Supporting energy policy research with large language models: A case study in wind energy siting ordinances
Not Available
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
Engineering topics
Levine, Aaron
Publications and source records attributed to Levine, Aaron.
AquaPV: Regulatory and Environmental Considerations for Floating Photovoltaic Projects Located on Federally Controlled Reservoirs in the United States
To meet the nation's decarbonization goals, the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Futures study forecasts that installed solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity must increase nearly tenfold, from 80 gigawatts (GW) in 2020 to approximately 760 GW cumulative installed capacity by 2035. Ground-mounted PV is expected to dominate future solar deployment and will require more than 3.5 million acres of land to meet annual demand projections (of nearly 45 GW) by 2030. However, various competing demands for land (e.g., agricultural production, conservation) and high land acquisition costs in specific locations could be challenges to meeting future PV demand solely with ground-mounted PV deployment. Floating photovoltaics (FPV) may be an alternative in locations where ground-mounted PV is not feasible and aid in reaching the nation's PV deployment and decarbonization goals. FPV is a newer siting approach in which a PV array is affixed to a floating apparatus and sited on a water body like a reservoir behind a dam. FPV systems may be stand-alone or co-located at new or existing hydroelectric facilities or pumped storage hydropower (PSH) facility reservoirs. Co-located FPV systems may or may not be operationally paired and work in tandem with the hydroelectric or PSH facility. This report provides novel analysis to understand the opportunities and challenges associated with developing stand-alone and co-located FPV projects on reservoirs in the United States. Specifically, the report explores potential environmental and energy benefits and environmental impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of FPV projects. The report also identifies and analyzes U.S. federal- and state-issued permits and authorizations required by federal laws to understand the licensing pathways and regulatory requirements for FPV projects sited on reservoirs licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and on powered and non-powered reservoirs owned by the Bureau of Reclamation or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
Hydropower Investment and Public-Private Ecosystem Assessment
The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) commissioned this Report to evaluate the primary challenges in raising investment in medium-sized hydropower and PSH, defined as projects with five (5) to 30 megawatts (MW) of installed capacity, and to understand potential opportunities to increase mobilization of private sector investment in hydropower and PSH projects in the future. Based on stakeholder interviews, a market survey, and industry reports, this Report considers the investment and development trends and future opportunities for five hydropower project types: capacity additions, conduits, PSH (both open and closed loop), non-powered dams (NPDs), and new stream-reach development (NSD).
13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
Topics and Considerations for Developing State Geothermal Regulations
The intent of this document is to provide guidance to states for developing geothermal regulations that would be inclusive of all geothermal technologies (e.g., conventional and non-conventional power production and direct-use applications) with applicability in all states. As part of this project, the NREL project team reviewed and catalogued existing state and federal geothermal regulations, compiled best practices from geothermal and other extractive industries, and established a Geothermal Regulatory Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) to advise and review the geothermal regulatory guidance. The SWG met approximately monthly over the course of one year to review and discuss specific topics as relevant to this geothermal regulatory guidance. This report is broken into five main sections, which were identified in coordination with the SWG as the main topics for inclusion. Within these sections, a list of considerations within each category were identified and, in some cases, relevant examples from existing state and federal geothermal regulations are included to further illustrate the proposed considerations. This report includes the following topics: geothermal resource definition; leasing process; exploration approval process; drilling/wellfield development approval process; and underground injection control process.
15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
Non-Technical Barriers to Geothermal Development in California and Nevada [Slides]
This presentation presents the findings of our study, including an analysis of federal, state, and local geothermal regulatory and permitting processes, case studies analyzing site-specific attributes that may impact project development at four selected geothermal project sites, an analysis of cost and timeline implications for geothermal project development, and the results of a qualitative study focused on inter-agency coordination and collaboration efforts between federal, state, and/or local agencies for geothermal projects located in California and Nevada. Our analysis found that development timelines may be impacted by multiple federal and state environmental review processes and duplicative permitting requirements as well as coordination efforts between numerous federal, state, and local agencies involved in issuing authorizations and permits necessary for project development. In addition, projects in California and Nevada may face site-specific environmental challenges due to the presence of sensitive resources (e.g., biological species and species habitat, cultural resources) that may result in project construction delays. Our study results also indicate that protracted geothermal development timelines caused by delays in acquiring necessary permits and environmental reviews may result in loss of generated electricity revenue and additional financing costs, which may increase economic uncertainty associated with project development. Through our qualitative analysis, we found that utilization of best practices, including tiering to existing environmental review documents and developing memoranda of understanding, which clearly delineate agency roles and responsibilities may reduce overall project timelines, costs, and uncertainties associated with geothermal project development in California and Nevada.
15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