Engineering topics
Publications and source records attributed to Durvasulu, Venkat.
This is a presentation, where the team updates industry and DOE on progress made in the Storage Innovations 2030 initiative. The team also presents updates to the methodology, plans for the future, and revised results.
The feasibility and performance of nuclear energy coupled with Negative Emission Technology (NET) processes were investigated in this report. Three overarching questions from nuclear NET systems guided this research: which NET would be able to use heat and/or electricity from nuclear power plants (NPPs); what is the performance and cost of a nuclear NET system; and what would be the market outlook for this system? Among the various NETs that are actively being developed, several were found to potentially benefit from coupling with an NPP via (1) large amounts of decarbonized and constant-output electricity; (2) free waste heat or cheap low-temperature heat; or (3) high-temperature heat. NPPs were found to be compatible with Direct Air Capture (DAC) systems, and a detailed techno-economic analysis of coupled NPP&DAC systems was performed. Preliminary analysis also indicated that biomass and water-based NETs are potentially compatible with NPPs, but further work is needed to quantify the performance of these nuclear NET systems. Design and performance analyses were completed for both liquid solvent DAC (L-DAC) and solid sorbent DAC (S-DAC) technologies. A 1.0-GWth NPP coupled with L-DAC and S-DAC was found to be able to capture 12–15 Mt CO 2 /yr and 1.0–1.5 Mt CO 2 /yr, respectively. While the L-DAC process enables much greater CO 2 capture than the S-DAC process when both are sized with a 1 GWth NPP, the NPP&L-DAC system considered also requires >2 GWth natural gas oxy-combustion to reach adequate temperature in the calciner. CO 2 generated from natural gas combustion is also captured as part of the calcination process, in addition to the CO 2 captured from air, resulting in overall CO 2 sequestration of close to 30% more than what is captured from air. The cost of carbon capture calculated with the levelized cost of DAC (LCOD) had a range of $\$170–260$/tCO 2 for NPP&L-DAC systems and a range of $\$650–680$/tCO 2 for NPP&S-DAC systems. For both DAC systems, the NPP provides economic benefit when compared to previous National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) studies of non-nuclear DAC systems, leading to reduction of LCOD by 5–7% for L-DAC, and 8–13% for S-DAC. For the NPP&DAC systems, a preliminary market analysis reviewed potential CO 2 market prices and eligibility for incentives. The estimated potential revenues for CO 2 capture (coming from federal incentive, CO 2 commodity markets, or offset market) is in the range of $\$170–979$ tCO 2 , and the results show that because of lower LCOD, the NPP&L-DAC process would be more attractive to a market than the NPP&S-DAC process. The large investment needed for NPP&DAC processes would require long-term certainty of sufficient market size, CO 2 prices, and incentives. Enabling NPPs to ramp DAC operation up or down based on electricity market price is not expected to significantly increase revenues of the NPP&DAC system. This is because the revenues from CO 2 sequestration are required to be very high to justify the deployment and continuous operation of the very expensive DAC technologies. In this analysis, several new research questions were uncovered, and follow-up analyses are recommended for further investigation, including a detailed feasibility study of NPP coupled with other NET systems such as biomass pyrolysis and gasification with carbon capture and storage, and seawater carbon capture.
This report on accelerating the future of lithium-ion batteries is released as part of the Storage Innovations (SI) 2030 strategic initiative. The objective of SI 2030 is to develop specific and quantifiable research, development, and deployment (RD&D) pathways toward achieving the targets identified in the Long-Duration Storage Energy Earthshot, which seeks to achieve 90% cost reductions for technologies that can provide 10 hours or longer of energy storage within the coming decade. Through SI 2030, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is aiming to understand, analyze, and enable the innovations required to unlock the potential for long-duration applications in the following technologies.
