logoalt Hacker News

ggmyesterday at 11:48 PM2 repliesview on HN

Gas turbines have a role in energy production worldwide. If this means they can run more efficiently, then there's a place for it. If the intent is to run 24/7 then it should replace existing Gas 24/7 service deployment, not add new, unless there is a reason wind+solar+storage and a (smaller? different configuration) gas peaker cannot do the job.

If this works as a rapid start gas peaker, it could help in the shift off coal and diesel. It depends on the CO/CO2 burden.


Replies

kreelmantoday at 12:22 AM

It could be a good, relatively portable gas peaker. Though I would have thought batteries might be a better step for peak load management?

This might sit somewhere between peak load and base load?

Since the CO/CO2 exhaust from this turbine should be able to be captured fairly well, would it be possible to capture it on the spot into tanks of some kind? There are most probably some large thermal issues to deal with here.. I also wonder about the MIT COF-99 (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/exotic-powder-pul...) that eats up CO2 very efficiently.

If simply CH4 is being passed to the turbine, is the water generated from the combustion being captured anywhere?

What about the sound characteristics of this beasty? There are cases in the US of people noticing the new AI data centre fans whining at all hours.

There'll be an engineer/physicist out there somewhere who'll come up with a generally efficient way to move heat around (Graphene ?) and he'll start a multi-billion dollar business.

pdx_flyertoday at 12:17 AM

There are already quite a few rapid start gas peakers not only being produced but in-service. Nothing about Boom's stands out as being significantly different.

show 1 reply