UK is promising, there is considerable pressure from not only industry, but also the public and the government to continue developing EES facilities at industrial scale.

Italy, once heavily hydro-powered, has grown to rely on natural gas, coal, and oil for 50% of it’s electricity (gas representing 34% alone). The introduction of a solar FIT in 2005 lead to significant growth in the solar industry (Italy now ranks 2nd in per capita solar capacity globally) before the program ended in July 2014. In recent years there has been notable growth in electro-chemical EES capacity (~84 MW installed), primarily driven by a single large-scale project by TERNA, Italy’s transmission system operator (TSO). This capacity has made Italy the leader in EES capacity in the EU, however the market is to-date dominated by the large TSOs.

However, the combination of a reliance on imported natural gas, over 500,000 PV systems no longer collecting FIT premiums, and increasing electricity rates presents a unique market opportunity for residential power-to-gas in Italy.
Denmark is aggressively pursing a 100-percent renewable target for all sectors by 2050. While there is still no official roadmap policy on how they will get there, they have essentially narrowed it down to one of two scenario: a biomass-based scenario, or a wind + hydrogen based scenario. Under the hydrogen-based scenario there would be widespread investment to expand wind capacity and couple this capacity with hydrogen power-to-gas systems for bulk energy storage. With the Danish expertise and embodied investment in wind energy, one would expect that the future Danish energy system would be build around this strength, and hence require significant power-to-gas investment.

The renewable energy industry in Spain has completed stagnated due to retroactive policy changes and taxes on consumption of solar generated electricity introduced in 2015. The implementation of the Royal Decree 900/2015 on self-consumption has rendered PV systems unprofitable, and added additional fees and taxes for the use of EES devices. No evidence was found to suggest a market for energy storage will materialize in Spain in the near future.

The final country investigated was the Netherlands, which has been criticized by the EU for its lack of progress on renewable energy targets. With only 10% of Dutch electricity coming from renewable sources, there is currently little demand for large-scale EES. While the Netherlands may be lagging behind on renewable electricity targets, they have been a leader in EV penetration; a trend that will continue and see 1-million EVs on Dutch roads by 2025. In parallel with the EV growth, there has been a large surge in sub-100kW Li-ion installations for storing energy at electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. It is expected that these applications will continue to be the primary focus of EES in the Netherlands.

Similar to Italy, the Dutch rely heavily on natural gas for energy within their homes. This fact, coupled with an ever-increasing focus on energy independent and efficient houses could make the Netherlands a prime market for residential power-to-gas technologies.

Read more about electrical energy storage here.

Jon Martin, 2019

(Photo: NASA)

Posted on

Machine learning makes smarter batteries

Renewable energies, such as wind and solar energy are naturally intermittent. To balance their demand and supply, batteries of, for example, electric vehicles can be charged and act as an energy buffer for the power grid. Cars spend most of their time idle and could, at the same time, feed their electricity back into the grid. While this is still a dream of the future, commercialization of electric and hybrid vehicles is already creating a growing demand for long-lasting batteries, both for driving as well as grid buffering. Consequently, methods for evaluating the state of the battery will become increasingly important.

The long duration of battery health tests is a problem, hindering the rapid development of new batteries. Better battery life forcasting methods are therefore urgently needed but are extremely difficult to develop. Now, Severson and her colleagues report in the journal Nature Energy that machine learning can help to predict computer battery life by creating computer models. The published algorithms use data from early-stage charge and discharge cycles.

Normally, a figure of merit describes the health of a battery. It quantifies the ability of the battery to store energy relative to its original state. The health status is 100% when the battery is new and decreases with time. This is similar to the state of charge of a battery. Estimating the state of charge of a battery is, in turn, important to ensure safe and correct use. However, there is no consensus in the industry and science as to what exactly a battery’s health status is or how it should be determined.

The state of health of a battery reflects two signs of aging: progressive capacity decline and impedance increase (another measure of electrical resistance). Estimates of the state of charge of a battery must therefore take into account both the drop in capacity and the increase in impedance.

Lithium ion batteries, however, are complex systems in which both capacity fade and impedance increase are caused by multiple interacting processes. Most of these processes cannot be studied independently since they often occur in simultaneously. The state of health can therefore not be determined from a single direct measurement. Conventional health assessment methods include examining the interactions between the electrodes of a battery. Since such methods often intervene directly in the system “battery”, they make the battery useless, which is hardly desired.

A battery’s health status can also be determined in less invasive ways, for example using adaptive models and experimental techniques. Adaptive models learn from recorded battery performance data and adjust themselves. They are useful if system-specific battery information are not available. Such models are suitable for the diagnosis of aging processes. The main problem, however, is that they must be trained with experimental data before they can be used to determine the current capacity of a battery.

