Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “ownership”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10

SAM Plug-in Development (Phase I Final Report)

The DOE Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) has created an extensive set of advanced modeling and simulation tools for nuclear engineering analysis. The advanced capabilities of these newer analysis codes require more in-depth training, skills, and knowledge in order to effectively utilize them for the design, analysis, and licensing of advanced nuclear systems and experiments. A high learning curve for inexperienced users may deter organizations from incorporating these tools into their internal processes. This project involved development of a plug-in to the Symbolic Nuclear Analysis Package (SNAP) for the System Analysis Module (SAM) tool. SAM is an advanced system analysis tool for reactor transient analyses being developed at Argonne National Laboratory under the U.S. DOE Office of Nuclear Energy’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program. SAM utilizes an object-oriented application framework (MOOSE), and its underlying meshing and finite-element library (libMesh) and linear and non-linear solvers (PETSc), to leverage modern advanced software environments and numerical methods. SNAP provides a highly flexible framework for creating, modifying and documenting input for engineering analysis codes such as SAM as well as extensive functionality for submitting, monitoring, and interacting with the codes through an intuitive graphical user interface (GUI). The common user interface provided by SNAP minimizes the learning curve for engineers starting with a new analysis code and provides an intuitive framework for transitioning between different analysis codes. SNAP provides a powerful but intuitive interface to facilitate access to advanced modeling and simulation tools for inexperienced users. Unlike many “form based” GUI’s, SNAP maps each engineering code’s component input to an internal database which manages all component input parameters along with component interconnections. This level of abstraction permits SNAP to support several advanced capabilities such as renodalization, model validation and consistency checks, embedded documentation, model notebook generation, data ownership and reviewer tracking, and variable assignment for inputs to name a few. SNAP includes a built-in Python interpreter and is interfaced to several commercial and open source packages including CPython, MATLAB/OCTAVE, Microsoft Office, Open Office, and SANDIA’s DAKOTA package which provides Uncertainty Quantification analysis through the SNAP plug-ins. Phase I of this project involved development a fully functional basic SAM plug-in to SNAP. This plug-in provides the ability to import existing models, graphically construct, edit and submit models using SNAP’s extensive functionality.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Voluntary Renewable Energy Procurement Programs in Regulated Utility Markets

Multinational corporations are increasingly purchasing renewable energy (RE) to fulfill international commitments, reduce supply chain emissions, limit environmental impact, and secure stable and affordable electricity. The potential scale of global corporate RE purchasing has been estimated to be nearly 100 GW and growing; however, many markets still lack supportive enabling environments for corporations to access RE through on-site project development or private sector transactions. Even where allowed by law, on-site generation may be insufficient due to space and technical constraints, introducing additional challenges. Utility green pricing and utility green tariff programs backed by renewable energy certificates (RECs), referred to as utility green procurement programs (GPPs) in this report, offer powerful market-based solutions to utilities, regulators, and policymakers to provide corporate and other consumers with RE product options while generating revenue to support RE development. As RE markets expand around the globe, GPPs have proven to be effective mechanisms in market regimes, ranging from fully integrated state-owned utilities to broadly liberalized power markets. GPPs utilize RECs, which are a type of energy attribute certificate and closely resemble guarantees of origin, to track and ultimately monetize RE attributes that corporations and other buyers must procure to demonstrate progress against their RE commitments and make public claims of RE use. Time-tested and transparent REC accounting mechanisms provide market confidence, while at the same time offering flexibility to utilities, regulators, and customers for a range of applications. RECs are used in all types of electricity market structures, as indicated in Figure 1, but REC-based program designs and supporting components differ depending on the type of market. Liberalized markets allow for customers to contract directly with generators for electricity and RECs, while traditionally regulated markets with vertically integrated utility structures may have greater restrictions on generation asset ownership and electricity sales. RE markets can be further defined as being either mandatory or voluntary. Mandatory markets require suppliers to deliver specified amounts of RE to grid customers, such as under a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), while voluntary markets involve no legal mandates, but demand is driven by self-imposed customer goals.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Agent-Based Coordination Scheme for PV Integration (ABC4PV)

