Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “electricity costs”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Impacts of Climate Change on the Generation Potential of Solar and Wind Energy Systems in India

Low-carbon energy sources like wind and solar are essential for decarbonizing the electricity sector. In addition, the cost of electricity generated from these sources has plummeted over the last decade. Therefore, these energy sources are poised to take a significant share of the total installed capacity soon. However, they are susceptible to the impacts of climate change as their generation potential depends on the weather conditions. Estimating the installed capacity requirements of solar and wind energy to decarbonize the power sector without accounting for these possible changes in generation potential could lead to missing out on the set climate goals and meeting future electricity demand. This study evaluates the effect of climate change on the generation potential of wind and solar energy systems in India for two future periods, 2050 and 2070, under two climate scenarios or Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP): SSP245 and SSP585. Almost all regions show a decrease, and most regions show a significant decline (>5%) in the generation potential of solar Photovoltaic (PV) as compared to 2010 levels under both climate scenarios and future periods. The changes in the generation potential of wind energy are more significant (>10%), and the majority of regions show a decline in generation potential. Southwestern and central regions show an increase in wind generation potential for 2070 as compared to 2050 levels under the SSP245 scenario and the SSP585 scenario, respectively.

climate change↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sensitivity and Uncertainty Quantification of Transition Scenario Simulations

This report documents the first collective attempt at developing and applying capabilities to quantify uncertainties, assess parametric sensitivities, and optimize multiple parameters and metrics in fuel cycle simulations generated by the SA&I Campaign. To do this, external codes that were designed to perform sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification (SA&UQ) needed to be coupled to the SA&I Campaign’s nuclear fuel cycle simulators (NFCS). In FY20, two approaches were pursued: 1) coupling Cyclus to an ORNL-internal code called MOT (Metaheuristic Optimization Tool) and 2) coupling DYMOND to the opensource SA&UQ tool kit Dakota. The primary objective of having these NFCS/SA&UQ coupled capabilities is to better inform DOE-NE and other stakeholders on the results generated from the NFCS. For a given set of fuel cycle strategies, policies, and technology assumptions that make up a fuel cycle scenario, these NFCS have traditionally been used by the SA&I Campaign to provide quantitative answers in terms of year-by-year mass flows, infrastructure requirements, costs, etc. With these newly developed coupled capabilities, the SA&I Campaign can now efficiently simulate hundreds or thousands of these scenarios, sample large ranges of parameters and assumptions, and use the unique features of the SA&UQ tools to process the data. This enables providing answers with known and propagated uncertainties, determining the sensitivity of important metrics to different parameters and assumptions, quantifying how much fuel cycle and technology parameters impact each other, and producing optimized fuel cycle strategies for single and multiple variables. To demonstrate these new capabilities, the Cyclus/MOT was used to model several scenarios ranging from simple fleet retirements to transitions to advanced reactors. Specifically, for a transition scenario from LWRs to SFRs and advanced LWRs, uncertainty quantification, sensitivity analysis, and optimization studies were applied to cases involving single and multiple parameter (input) and single and multiple metric (output) variations. In addition, a similar transition scenario was modeled to demonstrate how to optimize the reprocessing capacity parameter to minimize two performance metrics while taking into account uncertainties from two other parameters. Lastly, a depletion module based on SCALE/ORIGEN was added in Cyclus to simulate the third scenario that was designed to quantify the impact of the modeling assumption that all LWR used nuclear fuel have the same burnup. The newly developed DYMOND/Dakota capability was also applied to a transition scenario from the existing fleet to small modular reactors and fast reactors. This particular scenario involves not only explicit isotopic depletion via ORIGEN-2, but also includes multirecycling and utilizing the criticality search feature to determine the fresh fuel composition of recycled fuel, a feature unique to the DYMOND NFCS. A large database of simulations were run with 4 main parameters that were sampled: start date of reprocessing, reprocessing capacity, energy demand growth rate, and advanced reactor share of the fleet. The 4 main metrics were uranium consumption, enrichment requirements, waste generation, and levelized cost of electricity using data from the Cost Basis Report. The demonstrated SA&UQ results include those that inform on how to choose parameters to avoid “failed” scenarios, Sobol’ indices that inform on the importance of various parameters individually and synergistically, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) studies that decompose parameter ranges into groups and informs on whether variations are statistically significant.