Experimental techniques are used to evaluate certain physical processes and failure mechanisms. This allows the rate of future capacity loss to be estimated. Unfortunately, these methods can not detect any intermittent errors. Alternative techniques use the rate of voltage or capacitance change (rather than raw voltage and current data). In order to accelerate the development of battery technology, further methods need to be found which can accurately predict the life of the batteries.

Severson and her colleagues have created a comprehensive data set that includes the performance data of 124 commercial lithium-ion batteries during their charge and discharge cycles. The authors used a variety of rapid charging conditions with identical discharge conditions. This method caused a change of the battery lives. The data covered a wide range of 150 to 2,300 cycles.

The researchers then used machine learning algorithms to analyze the data, creating models that can reliably predict battery life. After the first 100 cycles of each experimentally characterized battery their model already showed clear signs of a capacity fade. The best model could predict the lifetime of about 91% data sets studied in the study. Using the first five cycles, batteries could be classified into categories with short (<550 cycles) or long lifetimes.

The researchers’ work shows that data-driven modeling using machine learning allows forecasting the state of health of lithium-ion batteries. The models can identify aging processes that do not otherwise apparent in capacity data during early cycles. Accordingly, the new approach complements the previous predictive models. But at Frontis Energy, we also see the ability to combine generated data with models that predict the behavior of other complex dynamic systems.

(Photo: Wikipedia)

Posted on

Ammonia energy storage #3

As a loyal reader or loyal reader of our blog, you will certainly remember our previous publications on ammonia energy storage. There, we describe possible ways to extract ammonia from the air, as well as the recovery of its energy in the form of methane (patent pending WO2019/079908A1). Since global food production requires large amounts of ammonia fertilizers, technologies for extraction from air is already very mature. These technologies are essentially all based on the Haber-Bosch process, which was industrialized at the beginning of the last century. During this process, atmospheric nitrogen (N2) is reduced to ammonia (NH3). Despite the simplicity of the molecules involved, the cleavage of the strong nitrogen−nitrogen bonds in N2 and the resulting nitrogen−hydrogen bonds pose a major challenge for catalytic chemists. The reaction usually takes place under harsh conditions and requires a lot of energy, i.e. high reaction temperatures, high pressures and complicated combinations of reagents, which are also often expensive and energy-intensive to manufacture.

Now, a research group led by Yuya Ashida has published an article in the renowned journal Nature, in which they show that a samarium compound in aqueous solution combined with a molybdenum catalyst can form ammonia from atmospheric nitrogen. The work opens up new possibilities in the search for ways to ammonia synthesis under ambient conditions. Under such conditions, less energy is required to produce ammonia, resulting in higher energy efficiency for energy storage. In today’s Haber-Bosch process, air and hydrogen gas are combined via an iron catalyst. The resulting global ammonia production of this process ranges from 250 to 300 tonnes per minute, delivering fertilizers that provide nearly 60% of the world’s population (The Alchemy of Air, available at Amazon).

Comparison of different approaches to produce ammonia. Top: In the industrial Haber-Bosch synthesis of ammonia (NH3), nitrogen gas (N2) reacts with hydrogen molecules (H2), typically in the presence of an iron catalyst. The process requires high temperatures and pressures, but is thermodynamically ideal because only little energy is wasted on side reactions. Center: Nitrogenase enzymes catalyze the reaction of six-electron (e) nitrogen and six protons (H+) under ambient conditions to form ammonia. However, two additional electrons and protons form one molecule of H2. The conversion of ATP (the biological energy “currency”) into ADP drives the reaction. This reaction has a high chemical overpotential. It consumes much more energy than is needed for the actual ammonia forming reaction. Bottom: In the new reaction proposed by Ashida and colleagues, a mixture of water and samarium diiodide (SmI2) is converted to ammonia using nitrogen under ambient conditions and in the presence of a molybdenum catalyst. SmI2 weakens the O−H bonds of the water and generates the hydrogen atoms, which then react with atmospheric nitrogen.

On industrial scale, ammonia is synthesized at temperatures that exceed 400°C and pressures of approximately 400 atmospheres. These conditions are often referred to as “harsh”. During the early days, these harsh conditions were difficult to control. Fatal accidents were not uncommon in the early years of the Haber-Bosch development. This has motivated many chemists to find “milder” alternatives. After all, this always meant searching for new catalysts to lower operating temperatures and pressures. The search for new catalysts would ultimately reduce capital investment in the construction of new fertilizer plants. Since ammonia synthesis is one of the largest producers of carbon dioxide, this would also reduce the associated emissions.