Renewables and especially photovoltaics (PV) have benefitted significantly from a host of incentives and policies targeted toward enhanced integration and adoption of specific energy technologies. However, with the push to move forward into a subsidy-free market framework, behind-the-meter residential PV applications have generally struggled to retain their value (unlike utility scale and commercial projects) [1]. This project focused on developing control-theoretic solutions aimed at improving the integration and interaction of behind-the-meter residential PV with other distribution system assets (controllable and non-controllable) to enhance the integrated value of residential PV. To this end, a suite of decentralized control methodologies have been developed to enable effective coordination and control of behind-the-meter residential load customers’ PV, battery storage systems (BSS), controllable loads and other similar assets within a distribution feeder. This interaction aims at procuring energy savings and, thus, energy bill savings. The main source of savings is drawn from reducing the effect of demand charge pricing and is realized at the feeder level, assuming community level interaction and management among the aforementioned assets. Optimal control of the assets is implemented with a distributed optimization methodology, leveraging consensus-based algorithms. The results gathered from the optimal control simulations demonstrates that the savings can be duly achieved and the algorithm decision times (to dynamically control asset set points, for example) are fast. As for the overall efficiency of PV+BSS systems, to procure energy savings from curtailment of the demand charge pricing effects, the optimal control is set up so as to minimize the variance of the load for all customers, throughout a feeder and throughout time in a rolling horizon scheduling with model predictive control. The control takes into account inter-temporal electrochemical storage (battery) degradation costs: specifically, we have developed a long-term lifetime model for the BSS that weighs in the effect of the degradation factor in the dispatch formulations, thus, a considerable operating cost that affects energy decision making. The levelized cost of energy (LCOE – redefined for the purpose of quantifying asset integration effectiveness through the customers’ energy cost) is shown to be below the threshold set for the combined PV+BSS topology of $ 0.14/kWh for multiple cases of PV penetration all the way up to 50%, provided that a policy of shared ownership of and savings is in place. Further, the LCOE calculated for the case before the deployment PV+BSS systems is also achievable, i.e. the deployment of PV+BSS, if planned and scheduled optimally. will have no effect on customers’ energy costs. From the control methodology viewpoint, the developed consensus-based algorithms are shown to converge for a wide range of problem cases (spanning normal operating scenarios and contingencies), guaranteeing dispatch solutions under forecasting errors, communication break-downs and cyber-security attacks. The proposed control solutions are scalable and real-time implementable, with dispatch computations and device set-point updates converging in less than 2s in most practical instances of the above events.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Distributed Solar 2020 Data Update [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s Tracking the Sun report summarizes installed prices and other trends among grid-connected, distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) systems in the United States. This report is now being published on a biannual cycle. In 2020, Berkeley Lab has released a more limited Distributed Solar 2020 Data Update, which consists of the same data otherwise published in Tracking the Sun report. The update includes data on more than 1.9 million systems installed through 2019, covering 82% of all distributed PV systems installed nationally through that timeframe.As in prior years, the data update focuses to a large degree on installed prices reported for distributed PV projects, describing both historical trends and variability in pricing across projects.With respect to the historical price trajectory, national median installed prices fell, from 2018 to 2019, by roughly 1% for residential systems, remained essentially flat for small non-residential systems, and fell by 4% for large non-residential systems. Across all three customer segments, these are the slowest annual percentage declines since 2006-2008.Pricing continues to vary widely across individual projects, reflecting, among other things, differences in system sizing and design, installer-level pricing strategies, and local market conditions. For example, among residential systems installed in 2019, the lowest 20% were priced below $3.1/W, while the highest 20% were above $4.5/W. The distributions for non-residential systems exhibit similarly wide spreads.In addition to data on installed prices, the data update also covers a broad range of trends related to distributed PV system design, including: system sizing, module efficiency, module-level power electronics, inverter-loading ratios, solar+storage installations, mounting configuration, panel orientation, third-party ownership, and customer segmentation.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Distributed Solar Adoption in Orlando: A Household-Level Model for Distribution Resource Planning