Feng, B.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Solar and Storage Techno-Economic Analysis Tutorial for the IEEE Photovoltaic Specialist Conference (PVSC)

This tutorial will highlight the most recent efforts from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to track solar photovoltaic (PV) technology trends and manufacturing costs, project levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), and project levelized cost of solar plus storage (LCOSS) for systems across the globe. We will begin with an overview of the global PV supply chain and 2021 benchmark input data for NREL's crystalline silicon (c-Si) and thin film PV module manufacturing cost models. The framework that we follow and will review during this tutorial provides a methodology to prepare bottom-up manufacturing cost models including the items within the U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). For the polysilicon, wafer, cell conversion, and module assembly steps of the c-Si supply chain, and for thin film modules, we will review input data and methods useful for calculating the costs of goods sold (COGS); research and development (R&D) expenses; and sales, general, and business administration (S, G, &A) expenses. This 2021 benchmark analysis is compiled for state-of-the-art c-Si and thin film module manufacturing. We will also review methods for our 2021 system benchmark costs calculations and LCOE technoeconomic analysis of PV systems and solar plus storage systems. Next generation technologies that lower PV manufacturing and installation costs, reduce operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses, and improve system energy yield will also be highlighted. Techniques for comparing LCOE performance will also be reviewed. We look forward to sharing NREL's extensive work in these areas and discussing ideas for future directions.

cost models↗
DOE OSTI2026

Reservoir Characterization and Techno-Economic Analysis of Enhanced Geothermal and Closed-Loop Systems in the Wattenberg Field of the Denver-Julesburg Basin, Colorado

This report provides details of reservoir characterization and techno-economic analysis for enhanced geothermal systems and closed-loop geothermal systems in the Denver-Julesburg Basin Wattenberg area. The analysis contributes to the Geothermal Limitless Approach to Drilling Efficiencies (GLADE) project, a multi-institutional research initiative focused on advancing geothermal energy development by reducing drilling costs and improving the rate of penetration. The GLADE project brings together national laboratories, academic institutions, and industry partners, including the U.S. Department of Energy's Geothermal Technologies Office, Occidental Petroleum, the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR), Los Alamos National Laboratory, Colorado School of Mines, Louisiana State University, Texas A&M University, and several drilling technology companies. As part of this effort, NLR developed and applied slender-body theory modeling tools and the GEOPHIRES simulator to support techno-economic analysis. The slender-body theory wellbore simulator evaluated thermal performance in U-loop, Eavor-type multilateral, and enhanced geothermal system well configurations. Results indicated that an optimized single U-loop design delivers an outlet temperature of 168.8 degrees Celsius,stabilizing at a final outlet temperature of 135.3 degrees Celsius. Heat production also improved significantly, with an average thermal output of 16.9 MWth and a final thermal output of 11.0 MWth. These results provided critical baseline data for selecting optimized systems for techno-economic analysis. Building on these outputs, NLR applied the GEOPHIRES techno-economic simulator to estimate the levelized cost of electricity for both the Eavor multilateral and enhanced geothermal systems. The sensitivity analysis showed that drilling costs exert a particularly strong impact on the levelized cost of electricity of multilateral systems. Therefore, advances in drilling technology and improved drilling rates could yield significant gains in the economic performance of these systems. In this context, the GLADE project directly supports the U.S. Department of Energy's mission to reduce the cost of geothermal energy and accelerate the deployment of next-generation geothermal technologies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Least-Cost Pathways for India's Electric Power Sector

