Engineering topics

Melaina, Marc

Publications and source records attributed to Melaina, Marc.

6 records

DOE OSTI2023

Cost and life cycle analysis for deep CO 2 emissions reduction of steelmaking: Blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace and electric arc furnace technologies

Iron and steel manufacturing is the largest contributor to CO 2 emissions among heavy industries worldwide. This is mostly due to the use of coal in blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace (BF-BOF) process for virgin (primary) steel production. The electricity generation mix used in the electric arc furnace (EAF) process to recycle scrap steel also contributes to the CO 2 emission associated with secondary steel production. To decarbonize iron and steel sector, we investigated decarbonization options for BF-BOF and EAF processes, including energy efficiency, carbon capture and storage, and the use of clean energy sources, in various BF-BOF and EAF process configurations. Additionally, for each decarbonization approach, we evaluated the CO 2 reduction potential via life cycle analysis (LCA) and estimated the associated cost through techno-economic analysis (TEA). A typical U.S. BF-BOF for virgin steel production has a cradle-to-gate (CTG) CO 2 emissions of 1,990 kg/MT steel with a levelized cost of steel (LCOS) of $\$439$/MT steel, while a typical U.S. EAF process for secondary steel production in the United States has a CTG CO 2 emissions of 270 kg/MT steel with a LCOS of $\$365$/MT steel. Combining renewable energy sources and carbon capture, BF-BOF CTG CO 2 emissions can be reduced to 16 kg/MT steel, and EAF configurations can achieve similar deep reductions to reach 25 kg/MT steel. The corresponding LCOS with these decarbonization levels is estimated to increase to $\$542$/MT steel and $\$348$/MT steel, respectively. The estimated CO 2 avoidance costs vary from -$\$90$/MT CO 2 to $\$646$/MT CO 2 , depending on the various decarbonization technologies and energy prices.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Cost and Life Cycle Analysis for Deep CO 2 Emissions Reduction for Steel Making: Direct Reduced Iron Technologies

Among heavy industrial sectors worldwide, the steel industry ranks first in carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions. Technologies that produce direct reduced iron (DRI) enable the industry to reduce emissions or even approach net‐zero CO 2 emissions for steel production. Herein, comprehensive cradle‐to‐gate (CTG) life cycle analysis (LCA) and techno‐economic analysis (TEA) are used to evaluate the CO 2 emissions of three DRI technologies. Compared to the baseline of blast furnace and basic oxygen furnace (BF–BOF) technology for steel making, using natural gas (NG) to produce DRI has the potential to reduce CTG CO 2 emissions by 33%. When 83% or 100% renewable H 2 is used for DRI production, DRI technologies can potentially reduce CO 2 emissions by 57% and 67%, respectively, compared to baseline BF–BOF technology. However, the renewable H 2 application for DRI increases the levelized cost of steel (LCOS). When renewable natural gas (RNG) and clean electricity are used for steel production, the CTG CO 2 emissions of all the DRI technologies can potentially be reduced by more than 90% compared to the baseline BF–BOF technology, although the LCOS depends largely on the cost of RNG and clean electricity.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

An Analysis of the Potential and Cost of the U.S. Refinery Sector Decarbonization

In 2019, U.S. petroleum refineries emitted 196 million metric tons (MT) of CO 2 , while the well-to-gate and the full life cycle CO 2 emissions were significantly higher, reaching 419 and 2843 million MT of CO 2 , respectively. This analysis examines decarbonization opportunities for U.S. refineries and the cost to achieve both refinery level and complete life-cycle CO 2 emission reductions. Here, we used 2019 life-cycle CO 2 emissions from U.S. refineries as a baseline and identified three categories of decarbonization opportunity: (1) switching refinery energy inputs from fossil to renewable sources (e.g., switch hydrogen source); (2) carbon capture and storage of CO 2 from various refining units; and (3) changing the feedstock from petroleum crude to biocrude using various blending levels. While all three options can reduce CO 2 emissions from refineries, only the third can reduce emissions throughout the life cycle of refinery products, including the combustion of fuels (e.g., gasoline and diesel) during end use applications. A decarbonization approach that combines strategies 1, 2, and 3 can achieve negative life-cycle CO 2 emissions, with an average CO 2 avoidance cost of $\$113$ - $\$477$/MT CO 2 , or $\$54$ - $\$227$/bbl of processed crude; these costs are driven primarily by the high cost of biocrude feedstock.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Water Electrolyzers and Fuel Cells Supply Chain: Supply Chain Deep Dive Assessment