Potential for rooftop solar in Florida is massive (47% of retail sales, 3rd overall nationally), yet adoption lags (12th nationally). A 2018 Florida Public Service Commission ruling authorizing solar third-party ownership (leasing) has substantially increased attention on distributed solar in the state. The city of Orlando has committed to a 100% clean-energy target by 2050 and deployment of solar and storage are expected to contribute significantly to reaching the goal. Deployment of customer-adopted solar, unlike utility-procured solar, is uncertain, but known to be spatially correlated with demographic factors and existing adoption. We develop a new method to adapt NREL's dGen model in order to represent building-level agents in adoption forecasts for the Orlando Utility Commission (OUC) service territory. Using the agent-based model we develop projections of solar adoption, subject to scenarios varying future solar costs and valuation, and aggregate adoption predictions by OUC distribution feeder. We find substantial spatial heterogeneity in the projected level of adoption by OUC distribution feeder. For instance, 25% of all projected adoption through 2050 would be concentrated on just 5% of feeders and 88% of projected adoption on 50% of feeders. Because of the uncertainty in adoption, bottoms-up solar adoption forecasting methods at the household-level are integral to long-term resource planning by anticipating system needs as customers increasingly adopt distributed solar, storage, electric vehicles, and other distributed energy resources.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Unique Building Identifier (UBID): Public Sector Implementation Guide

Buildings generate data throughout their lifecycle – about ownership & taxation, usage, zoning, code compliance, energy use, and retrofits. State and local governments collect this data after it flows through growing networks of people and systems. But collecting data is only half the battle; what’s really needed is information – the actionable insights that lead to successful policy outcomes.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

Data-Driven Understanding of Low-to-Moderate Income Customers’ Adoption and Financial Qualification in Community Solar (Final Technical Report)

When Solstice began working in the community solar industry, it quickly became clear that there was a wide disparity along race and class lines in terms of what kind of household traditional solar offerings benefited. Solstice is an organization that aligns itself to the principles of a Just Transition, or the concept that a transition to a green economy should benefit and prioritize historically marginalized groups of people. Given that low-income communities are disproportionately burdened by our current polluting fossil fuel economy, Solstice set out to investigate the root causes of the exclusion of low to moderate income (LMI) households in the community solar market. As we worked more and more with financiers, developers, and LMI households, we recognized that significant barriers to entry in a developer-owned project were credit threshold requirements. A FICO score of 750 and higher discriminates against LMI households that are not financially stable enough to take on multiple lines of credit (or who may not have been deemed credit worthy enough to access a line of credit) yet who may have been reliable utility customers. As Solstice began looking further into preliminary data and speaking to community-based organizations (CBOs) that serve LMI households, we found our hypothesis to be worth investigating; there was indeed a subset of LMI households with poor FICO scores (or no FICO score at all) that had perfect bill payment history. Though initially Solstice was intent on gathering a body of data to prove or disprove this hypothesis, we were also concerned that all this proof of a financially stable and reliable customer was not being incorporated into FICO, and wondered if such a score would be possible. After preliminary research into the existence of alternative scores, Solstice realized that many mission-driven lending institutions rely on alternative metrics that are formulated for their specific industry. However, we also realized that community solar did not have an alternative credit underwriting mechanism, though there was great need from solar financiers for one. We anticipated that the creation of an EnergyScore would contribute to financiers’ need to qualify more people, as these entities are desperately looking for ways to lower the cost of customer acquisition. FICO turns away nearly 50% of potential customers (according to our own acquisition experience), and much of the community solar industry is realizing that FICO is not the perfect qualifying mechanism. Additionally, with a grounding in energy justice, just transitions, and climate justice, Solstice recognizes the need for a solution that addresses a more urgent need for LMI households to access renewable energy savings and relieve energy burdens. With funding from the Department of Energy, we gathered the data necessary to build the EnergyScore, reached out to mission-driven developers willing to test the metric, and secured several demonstration projects to pilot the EnergyScore. After acquiring customers for these demo projects using the EnergyScore, we will be continuously collecting customer payment behavior data. Though it goes beyond the scope of this project, we plan to disseminate this de-identified data with the wider community solar industry, which includes not only financiers and developers, but other mission-driven nonprofits, solar cooperatives, community-based organizations, environmental justice activists, and academics. While we intend to disprove the notion that LMI households cannot be included in projects without acutely increasing the risk to project finances, we also hope the data can be used to negotiate better pricing of systems and terms of ownership for community groups seeking to build inclusive projects.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