The Government of India has a target of deploying 175 GW from renewable energy by 2022 and 40% of electricity capacity from renewable energy by 2030 and has indicated that ambitions for 2030 could be higher. Rapid changes in technology costs and performance could drive further deployment of wind and solar capacity beyond these policy targets. Increased deployment of variable renewable energy (VRE) raises new questions for power system planning regarding the optimal siting of generation capacity, trade-offs between generation and transmission infrastructure, and system flexibility needs. This study aims to evaluate least-cost pathways for India's electric power system over the period 2017-2047. Uniquely, this work considers an expanded planning horizon and range of scenarios not previously analyzed in national planning studies in India. The data collection and model design processes undertaken for this study provides a framework for recurring planning studies. This study finds anticipated changes in electricity demand and component costs can drive a significant shift in India's future electricity supply and how this system will be operated. In the Base scenario, the share of generation from VRE reaches 54% by 2047. Reducing the capital cost of wind has a larger impact on VRE penetration than reducing the capital cost of solar PV or battery storage. In the lowest wind cost scenario (40% capital cost decline by 2047 relative to the Base scenario), the penetration of VRE in the generation mix reaches 722%, exceeding the penetration levels achieved when the cost of battery storage or solar PV are reduced by an even greater 50%. In a future system with high penetrations of RE, capacity additions are driven by the coincidence of demand and RE generation rather than peak demand alone. This study finds the system could have surplus capacity during the peak demand months of July–September because this period corresponds to periods with high wind speeds and more wind generation available to meet peak demand. By contrast, new capacity is needed to meet demand during moderate demand months of October–November when output from wind plants falls more than 75% nationally compared to the previous two months. Finally, the success for gas for electricity production may depend on cost competitiveness rather than fuel availability. Increasing the amount of gas available for electricity production had no significant impact on the capacity or generation mix by 2047, as determined from a scenario that significantly increases fuel availability throughout the planning horizon. In fact, over 80% of new gas fuel available for the power sector remains unused. This suggests the high cost of gas plant operations relative to other technologies may constrain the expansion of gas generation in India more than fuel availability.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Spokane Eco-District Campus Performance Under Alternative Electricity Rates: Benefits for virtual power plant participants and suppliers

Here, the respective benefits for virtual power plant participants and suppliers are revealed and compared under alternative electricity rate structures, including conventional large commercial electricity rates, large commercial electricity rates with special rates for demand-side generation, and dynamic hourly transactive prices. These three scenarios were explored using the capabilities of the Eco-District campus, a virtual power plant in Spokane, Washington, that is supplied electricity by Avista Utilities. The Eco-District Campus was modeled to host solar power generation, battery energy storage, and thermal energy resources that must be coordinated with building heating and cooling needs. First, the electricity supplier’s costs for energy, infrastructure, and energy losses were modeled. Then, the virtual power plant’s performance was modeled while presuming that its manager would minimize its costs under its electricity rate structure. The demand charges of conventional commercial electricity rates managed monthly peak, as would be expected, but hourly dynamic transactive pricing resulted in a striking alignment between the costs incurred by the supplier and the virtual power plant’s energy costs.

Electricity rates↗
DOE OSTI2020

Oxy-Combustion System Process Optimization

The overall objective of this work is to develop a new chemical absorbent-based, high pressure, CO 2 purification system to remove the residual oxygen that currently contaminates the recovered CO 2 , and to optimize the Pressurized Oxy-Combustion (POxC) process to minimize the Cost of Electricity (COE) generated in this advanced combustion process. TDA developed and validated the performance of the oxygen removal system for CO 2 purification. In collaboration with the Advanced Power & Energy Program (APEP) of University of California, Irvine (UCI), we optimized the POxC process, including thermal management, heat integration, and power cycle optimization using process design and modeling supported with Aspen Plus® process simulations. The techno-economic analysis results indicate that the pressurized oxycombustion coal power plant with Ion-transport membrane (ITM) air separation unit (ASU) (Case 2 – 30.55%) does not show an advantage over a cryogenic ASU (Case 1 – 31.24%) while TDA’s sorption-based ASU (Case 4 - 32.61%) shows a significant advantage over the cryogenic ASU (Case 1 – 331.24%). The specific plant costs show a wide range with a low of $2544/kW for Case 11C (TDA ASU, co-sequestering the SO x , and ultra-supercritical steam cycle) to a high of $2975/kW for Case 12A (cryogenic ASU and sCO 2 cycle). In general, the ITM ASU based cases have lower specific plant costs than the corresponding cryogenic ASU based cases while the TDA ASU based cases show the lowest specific plant costs. The main reason for lowering these costs is the higher overall plant thermal efficiency which decreases the plant cost on a $ per kW basis. Next comparing the cases with different power cycle working fluid conditions in terms of temperature and pressure while all utilizing steam, similar trends as the plant costs may be observed. However, with the supercritical CO 2 (sCO 2 ) cycle, the increase in thermal efficiency of the sCO 2 cycle was not able to offset its increase in plant cost making the plant costs higher than those of the corresponding steam cycle cases. The Cost of Electricity (COE) again shows similar trends as the specific plant costs. The COE for Case 11C at $110.1/MWh is also the lowest, but among all cases that do not co-sequester the SO x , Case 12C (TDA ASU and sCO 2 cycle) has the lowest COE at $\$$117.5/MWh while the highest is for Case 8A (cryogenic ASU and supercritical steam cycle) at $130.4/MWh.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Case Study: Field Evaluation of a Low-Cost Circuit-Level Electrical Submetering System