Like many other chemists before them, the authors have been inspired by nature. Nitrogenase enzymes carry out the biological conversion of atmospheric nitrogen into ammonia, a process called nitrogen fixation. On recent Earth, this process is the source of nitrogen atoms in amino acids and nucleotides, the elemental building blocks of life. In contrast to the Haber-Bosch process, nitrogenases do not use hydrogen gas as a source of hydrogen atoms. Instead, they transfer protons (hydrogen ions, H+) and electrons (e) to each nitrogen atom to form N−H bonds. Although nitrogenases fix nitrogen at ambient temperature, they use eight protons and electrons per molecule N2. This is remarkable because the stoichiometry of the reaction requires only six each. This way, nitrogenases provide the necessary thermodynamic drive for nitrogen fixation. The excess of hydrogen equivalents means that nitrogenases have a high chemical overpotential. That is, they consume much more energy than would actually be needed for nitrogen fixation.

The now published reaction is not the first attempt to mimic the nitrogenase reaction. In the past, metal complexes were used with proton and electron sources to convert atmospheric nitrogen into ammonia. The same researchers have previously developed 8 molybdenum complexes that catalyze nitrogen fixation in this way. This produced 230 ammonia molecules per molybdenum complex. The associated overpotentials were significant at almost 1,300 kJ per mole nitrogen. In reality, however, the Haber-Bosch process is not so energy-intensive given the right catalyst is used.

The challenge for catalysis researchers is to combine the best biological and industrial approaches to nitrogen fixation so that the process proceeds at ambient temperatures and pressures. At the same time, the catalyst must reduce the chemical overpotential to such an extent that the construction of new fertilizer plants no longer requires such high capital investments. This is a major challenge as there is no combination of acids (which serve as a proton source) and reducing agents (the electron sources) available for the fixation at the thermodynamic level of hydrogen gas. This means that the mixture must be reactive enough to form N−H bonds at room temperature. In the now described pathway with molybdenum and samarium, the researchers have adopted a strategy in which the proton and electron sources are no longer used separately. This is a fundamentally new approach to catalytic ammonia synthesis. It makes use of a phenomenon known as coordination-induced bond weakening. In the proposed path, the phenomenon is based on the interaction of samarium diiodide (SmI2) and water.

Water is stable because of its strong oxygen-hydrogen bonds (O−H). However, when the oxygen atom in the water is coordinated with SmI2, it exposes its single electron pair and its O−H bonds are weakened. As a result, the resulting mixture becomes a readily available source of hydrogen atoms, protons and electrons, that is. The researchers around Yuya Ashida use this mixture with a molybdenum catalyst to fix nitrogen. SmI2-water mixtures are therefore particularly suitable for this type of catalysis. In them, a considerable coordination-induced bond weakening was previously measured, which was used inter alia for the production of carbon-hydrogen bonds.

The extension of this idea to catalytic ammonia synthesis is remarkable for two reasons. First, the molybdenum catalyst facilitates ammonia synthesis in aqueous solution. This is amazing because molybdenum complexes in water are usually degraded. Second, the use of coordination-induced bond weakening provides a new method for nitrogen fixation at ambient conditions. This also avoids the use of potentially hazardous combinations of proton and electron sources which are a fire hazard. The authors’ approach also works when ethylene glycol (HOCH2CH2OH) is used instead of water. Thus, the candidates for proton and electron sources are extended by an additional precursor.

Ashida and colleagues propose a catalytic cycle for their process in which the molybdenum catalyst initially coordinates to nitrogen and cleaves the N−N bond to form a molybdenum nitrido complex. This molybdenum nitrido complex contains the molybdenum-nitrogen triple bond. The SmI2-water mixture then delivers hydrogen atoms to this complex, eventually producing ammonia. The formation of N−H bonds with molybdenum nitrido complexes represents a significant thermodynamic challenge since the N−H bonds are also weakened by the molybdenum. Nevertheless, the disadvantages are offset by the reduction of the chemical overpotential. The SmI2 not only facilitates the transfer of hydrogen atoms, but also keeps the metal in a reduced form. This prevents undesired molybdenum oxide formation in aqueous solution.

The new process still has significant operational hurdles to overcome before it can be used on an industrial scale. For example, SmI2 is used in large quantities, which generates a lot of waste. The separation of ammonia from aqueous solutions is difficult in terms of energy consumption. However, if the process were used for energy storage in combination with our recovery method, the separation would be eliminated from the aqueous solution. Finally, there is still a chemical overpotential of about 600 kJ/mol. Future research should focus on finding alternatives to SmI2. These could be based, for example, on metals that occur more frequently than samarium and promote coordination-induced bond weakening as well. As Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch have experienced, the newly developed method will probably take some time for development before it becomes available on industrial scale.