The CanBikeCO Mini Pilot: Preliminary Results and Lessons Learned

In fall 2020, the Colorado Energy Office, as part of the State of Colorado’s “Can Do Colorado” initiative, initiated a project aimed at encouraging energy-efficient transportation during the COVID-19 pandemic. The initial mini-pilot provided e-bikes to 13 low-income households under an individual ownership model. This report assesses the impact of providing this additional mobility option on the travel behavior of participants. It also outlines the lessons learned from deploying a continuous monitoring platform to track the travel behavior. These lessons will influence the evaluation component for the full pilot, which will cover multiple geographic regions, starting in summer 2021, and run for 2 years. The continuous data collection was enabled by a customized version of the open-source e-mission platform, called CanBikeCO, configured with a behavioral gamification feature. The Colorado Energy Office used this system to collect a unique data set consisting of 3 months of partially automated travel diaries, combining sensed and surveyed data and linked with demographic information, from 12 participants. The data collection process worked well overall: users generally liked the app, appreciated the game, and did not complain about battery life. The long tracking period introduced behavioral challenges in user engagement, which we plan to address using repeated patterns and automated status checks for the full pilot. The analysis results, based on the subset of trips with user-reported labels (68%), indicate that the e-bike was the dominant commute mode share (31%), in sharp contrast to the census bicycle commute mode share (<1%). E-bike trips primarily replaced single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips (28%), followed closely by walking (24%) and regular bike (20%). The nonmotorized mode replacement corresponds to lower travel time and increased productivity enabled by the program. The emissions impact analysis of the program, computed using trip-level energy intensity factors, indicates savings of 1,367 lbs. of CO 2 . Although the results are strongly positive, the narrow demographic profile of study participants, their limited mobility alternatives, and nonuniform labeling indicate caution in broader interpretation. These preliminary results do suggest that such programs, supported by real-time education and support from program managers, can simultaneously meet equity and sustainability goals. The planned full pilot, addressing the data collection challenges and broadening the geographic scope, will provide additional insights into the generality of this approach.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Top 13 Blendstocks Derived from Biomass for Mixing-Controlled Compression-Ignition (Diesel) Engines: Bioblendstocks with Potential for Decreased Emissions and Improved Operability

Reducing the impacts of medium- and heavy-duty (MD/HD) ground transportation can be enabled by fuel-engine combinations that use lower compression ignition liquid fuels and reduce criteria pollutant emissions. Fuels and blendstocks combined with advanced engine technologies could reduce the cost of ownership and the emission of pollutants, including soot, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and greenhouse gases (GHGs), from MD/HD vehicles. This report describes the evaluation and screening of MD/HD mixing-controlled compression ignition (MCCI) biofuel candidates for further development and commercialization. The report is aimed at 1) biofuel researchers looking to better understand options to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions while maintaining efficiency and meeting requirements for engine operability and 2) engine researchers who want to evaluate biofuels that meet diesel fuel properties for their impact on conventional and advanced diesel combustion strategies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

C-AAC Occupancy and Transition Out of CMR [Slides]

This in-depth evaluation was performed in order to gather information for a plan and time estimate of C-AAC space cleanout and handover to the CMR facility once programmatic operations are relocated to other facilities. C-AAC space ownership in CMR wings 1, 5, 7, and 9 have been identified down to the Team level (see subsequent slides and other supporting documentation). This plan assumes that C-AAC activities that support Pu sustainment efforts (Wings 1, 5, and 7) are relocated to PF-4 and RLUOB in mid/end FY24 and current projects in Wing 9 are completed by the end of FY24/mid FY25 (cessation of C-AAC programmatic operations in CMR). This plan assumes that no other programmatic activities are initiated in CMR (e.g. MOX fuel rods). Timing and order of cleanout of programmatic laboratory and office spaces in wings 1, 5, and 7 is dependent upon analytical chemistry operations being established and relocated to RLUOB and PF-4. Timing and order of cleanout of programmatic laboratory and office spaces in wing 9 is dependent upon completion of current projects (MR&R, Thermo Fisher drum, etc.). As C-AAC Teams move out of the CMR building and into other facilities, the spaces occupied by those teams are planned to be targeted for in depth cleanout in the order that teams and capabilities are relocated.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Geothermal Play-Fairway Analysis of Washington State Prospects: Final Report