Circuit-level metering technologies provide the ability to monitor individual circuits within an electrical panel in a building, providing detailed power and energy consumption data at a much more granular level than was previously achievable in a cost-effective manner. While the fundamental hardware components of circuit-level—split-core current transformers (CTs) and power monitoring meters—have existed for some time, the new offerings in the market have tightly integrated these components, lower costs, and have streamlined data organization, transport, and access via software solutions accessible through web and application programming interfaces (API). NREL evaluated Meazon’s single-circuit metering system. The evaluation of the equipment under test (EUT) focused on three aspects: (1) accuracy of the data provided by the system, (2) ease of installation of this technology and ease of data integration into existing U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) analytics platforms, and (3) total cost of ownership and cost-effectiveness of the technology. The metering technology was tested in a field deployment where it was installed in low and high-voltage commercial electrical panels in the César E. Chávez Memorial Building in Denver, Colorado. The goals were to assess the metering accuracy, the ease of installation and data retrieval, and the total cost of ownership and cost-effectiveness. This technology proved easy to install by a certified electrician who completed the install of 6 meters in 2 separate panels (120/208 V and 277/480 V) and 2 circuit disconnects (along with associated commissioning) at the César E. Chávez Memorial Building in less than one day. The technology was installed in high- and low-voltage panels and with limited space in the electrical room, demonstrating the applicability of this technology to almost all commercial buildings in the GSA portfolio. Primary considerations for this technology include appropriate sizing of CTs for each circuit, selection of loads/circuits/panels that are of high value for detailed submetering (e.g., tailored for high-load devices), and how GSA would like to integrate these data with its existing energy management infrastructure. Through the field evaluation, we demonstrated data integration from the vendor system into the primary software component on the GSA enterprise-level energy management and information system, GSA Link. Data from the circuit-level metering were integrated into this platform and used to perform FDD. This demonstrated the ability of the EUT to augment existing energy management and information systems in buildings where GSA Link is deployed and provides a pathway for delivering FDD at other buildings throughout the portfolio.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Renewable Energy Potential Model: Geothermal Supply Curves

The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model is a geospatial platform for estimating technical potential and developing renewable energy supply curves, initially developed for wind and solar technologies. The model evaluates deployment constraints, considering land use, environmental, and cultural factors, and estimates the distance to existing grid features to connect future plants (Maclaurin et al., 2021). A pressing deficiency in the reV model, however, is representation of geothermal electricity generation technologies. To address this gap, we developed a novel geothermal generation module for reV that allows for representation and analysis at the same level of detail as other renewable technologies. The included paper describes our process for evaluating data sources for the modeling, and presents five preliminary reV geothermal results. More specifically, we present two sets of resource data that represent upper and lower bounds for geothermal potential. We then present several sensitivity runs using the upper bound resource data; the results are encouraging that levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) can be reduced by optimizing the location and estimated capacity of the spatially diverse geothermal resource while considering the distance to existing grid infrastructure. Our preliminary supply curves and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) results provided here should be considered with care due to the high uncertainty in geothermal resource potential data. We present median LCOE values for the conterminous U.S. for three scenarios: two hydrothermal (3.5km depth, USGS heat flow & SMU temperatures respectively) and one EGS (4.5km depth, SMU temperatures). The capital and operating costs for each respective technology are modeled. We also compare results using two different resource data sources.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Systems Analysis of Biomass and Coal Co-firing Power Plants with Deep Carbon Capture Toward Net-zero Emissions

