Corrigendum to “On using unstabilized compressed earth blocks as suspended weights in gravity energy storages” [J. Energy Storage 72 (2023) 108764] (Journal of Energy Storage (2023) 72(PE), (S2352152X23021618), (10.1016/j.est.2023.108764))

Standard

Corrigendum to “On using unstabilized compressed earth blocks as suspended weights in gravity energy storages” [J. Energy Storage 72 (2023) 108764] (Journal of Energy Storage (2023) 72(PE), (S2352152X23021618), (10.1016/j.est.2023.108764)). / Kropotin, P.; Penkov, O.; Marchuk, I.

In: Journal of Energy Storage, Vol. 73, 109138, 20.12.2023.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

BibTeX

@article{1b8884d6694848dfb1f1376547420c72,

title = "Corrigendum to “On using unstabilized compressed earth blocks as suspended weights in gravity energy storages” [J. Energy Storage 72 (2023) 108764] (Journal of Energy Storage (2023) 72(PE), (S2352152X23021618), (10.1016/j.est.2023.108764))",

abstract = "The authors regret that there was a typo in several places: $/kWh should be written instead of $/kW. In the Introduction: “At a price of $75 per ton for reinforced concrete, the latter would add approximately 135 $/kWh to the capital costs. According to publicly available sources [19], sCEBs have a density about 20 % lower than that of concrete, but 1.5–3 times cheaper. Hence, using same-weight sCEBs can save anywhere from 45 to 90 $/kWh of capital cost. Considering the competitive price of such storage, which ranges from 300 to 500 $/kWh [1], utilizing sCEBs offers a significant advantage.” In the Conclusion: “Hence, using same-weight sCEBs can save anywhere from 45 to 90 $/kWh of capital cost. Considering the competitive price of such a storage ranging from 300 to 500 $/kWh [1], utilizing sCEBs offers a significant advantage.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.",

author = "P. Kropotin and O. Penkov and I. Marchuk",

note = "Kropotin, P. Corrigendum to “On using unstabilized compressed earth blocks as suspended weights in gravity energy storages” [J. Energy Storage 72 (2023) 108764] / P. Kropotin, O. Penkov, I. Marchuk // Journal of Energy Storage. – 2023. – Vol. 73. – P. 109138. – DOI 10.1016/j.est.2023.109138.",

year = "2023",

month = dec,

day = "20",

doi = "10.1016/j.est.2023.109138",

language = "English",

volume = "73",

journal = "Journal of Energy Storage",

issn = "2352-152X",

publisher = "Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Corrigendum to “On using unstabilized compressed earth blocks as suspended weights in gravity energy storages” [J. Energy Storage 72 (2023) 108764] (Journal of Energy Storage (2023) 72(PE), (S2352152X23021618), (10.1016/j.est.2023.108764))

AU - Kropotin, P.

AU - Penkov, O.

AU - Marchuk, I.

N1 - Kropotin, P. Corrigendum to “On using unstabilized compressed earth blocks as suspended weights in gravity energy storages” [J. Energy Storage 72 (2023) 108764] / P. Kropotin, O. Penkov, I. Marchuk // Journal of Energy Storage. – 2023. – Vol. 73. – P. 109138. – DOI 10.1016/j.est.2023.109138.

PY - 2023/12/20

Y1 - 2023/12/20

N2 - The authors regret that there was a typo in several places: $/kWh should be written instead of $/kW. In the Introduction: “At a price of $75 per ton for reinforced concrete, the latter would add approximately 135 $/kWh to the capital costs. According to publicly available sources [19], sCEBs have a density about 20 % lower than that of concrete, but 1.5–3 times cheaper. Hence, using same-weight sCEBs can save anywhere from 45 to 90 $/kWh of capital cost. Considering the competitive price of such storage, which ranges from 300 to 500 $/kWh [1], utilizing sCEBs offers a significant advantage.” In the Conclusion: “Hence, using same-weight sCEBs can save anywhere from 45 to 90 $/kWh of capital cost. Considering the competitive price of such a storage ranging from 300 to 500 $/kWh [1], utilizing sCEBs offers a significant advantage.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

AB - The authors regret that there was a typo in several places: $/kWh should be written instead of $/kW. In the Introduction: “At a price of $75 per ton for reinforced concrete, the latter would add approximately 135 $/kWh to the capital costs. According to publicly available sources [19], sCEBs have a density about 20 % lower than that of concrete, but 1.5–3 times cheaper. Hence, using same-weight sCEBs can save anywhere from 45 to 90 $/kWh of capital cost. Considering the competitive price of such storage, which ranges from 300 to 500 $/kWh [1], utilizing sCEBs offers a significant advantage.” In the Conclusion: “Hence, using same-weight sCEBs can save anywhere from 45 to 90 $/kWh of capital cost. Considering the competitive price of such a storage ranging from 300 to 500 $/kWh [1], utilizing sCEBs offers a significant advantage.” The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused.

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/236e6876-ec01-32a7-a6cd-15b0e91eb6ba/

UR - https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=63848781

U2 - 10.1016/j.est.2023.109138

DO - 10.1016/j.est.2023.109138

M3 - Article

VL - 73

JO - Journal of Energy Storage

JF - Journal of Energy Storage

SN - 2352-152X

M1 - 109138

ER -

ID: 68317351