Electrochemical capacitors, which are commercially called supercapacitors or ultracapacitors, are a family of energy storage devices with remarkably high specific power compared with other electrochemical storage devices. Supercapacitors do not require a solid dielectric layer between the two electrodes, instead they store energy by accumulating electric charge on porous electrodes filled with an electrolyte solution and separated by an insulating porous membrane. Supercapacitors offer large specific capacitance and high power output. They can be charged and discharged very quickly, offer excellent cycle life and long operational life, and operate over a broad temperature range. The major drawbacks of supercapacitors are low energy density and a high self-discharge rate. For example, a supercapacitor passively discharges from 100% to 50% in a month compared with only 5% for a lithium-ion battery [1]. The high capital cost and low energy density of supercapacitors make the unit cost of energy stored ($/kWh) more expensive than alternatives such as batteries. Their attributes make them attractive for uses in which frequent small charges/discharges are required (e.g., ensuring power quality or providing frequency regulation). Their attributes and cost make them less attractive for long-duration energy storage, which favors technologies with low self-discharge that cost less per unit of energy stored.
Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies that can operate with a high degree of operating flexibility could provide necessary electric grid flexibility in a system with high shares of variable renewables. This project examines the deployment and dispatch potential of twelve unique flexible CCS (FLECCS) technologies that encompass post-combustion carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) capture designs, concepts using a storage media to enable energy arbitrage, and hybrid processes that integrate CCS with direct air capture (DAC) for flexibility with net zero or negative CO 2 emissions. FLECCS technology potential is explored with a multi-model, multi-scale framework including the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electric sector capacity expansion model (CEM) and the PLEXOS production cost model (PCM). Innovative methods were developed to represent FLECCS technology operating modes, performance, and cost in the two models. ReEDS was then used to simulate nine scenarios for each FLECCS technology, three CO 2 emissions price futures reaching $\$$150, $\$$225, and $\$$300/tCO 2 in 2050; and three scenarios for FLECCS technology deployment favorability relative to competing technologies. For each CO 2 price and reference FLECCS favorability, the 2050 infrastructures from ReEDS model are downscaled and implemented in PLEXOS to examine hourly dispatch under detailed operational constraints that are not included in ReEDS. FLECCS technologies exhibited a wide range of deployment potential ranging from none to several hundred gigawatts of capacity, with outcomes highly sensitive to input cost and performance parameters that are inherently highly uncertain. When deployed, FLECCS tended to displace a combination of wind, solar, and natural gas-based technologies rather than supporting increased renewable deployment. As a result, CO 2 emissions reductions facilitated by FLECCS deployment tended to come with higher overall system costs and electricity prices. When economically competitive, FLECCS technologies can contribute significant flexible generation and firm capacity to the grid, but continued technology development and an expanded analytical scope are necessary to fully understand FLECCS deployment potential its impact on the electric power sector. Follow-on analysis incorporating captured CO 2 tax credit value from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and other potential policy scenarios could be particularly valuable, as this policy can substantially change the relative competitiveness of FLECCS technologies.
Timing of generation is becoming more and more valuable. This creates greater potential tension between environmental and power system objectives since both systems require their own flow patterns. Identifying win–win outcomes in this context requires being able to discuss the value of flexibility across stakeholder groups. This research proposes a two-stage optimization method to understand hydropower flexibility to meet both environmental and power system requirements. The tool simulates the two-settlement market process in the U.S. by maximizing revenues from both the day-ahead and real-time markets, subject to plant operational limits, regulatory flow and ramping requirements, and uncertainties associated with water availability and market prices. The model is formulated as linear programming problems and solved using IBM ILOG CPLEX optimizer. By examining a range of flow requirements, ramping constraints, and storage capacities, the proposed tool shows how to make more informed decisions to weigh the cost of specific flow requirements in the context of the overall license requirements. Results from the case study show that revenue is more sensitive to the ramping constraints than the minimum flow constraints. We also demonstrate that removing flow constraints in a dry month increases monthly revenue by up to 118%, as opposed to only 1% in a wet month. In addition, our results suggest that using a learning-based water flow forecast results in an increase of monthly revenue up to 6.4% compared with persistence forecast.