Achieving a net-zero emission economy in the United States requires integrating diverse low-carbon and negative-emission technologies into the existing fossil fuel-dominant power fleet. Potential technologies from the low-carbon portfolio include renewable power, fossil power with carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with CCS (BECCS), and direct air capture (DAC). Renewable power is a clean energy source but has to pair with costly battery storage to provide dispatchable electricity. Fossil power with CCS offers dispatchable electricity yet still relies on DAC to offset residual emissions, even when deploying deep CCS with more than 90% CO2 capture. Coal-biomass co-firing with CCS, a subset of BECCS, is a reliable energy production technology that can be retrofitted from existing electricity generation units (EGUs). Power plant retrofit maximizes the use of the current U.S. coal power fleet without the need for large-scale deployment of new renewable power, battery storage, or DAC. Retrofitting coal-biomass co-firing with deep CCS in EGUs is a promising option, but not a universal solution. Biomass co-firing at a power plant introduces economic challenges and indirectly poses pressure on land and water resources. Meanwhile, retrofitting deep CCS affects plant efficiency and raises electricity generation costs. Overall, the technical feasibility and economic viability of plant retrofits vary across EGUs, as they are contingent upon the regional availability of biomass, unit-specific characteristics, site-specific fuel supply costs, and adjacent CO2 storage potential. Government incentives like 45Q can improve the retrofit viability, though the impact requires further quantification. A comprehensive analysis at the unit level is essential to address the question regarding the fate of the U.S. coal-fired electricity generation fleet toward the net-zero emission goal. This study conducts a systematic techno-economic-environmental assessment of EGUs to identify the viability of biomass co-firing and deep CCS retrofits in the U.S. coal-fired power fleet. Specifically, it characterizes the techno-economic performance of deep carbon capture, estimates life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and conducts a fleet-level assessment on retrofit viability. The key objectives are (1) to estimate the unit-specific performance and retrofitted cost under various biomass co-firing levels and CO2 capture rates; (2) to determine the possibility of reaching net-zero emission at the fleet level; (3) to quantify the cumulative capacities that are suitable for plant retrofits under current and future biomass supply scenarios; and (4) to improve the understanding of policy impacts on such retrofits to help the power sector’s transition to a net-zero economy. Techno-economic Model of Deep Carbon Capture. This study develops the performance and economic models for Monoethanolamine-based post-combustion CO2 capture at 95–99% capture rates. The process is simulated in Aspen Plus, analyzing the performance of carbon capture technology by varying the plant sizes, solvent lean loading, CO2 concentrations, and flue gas inlet temperature. Based on the key inputs and output parameters of CO2 capture, a reduced-order performance model of deep carbon capture is formulated. In addition, an engineering-economic model integrating the performance metrics is developed to estimate the capital as well as operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Capital cost estimations follow the framework of the Integrated Environmental Control Model (IECM) and incorporate data regressions from three technical reports by IECM, the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The O&M cost estimation utilizes the actual inventory consumption rate and labor requirements. Both performance and cost models are embedded into IECM v13.0-beta, a fossil-fuel power plant modeling tool. Life Cycle Assessment of Power Plants. This study estimates the GHG emissions of power plants through life cycle assessment (LCA). The LCA scope includes fuel supply, combustion-based power generation, and CO2 transport and storage. The fuel-based life cycle module is designed following the framework of the NETL Unit Process Library and CO2U LCA Guidance Toolkit. The module is then incorporated into IECM v13.0-beta. The process-based LCA is applied to estimate the GHG emissions of coal and biomass supply, coal- and coal-biomass co-firing power plant operation, as well as CO2 pipeline transport and geographical sequestration. An uncertainty analysis is conducted to quantify the variability and uncertainty associated with the LCA using the Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) method. Fleet-level Assessment. This study evaluates the technical and economic feasibility of selected coal-fired EGUs, examines the role of tax credits in retrofit viability, and assesses the competitiveness of retrofitted units against other low-carbon options. Unit screening identifies EGUs for the study, focusing on new, efficient baseload units with air pollution controls. The power plant databases are then established to organize unit-specific information on performance and operating conditions from the relevant public databases. Biomass for co-firing retrofits is selected based on home and neighboring county availability, ensuring sustained operation with at least a 5% co-firing level. The CO2 storage site is determined by state-level storage potential, with ArcGIS Pro and NETL CO2 Saline Storage Cost Model used to identify the optimal balance between the nearest transport distances and affordable storage costs. The latest IECM v13.0-beta is then employed to configure and evaluate the eligible EGUs with or without the deployment of deep CCS and biomass co-firing. A supply curve is established to illustrate the cumulative installed capacity suitable for retrofits at different cost levels. A sensitivity analysis on tax credits for carbon sequestration is performed. Finally, a unit-level cost comparison is conducted among retrofitted plants, renewable power with battery storage, and abated fossil fuels with DAC. Expected Results. This study evaluates the technical, economic, and environmental metrics of each EGU across an array of CO2 capture rates and biomass co-firing level scenarios. Unit-level comparisons will identify critical factors influencing technical performance. The supply curves with and without tax incentives will provide insights into the impact of tax credits on biomass co-firing and CCS deployment. The cost comparisons with renewables and DAC-retrofit will assess the competitiveness of the retrofitted units. Life cycle emissions from each unit will be assessed to identify the scenarios under which net-zero emissions can be achieved. These analyses are expected to determine the total coal-fired capacity suitable for serving as a low-carbon energy source with or without tax incentives. The study results are novel in identifying optimal unit-specific strategies for producing carbon-neutral power, whether through retrofitting EGUs with deep CCS, biomass co-firing, DAC, or installing renewable power with battery. The findings will provide insight into nationwide efforts to ensure reliable, affordable, and low-carbon electricity. It also will inform investment decisions and policies in the deployment of deep carbon capture and negative emission technologies for a net-zero energy future.