The Washington State Geothermal Play-Fairway Analysis overcomes the exploration challenges posed by dense vegetation, glacial deposits, and extreme precipitation. The geothermal play-fairways we target are locations where heat, permeability, and saturated porosity are present in sufficient volume to provide adequate heat exchange at depths accessible by modern drilling technology. The three study areas lie along the Cascade Range magmatic arc and are near Mount Baker, Mount St. Helens, and the Wind River Valley. The seven-year project is divided into three phases. In Phase 1 we build on a previous statewide assessment of geothermal resources and develop an initial modeling approach. The results are a series of favorability, uncertainty, and risk maps for three targeted study areas. Based on these initial results, we collect new geologic and geophysical data to further refine our modeling and reduce exploration uncertainty in Phase 2. We improve the modeling method to handle the new data and update the favorability, uncertainty, and risk maps. We also update the conceptual geothermal resource models. In Phase 3 we validate our modeling approach by drilling two temperature-gradient holes and collecting and analyzing core, image logs, and new geochemistry. Our modeling approach improves on an earlier statewide method through a more-rigorous and detailed assessment of heat and permeability. Permeability potential is assessed through geomechanical modeling of the deformation that can generate and maintain reservoir porosity and permeability. Metrics to inform heat potential include temperature-gradient wells, which are sparse in Washington; proximity of Quaternary volcanic vents and young intrusive rock; spring temperature; and reservoir temperature inferred from geothermometry. We weight the individual components using an expert-guided approach known as the Analytical Hierarchy Process. During Phase 2 we also develop a fluid-filled fracture model, and an infrastructure model that helps to delineate areas which are more favorable for geothermal development based on proximity to transmission lines, elevation, land ownership and use restrictions, and availability of process water. New geologic and geophysical data is collected during Phase 2 in each of our three main study areas. At Mount Baker and north of Mount St. Helens we conduct 1:24,000-scale geologic mapping and lidar analysis to better constrain the location and character of surface faults; detailed mapping in the Wind River Valley was completed just prior to the start of this project. Ages of intrusive rocks are determined with 40 Ar/ 39 Ar geochronology, though all of our samples are Miocene or older. We collect ground based gravity observations (a total of 1,580 new stations) in all of our study areas and ground-based magnetic lines (a total of 93 km) at Mount Baker. These data are combined with existing gravity and aeromagnetic data and used to constrain fault locations and geometry. Two to three cross sections are constructed at each study area using the mapped surface geology and forward-modeling of the gravity and magnetic data; these cross sections form the basis for our updated conceptual models. We collect magnetotelluric surveys at Mount Baker and Mount St. Helens and these data are inverted to form a resistivity model from the surface to about 10 km depth; each model shows conductive zones that can be interpreted as upwelling geothermal fluids. At Mount St. Helens we deploy a passive seismic array and use the newly detected events to refine the location of the Saint Helens seismic zone. We also employ ambient-noise tomography to develop a detailed seismic-velocity model for the study area and use this model to help constrain our cross sections and conceptual model. Based on the new data collected during Phase 2—and our updated models—we develop a campaign of temperature-gradient holes and core analysis to validate our modeling in Phase 3. Drill hole MB76-31 is located near Little Park Creek, 11 km west-southwest of the summit of Mount Baker, and is 1,471 ft deep. About 410 ft of core from the lower portion of the hole—and image logs from ~175 ft below ground surface to the bottom—are collected and analyzed. Water samples are collected and processed for geothermometry. Drill hole MSH17-24 is located along upper Schultz Creek, 16 km north-northeast of Mount St. Helens and has core from 470 ft to the bottom at 1,053 ft. We did not collect image logs due to borehole stability concerns, but water samples are collected and analyzed for geothermometry. Repeat temperature-gradient measurements are made at both sites and thermal conductivity is measured from core samples. At MB76-31, the equilibrated temperature gradient of 64°C/km and calculated heat flow of 141–159 mW/m 2 is more than twice the regional average. Detailed mapping and analysis of the core, coupled with correlation to the image logs, indicates a history of permeability generation consistent with our predictions of high permeability. Because the site has high favorability in the Phase 2 model, we consider the results a positive validation of the modeling. At site MSH17-24, the equilibrated temperature gradient of ~15°C/km and calculated heat flow of 41–43 mW/m 2 are similar to regional. Geochemical analysis of the water samples indicates a meteoric source without any geothermal component. Detailed outcrop-based mapping of fault exposures near the drill site and analysis of image logs from nearby boreholes indicates a history of permeability generation consistent with our predictions. Because the site has low favorability in the Phase 2 model, we consider the results a positive validation of the modeling. Together, the two sites provide a reasonably positive validation of the Phase 2 modeling and should encourage future use of this modeling approach.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