(Photo: Wikipedia)

Posted on

Producing liquid bio-electrically engineered fuels from CO2

At Frontis Energy we have spent much thought on how to recycle CO2. While high value products such as polymers for medical applications are more profitable, customer demand for such products is too low to recycle CO2 in volumes required to decarbonize our atmosphere to pre-industrial levels. Biofuel, for example from field crops or algae has long been thought to be the solution. Unfortunately, they require too much arable land. On top of their land use, biochemical pathways are too complex to understand by the human brain. Therefore, we propose a different way to quickly reach the target of decarbonizing our planet. The proce­dure begins with a desired target fuel and suggests a mi­crobial consortium to produce this fuel. In a second step, the consortium will be examined in a bio-electrical system (BES).

CO2 can be used for liquid fuel production via multiple pathways. The end product, long-chain alcohols, can be used either directly as fuel or reduced to hydrocarbons. Shown are examples of high level BEEF pathways using CO2 and electricity as input and methane, acetate, or butanol as output. Subsequent processes are 1, aerobic methane oxida­tion, 2, direct use of methane, 3 heterotrophic phototrophs, 4, acetone-butanol fermentation, 5, heterotrophs, 6, butanol di­rect use, 7, further processing by yeasts

Today’s atmospheric CO2 imbalance is a consequence of fossil carbon combus­tion. This real­ity requires quick and pragmatic solutions if further CO2 accu­mulation is to be prevented. Direct air capture of CO2 is moving closer to economic feasibility, avoid­ing the use of arable land to grow fuel crops. Producing combustible fuel from CO2 is the most promis­ing inter­mediate solution because such fuel integrates seamlessly into existing ur­ban in­frastructure. Biofuels have been ex­plored inten­sively in re­cent years, in particular within the emerging field of syn­thetic biol­ogy. How­ever tempt­ing the application of genetically modified or­ganisms (GMOs) ap­pears, non-GMO technology is easier and faster to im­plement as the re­quired microbial strains al­ready exist. Avoiding GMOs, CO2 can be used in BES to produce C1 fu­els like methane and precursors like formic acid or syngas, as well as C1+ com­pounds like ac­etate, 2-oxybut­yrate, bu­tyrate, ethanol, and butanol. At the same time, BES inte­grate well into urban in­frastructure without the need for arable land. However, except for meth­ane, none of these fuels are readily com­bustible in their pure form. While elec­tromethane is a com­mercially avail­able al­ternative to fossil natu­ral gas, its volumetric energy den­sity of 40-80 MJ/m3 is lower than that of gasoline with 35-45 GJ/m3. This, the necessary technical modifications, and the psychological barrier of tanking a gaseous fuel make methane hard to sell to automobilists. To pro­duce liq­uid fuel, carbon chains need to be elongated with al­cohols or better, hy­drocarbons as fi­nal prod­ucts. To this end, syngas (CO + H2) is theoreti­cally a viable option in the Fischer-Tropsch process. In reality, syngas pre­cursors are ei­ther fossil fu­els (e.g. coal, natural gas, methanol) or biomass. While the for­mer is ob­viously not CO2-neu­tral, the latter com­petes for arable land. The di­rect con­version of CO2 and electrolytic H2 to C1+ fuels, in turn, is catalyzed out by elec­troactive microbes in the dark (see title figure), avoid­ing food crop com­petition for sun-lit land. Unfortunately, little re­search has been under­taken beyond proof of con­cept of few electroactive strains. In stark con­trast, a plethora of metabolic studies in non-BES is avail­able. These studies often pro­pose the use of GMOs or complex or­ganic sub­strates as precur­sors. We propose to systemati­cally identify metabolic strategies for liquid bio-electrically engineered fuel (BEEF) production. The fastest approach should start by screening meta­bolic data­bases using es­tablished methods of metabolic modeling, fol­lowed by high throughput hypothesis testing in BES. Since H2 is the intermediate in bio-electrosynthesis, the most efficient strategy is to focus on CO2 and H2 as di­rect pre­cursors with as few in­termediate steps as pos­sible. Scala­bility and energy effi­ciency, eco­nomic feasibil­ity that is, are pivotal elements.

First, an electrotrophic acetogen produces acetate, which then used by heterotrophic algae in a consecutive step.