Biomass Co-firing↗
DOE OSTI2026

The Levelized Cost of Exergy Framework

Exergy is the amount of energy within a substance or within a transfer of energy that can be used to produce work or some other useful output when interacting with some reference environment. Two different energy systems that produce the same output with the same exergetic efficiency must necessarily have the same amount of exergy input, even if the amount of energy input to the two systems is vastly different. For example, a low-grade heat-driven desalination would require far more energy input than a reverse osmosis (RO) plant producing the same amount of water, but if their exergetic efficiencies were the same, they would require the same amount of exergy input. Thus, comparisons between different energy sources on the basis of energy is not always appropriate. Instead, a comparison on a per unit exergy basis provides more insight on the cost-effectiveness of different energy sources and systems. In this presentation, we describe a framework for analyzing the levelized cost of exergy (LCOEx) for both inputs and outputs of various energy systems. Our framework illustrates how the cost per unit exergy of a system's energy source, as well as the exergetic efficiency of the system, greatly affect the cost of the system output. We use the levelized cost of electricity as a benchmark value for LCOEx, due to electricity's ubiquity as an energy source, and because it is relatively inexpensive on a per unit exergy basis. The LCOEx of various heat sources are then compared to the LCOEx of electricity. Medium- and high-grade industrial heat (> 150 degrees C) produced by natural gas tends to have an LCOEx on par with electricity. This is due to the low cost of natural gas, as well as the high exergy content of heat at higher temperatures. Meanwhile, low-grade heat tends to be an expensive exergy source, owing to the low exergy content of the low-grade heat. We first apply our framework to desalination, where RO has come to dominate, due to the low LCOEx of the energy source (electricity) and relatively high exergetic efficiency of RO compared to thermal desalination systems. We then use this framework to highlight an opportunity for dehumidification systems to experience a similar cost improvement as desalination has. If an electrically-driven, high exergetic efficiency dehumidification system were developed (such as the membrane-based dehumidification systems proposed in literature), it would use a low cost exergy source with a high exergetic efficiency and could potentially lower the cost of dehumidification in the way that RO has done for desalination. Finally, we apply our framework to various fuels (natural gas, hydrogen, gasoline, etc.) and energy systems across different sectors (desalination, dehumidification, vehicles, etc.) to understand the variation in the cost of exergy input and exergetic efficiency of different systems and technologies.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Modeling Annual Electricity Production and Levelized Cost of Energy from the US East Coast Offshore Wind Energy Lease Areas