There's No Place Like Home: Residential Parking, Electrical Access, and Implications for the Future of Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

In March 2021, the cumulative sale of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) and battery electric vehicles (BEV), reached 1.8 million in the United States (Argonne National Laboratory 2021). However, PEV adoption is still in its infancy; its market share has just reached around 3% of new light-duty vehicle (LDV) sales by the end of 2020 (Alliance for Automotive Innovation 2021). Current trends suggest that PEV market share in the United States is increasing. The U.S. Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) 2020 Annual Energy Outlook forecasts PEV registrations to exceed 8 million vehicles by 2030 (AEO 2020). PEV adoption is expected to be led by states that are regulating the sale of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) (California Air Resources Board). California continues to push for more aggressive ZEV regulations; the state recently issued an executive order aimed at 100% of LDV sales being ZEVs by 2035 (Office of Governor Newsom). At the federal level, the Biden administration has shown great ambition in encouraging broader electric vehicle (EV) adoption, including setting the goal of installing 500,000 new chargers nationwide (The White House 2021). Access to charging infrastructure is consistently cited as one of the primary barriers to the increased sale of PHEVs and BEVs (Carley et al. 2019). In the United States, PEV charging options are often described using a pyramid structure, with residential charging as the foundation, workplace charging in the middle, and public charging on top (Figure 1). The existing electricity system, which generates, transmits, and distributes electric fuel to residential households, has helped PEVs partially overcome the "chicken and egg" conundrum that has haunted other alternative fuels. Viable home access to electric charging is also an important equity issue, because non-residential PEV charging options (e.g., workplace or public charging stations) are generally more expensive. Households without residential charging access may experience higher total cost of PEV ownership if non-residential charging options are more costly.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Dishwashers in the Residential Sector: A Survey of Product Characteristics, Usage, and Consumer Preferences

Data on consumer purchasing decisions, usage, and behaviors relating to residential appliances help to inform technical and economic analyses related to the energy and water used by those appliances, including dishwashers. Existing publicly available data for dishwashers include two regularly conducted national surveys that describe dishwasher ownership and usage. The United States (US) Department of Energy’s (DOE) Energy Information Administration’s Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) records the presence of a dishwasher in the home, the numbers of times per week the dishwasher is operated, and the dishwasher age, along with household demographic characteristics. The US Census Bureau’s American Housing Survey (AHS) also records the presence of a dishwasher in the home along with household demographic characteristics.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Why Regional and Long-Haul Trucks are Primed for Electrification Now

Zero emission freight trucks are needed to both improve public health and reduce global greenhouse gas emissions but at the same time are generally believed to be uneconomical. However, recent dramatic declines in battery prices and improvement in their energy density have created opportunities for battery-electric trucking today that were seldom anticipated just a few years ago. At the current global average battery pack price of $135 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) (realizable when procured at scale), a Class 8 electric truck with 375-mile range and operated 300 miles per day when compared to a diesel truck offers about 13% lower total cost of ownership (TCO) per mile, about 3-year payback and net present savings of about US $200,000 over a 15-year lifetime. This is achieved with only a 3% reduction in payload capacity. Even this small penalty can be reversed cost-effectively through light-weighting, in any case, only matters for a small fraction of trucks which regularly utilize their maximum payload. Electric trucks appear poised to also meet the performance demands for a large share of regional and long-haul trucking today. The estimated average distance traveled between 30- minute driver breaks is 150 miles and 190 miles for regional-haul and long-haul trucks respectively in the US. Thirty minutes of charging using 500 kW or mega-Watt scale fastchargers would add sufficient range without impairing operations and economics of freight movement. However, as with almost any clean technology, higher upfront capital costs of both vehicles and charging infrastructure are major barriers when electric trucking is in its infancy. Without strong policy support, coordinated investments in both vehicle manufacturing and fuel infrastructure will not be forthcoming on the scale needed to harness the true potential of battery electric trucks.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Options For Large-Scale Installation of Individual Heat Substations Based on International Best Practices