The report “America’s Strategy to Secure the Supply Chain for a Robust Clean Energy Transition” lays out the challenges and opportunities faced by the United States in the energy supply chain as well as the federal government plans to address these challenges and opportunities. It is accompanied by several issue-specific deep dive assessments, including this one, in response to Executive Order 14017 “America’s Supply Chains,” which directs the Secretary of Energy to submit a report on supply chains for the energy sector industrial base. The Executive Order is helping the federal government to build more secure and diverse U.S. supply chains, including energy supply chains. This report is one of a series that supports the analysis of the energy industrial base called for in Executive Order 14017 on America’s supply chains (Exec. Order No. 14017, 2021). Specifically, it provides a review of the supply chain for water electrolyzers and fuel cells with a focus on polymer electrolyte membrane electrolyzer cells (PEMEC), polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells (PEMFC), solid oxide electrolyzer cells (SOEC), and solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC). Water electrolysis and fuel cells are a nascent industry with little prior information related to supply chain needs and constraints. This report provides a preliminary assessment; further industry peer review and revisions are expected.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2020

Resource Assessment for Hydrogen Production

This analysis was conducted in support of the U.S. Department of Energy's H2@Scale initiative, and this report examines the resources required to meet demand for an additional 10 million metric tonnes (MMT) of hydrogen in 2040. The technical potential of hydrogen production from fossil, nuclear, and renewable energy resources is presented. Updated maps describe the geographical distribution of hydrogen production potential from renewable energy resources. The results conclude that the technical resource availability of domestic energy resources is sufficient to meet an additional 10 MMT of hydrogen demand in 2040, without placing significant pressure on existing resources. While this level of hydrogen demand could result in a significant increase in renewable energy consumption, in particular, the technical potential of each resource is estimated to be sufficient to meet the demand. Future research, to enable the large-scale integration of hydrogen in the U.S. energy and other sectors, will include analyzing the geographic distribution of resources in relation to hydrogen demand for a variety of applications. Additional techno-economic analysis is also needed to understand the economic potential of hydrogen in other industries, beyond transportation; such analysis is currently being undertaken by a multi-lab project initiated by DOE in 2016. Finally, information from techno-economic analyses should be used to continually update and inform R&D targets for energy production, hydrogen production, and hydrogen utilization technologies.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2020

Quantifying the Tangible Value of Public Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

The lack of an extensive public recharging infrastructure is an important barrier to the growth of the plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) market. Because charging infrastructure is likely to be underutilized during the early stages of market development, it is difficult for decision makers to decide how much to invest in public charging stations. Quantifying the value of public charging infrastructure to current and potential future owners of PEVs is essential for estimating the benefits of charging stations to current PEV owners and for predicting the impact on future PEV sales. This paper estimates consumers’ willingness to pay for public charging infrastructure in the context of utility maximization. The objective is to provide a method for valuing charging infrastructure that can inform investment decisions and be used in forecasting models to predict the impacts on future PEV sales. A basic theory of the tangible value of charging infrastructure is developed as a function of PEV type, range, recharging time and existing infrastructure. Existing simulation studies provide functional relationships that quantify the ability of charging infrastructure to enable additional miles of electrified travel. The enabled travel functions are used to predict impact of infrastructure deployment on incremental electrified travel for 1) plug-in hybrids and 2) intra-regional and 3) inter-regional travel by all-electric vehicles. The willingness to pay for increased electrified miles is derived from the willingness to pay for increased electric driving range, based on econometric studies of plug-in vehicle choice. The result is a set of three functions that can be used to calculate the marginal willingness-to-pay for public charging infrastructure as a function of vehicle attributes, existing charging infrastructure, energy prices and annual vehicle travel.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