Offshore wind energy development along the East Coast of the US is proceeding quickly as a result of large areas with an excellent wind resource, low water depths and proximity to large electricity markets. Careful planning of wind turbine deployments in these offshore wind energy lease areas (LA) is required to maximize power output and to minimize wake losses between neighboring wind farms as well as those internal to each wind farm. Here, we used microscale wind modeling with two wake parameterizations to evaluate the potential annual energy production (AEP) and wake losses in the different LA areas, and we developed and applied a levelized cost of energy (LCoE) model to quantify the impact of different wind turbine layouts on LCoE. The modeling illustrated that if the current suite of LA is subject to deployment of 15 MW wind turbines at a spacing of 1.85 km, they will generate 4 to 4.6% of total national electricity demand. The LCoE ranged from $68 to $102/MWh depending on the precise layout selected, which is cost competitive with many other generation sources. The scale of the wind farms that will be deployed greatly exceed those currently operating and mean that wake-induced power losses are considerable but still relatively poorly constrained. AEP and LCoE exhibited significant dependence on the precise wake model applied. For the largest LA, the AEP differed by over 10% depending on the wake model used, leading to a $10/MWh difference in LCoE for the wind turbine layout with 1.85 km spacing.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Review: Indirect Optimal Control of Wave Energy Converters

Wave energy conversion has been the subject of interest in the past several years. While there are several concepts for converting wave power into electric power, the cost of the electric power harvested from ocean waves remains high. One of the main challenges, though it receives less attention, is the control of the wave energy converter (WEC). This paper presents a treatment for the WEC control problem within the context of optimal control theory. The result is systematic development for an explicit expression for a control that maximizes the harvested energy while meeting operational constraints such as the maximum device stroke and the maximum control force. The control presented here can also be adjusted to meet device design constraints such as a limitation on the amount of reactive power available from the power take-off (PTO) unit; this feature enables a control co-design for the PTO unit. Numerical simulations are presented in this paper for demonstration.

control design↗
DOE OSTI2020

Energy Paths for the Yurok People

This Yurok Tribe energy strategic planning study examined electricity usage, costs and infrastructure, as well as electricity needs on the Reservation. It also assessed the Tribe’s energy resources. Equipped with this information, the project team conducted an energy options analysis that examined different project opportunities and identified key projects that are both feasible to implement and will help the Tribe reach its stated Energy Vision. A key finding of the energy needs assessment is that there are still numerous households that are without grid electric power, and it is likely that most of them will remain disconnected from the grid because of their remoteness. To provide these community members with reliable, affordable, modern energy services their homes will need to be electrified via a robust off-grid energy services program that installs and maintains off-grid energy systems. This is the key need that is explored and addressed in this plan. The approach taken is to establish a new business entity, a Tribal Energy Authority or Utility, that will operate a Tribal Energy Program. The Energy Strategic Plan identifies a number of potential funding sources that could be used to support both the On-grid and Off-grid Energy Programs. This plan also promotes continued efforts to reduce electricity consumption through the implementation of energy efficiency measures in existing facilities and the enforcement of a strong energy-efficient building code for all new construction on the Reservation. Finally, the plan promotes added resilience at critical Tribal facilities on the Reservation by recommending that battery energy storage systems and microgrid controls be coupled with rooftop solar PV systems to create cutting edge microgrid facilities that can provide critical power services to Tribal facilities when the main electric grid is shutdown.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

High Temperature Ceramic Heat Exchangers for the Gen3 Concentrated Solar Power Systems