The purpose of this report is to provide recommendations for actions Ukraine could take to implement large-scale installation of IHSs as part of comprehensive district heating reform. The report discusses the importance of IHS in the district heating sector, then presents several case studies of approaches that European countries have taken to facilitate large-scale IHS installation in multi-apartment buildings. These case studies focus on the ownership and financing of IHS, as there are different models for how this can be done (the DH company can make the investments and recover the costs through the tariff, or building residents can make the investments themselves). They also include details on the approval process and technical specifications, as these can add additional barriers and time to the installation process.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Regulatory Implications of Embedded Grid Energy Storage

Electricity is unique among commodities in that its supply chain was developed without a storage component. Every other resource commodity has the ability to store excess quantities built into its supply chain – in the form of granaries, warehouses, reservoirs, etc. This embedded storage creates a buffer for mismatches between supply and demand, stabilizing prices and protecting customers. Recent technological advances in cost-competitive energy storage technologies that are scalable and flexible have made the concept of embedded electrical storage feasible, but several regulatory questions remain. This paper summarizes energy regulatory structures in the U.S. and the implications that they would have for embedded storage on the electric grid. Regulatory challenges for embedded storage include the lack of underlying standards, inclusion in planning processes, ownership models, compensation, and metrics. Two possible pathways forward are explored: an incremental one including regulatory guidance regarding the evaluation of embedded storage in existing planning processes, and a complex one involving the revision of existing reliability standards or the development of a new standard specific to embedded storage.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Evaluating the Impact of Residential Solar Contract Cancellations in the United States

The residential solar photovoltaic (PV) market in the United States is growing, despite frequent customer cancellations. Contract cancellations result in lost time and costs that must be borne by installers, often in the form of higher "soft costs" (i.e., non-equipment costs). These costs are often passed on to customers who successfully install PV systems. To date, few studies have attempted to estimate national cancellation rates or model the impacts on installed system costs. In this report, we utilize an installer-provided dataset of 199,665 residential PV-only projects representing about 10% of U.S. installs each year from 2017-2019. With this data, we evaluate cancellation rates and trends from contract signing to install. Next, by leveraging NREL's soft cost model for residential solar, we estimate installer spending through each phase of the pre-install process. Applying our findings on cancellation timelines and rates, we then estimate the potential cost impacts to successful installs from contract cancellations. Our work suggests that the rates and impacts of contract cancellations have been previously underestimated. Namely, we find that cancellations/unsuccessful project are; more common than previous estimates suggest; occur earlier in project timelines, though a significant number happen even after permit/ATB approvals; and contribute significantly to customer acquisition and other soft costs. We also find that cancellation do not appear to be driven by review delays in permitting and interconnection applications.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

2020 Energy Storage Pricing Survey

The annual Energy Storage Pricing Survey (ESPS) series is designed to provide a standardized reference system price for various energy storage technologies across a range of different power and energy ratings. This is an essential first step in comparing systems of the different technologies’ usage costs and total cost of ownership. The final system prices are developed based on data from an extensive set of interviews with representatives across the manufacturing and project development value chain, plus available published data. This information is incorporated into a consistent methodology structure that will allow pricing information to be incorporated at whatever level it was obtained, ranging from component to fully installed system. The ESPS system pricing methodology breaks down the cost of an energy storage system into the following component categories: the storage module; the balance of system; the power conversion system; the energy management system; and the engineering, procurement, and construction costs. By evaluating each of the different component costs separately, a more accurate system cost can be developed that provides internal pricing consistency between different project sizes using the same technology, as well as between different technologies that utilize similar components.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