The biggest obstacle for BEEF production is lacking knowledge about pathways that use CO2 and electrolytic H2. This gap exists despite metabolic data­bases like KEGG and more recently KBase, making metabolic design and adequate BEEF strain selection a guessing game rather than an educated ap­proach. Nonetheless, metabolic tools were used to model fuel pro­duction in single cell yeasts and various prokaryotes. In spite of their shortcomings, metabolic data­bases were also employed to model species interactions, for example in a photo-het­erotroph consor­tium using software like ModelSEED / KBase (http://mod­elseed.org/), RAVEN / KEGG and COBRA. A first sys­tematic at­tempt for BEEF cul­tures produci­ng acetate demonstrated the usability of KBase for BES. This research was a bottom-up study which mapped ex­isting genomes onto existing BEEF consor­tia. The same tool can also be em­ployed in a top-down ap­proach, starting with the desired fuel to find the re­quired or­ganisms. Some possi­ble BEEF organisms are the following.

Possible pathways for BEEF production involving Clostridium, 3, or heterotrophic phototrophs, 7, further processing by yeasts

Yeasts are among the microorganisms with the greatest potential for liquid biofuel production. Baker’s yeast, (Saccha­romyces cerevisiae) is the most promi­nent exam­ple. While known for ethanol fermentat­ion, yeasts also produce fusel oils such as bu­tane, phenyl, and amyl derivate aldehy­des and alco­hols. Unlike ethanol, which is formed via sugar fer­mentation, fusel oil is syn­thesized in branched-off amino acid pathways followed by alde­hyde reduction. Many en­zymes involved in the re­duction of aldehydes have been identified, with al­cohol dehydro­genases be­ing the most commonly ob­served. The corre­sponding reduc­tion reactions require reduced NADH⁠ but it is not known whether H2 pro­duced on cathodes of BES can be in­volved.
Clostridia, for example Clostridium acetobutylicum and C. carboxidivo­rans, can pro­duce alcohols like butanol, isopropanol, hexanol, and ketones like acetone from complex sub­strates (starch, whey, cel­lulose, etc. ) or from syngas. Clostridial me­tabolism has been clarified some time ago and is dif­ferent from yeast. It does not necessar­ily require com­plex precursors for NAD+ reduction and it was shown that H2, CO, and cath­odes can donate elec­trons for alcohol production. CO2 and H2 were used in a GMO clostridium to produce high titers of isobu­tanol. Typi­cal representa­tives for acetate produc­tion from CO2 and H2 are C. ljungdahlii, C. aceticum, and Butyribac­terium methy­lotrophicum. Sporo­musa sphaeroides pro­duces acetate in BES. Clostridia also dominated mixed cul­ture BESs converting CO2 to butyrate. They are therefore prime targets for low cost biofuel production. Alcohols in clostridia are produced from acetyl-CoA. This reaction is re­versible, al­lowing ac­etate to serve as substrate for biofuel production with extra­cellular en­ergy sup­ply. Then, en­ergy con­servation, ATP syn­thesis that is, can be achieved from ethanol electron bifurca­tion or H2 oxida­tion via respi­ration. While pos­sible in anaero­bic clostridia, it is hitherto unknown whether elec­tron bifurca­tion or res­piration are linked to alcohols or ke­tone synthesis.
Phototrophs like Botryococcus produce C1+ biofuels as well. They synthesize a number of different hydro­carbons including high value alkanes and alkenes as well as terpenes. However, high titers were achieved by only means of ge­netic engineering, which is economically not feasible in many countries due to regulatory constrains. Moreover, aldehyde dehy­dration/deformylation to alkanes or alkenes requires molecular oxygen to be present. Also the olefin path­way of Syne­chococcus depends on molecular oxygen with the cytochrome P450 involved in fatty acid de­carboxylation. The presence of molecular oxygen affects BES performance due to immediate product degrada­tion and unwanted cathodic oxygen reduction. In contrast, our own preliminary experi­ments (see title photo) and a corrosion experi­ment show that algae can live in the dark using electrons from a cath­ode. While the en­zymes in­volved in the production of some algal biofuels are known (such as olefin and alde­hyde de­formylation), it is not known whether these pathways are connected to H2 utilization (perhaps via ferredox­ins). Such a con­nection would be a promising indicator for the possibility of growing hydrocar­bon produc­ing cyanobacteria on cathodes of BES and should be examined in future research.
At Frontis Energy we believe that a number of other microorganisms show potential for BEEF production and these deserve further investi­gation. To avoid GMOs, BES compatible co-cultures must be identified via in silico meta­bolic reconstruc­tion from existing databases. Possible inter-species intermediates are unknown but are prerequisite for suc­cessful BES operation. Finally, a techno-economical assessment of BEEF pro­duction, with and with­out car­bon taxes, and compared with chemical methods, will direct future research.