As part of the Department of Energy’s Solar Energy Technology Office (SETO), the Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) Gen3 Demonstration Roadmap outlined the various technology pathways, goals, and technology needs/gaps to integrate CSP to a supercritical CO 2 (sCO 2 ) power cycle that operates at temperatures >700 °C. It is envisioned that the higher temperature power cycle will enhance the overall system efficiencies and reduce the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) to meet a 2030 cost target of $0.05/kWhe for baseload CSP plants with ≥12 hours of storage. In this regard, there is a need for heat exchangers (HXs) that can operate at high sCO 2 pressures and temperatures >700 °C. Since current high-temperature alloys degrade at high temperatures, as part of this project, advanced ceramic materials, HX designs, and low-cost additive manufacturing approaches were developed to fabricate and evaluate the performance of the lab-scale ceramic HX prototypes.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Globally Gridded Groundwater Extraction Volumes and Costs under Six Depletion and Ponded Depth Targets

This repository contains simulated outputs from superwell – a hydro-economic tool for long-term assessment of groundwater cost and supply – providing globally gridded groundwater extractable volumes and associated unit costs ($/km³) for accessible groundwater production, based on a variety of user-defined depletion and ponded depth scenarios. Key model documentation: Niazi, H., Ferencz, S. B., Graham, N. T., Yoon, J., Wild, T. B., Hejazi, M., Watson, D. J., & Vernon, C. R. (2025). Long-term hydro-economic analysis tool for evaluating global groundwater cost and supply: Superwell v1.1. Geoscientific Model Development, 18(5), 1737-1767. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1737-2025 Find the source code of the superwell model on GitHub: https://github.com/JGCRI/superwell Repository Overview Main output: superwell_outputs.7z contains 6 files (4.5 GB) named as superwell_py_deep_all_0.*PD_0.*DL.csv. These files present superwell outputs of global groundwater extraction volumes and cost estimates on a 0.5° scale for six scenarios with different Ponded Depth (PD; 0.3 and 0.6 m) and Depletion Limit (DL; 5%, 25%, and 40% of available volume) targets over the entire pumping lifetime of a grid cell superwell_py_deep_all_0.3PD_0.25DL_sample_100.csv contains superwell outputs for 100 data points sampled to match the global inputs' distribution superwell_py_deep_all_0.3PD_0.25DL_Grid_72548.csv contains superwell output for a single grid cell concept_v5.png provides an overview of the superwell workflow Outputs Description year_number: year of pumping depletion_limit: set depletion limit (DL) as a volume fraction of total available groundwater Mappings: continent, country, gcam_basin_id, Basin_long_name, grid_id: geographic identifiers and basin information Inputs: grid_area (km²): area of the grid cell whyclass: hydrogeological classification of the aquifer permeability (m/day), porosity (%), total_thickness (m), depth_to_water (m): aquifer properties. The geo-processed input data has been published separately: https://doi.org/10.57931/2307831 Model outputs: orig_aqfr_sat_thickness (m), aqfr_sat_thickness (m): original and remaining/instantaneous saturated thickness of the aquifer hydraulic_conductivity (m/day), transmissivity (m²/day): hydraulic properties of the aquifer radius_of_influence (m), areal_extent (km²): well radius and area of influence from the center of the well number_of_wells (-): number of wells in a grid cell determined by a ratio of well area and grid area max_drawdown (m), drawdown (m), drawdown_interference (m): well and aquifer drawdown during extraction total_head (m): total lift for the groundwater (depth to water plus drawdown) total_well_length (m): total depth of wells drilled well_yield (m³/day): pumping rate or well yield power (kW), energy (kWh): power and energy required for pumping groundwater Volume Outputs: volume_produced_perwell (m³), cumulative_vol_produced_perwell (m³): production volume metrics per well volume_produced_allwells (m³), cumulative_vol_produced_allwells (m³): aggregate extraction volumes for all wells in a grid cell available_volume (m³): available groundwater in storage for the grid cell as determined by aquifer properties depleted_vol_fraction: fraction of total volume pumped over available volumes in a grid cell (same as depletion limit) Cost Outputs: well_installation_cost ($): well installation cost based on the hydrogeological complexity of the aquifer annual_capital_cost, maintenance_cost, nonenergy_cost ($): nonenergy costs energy_cost_rate ($/kWh): electricity rate energy_cost ($): energy cost of pumping groundwater total_cost_perwell ($), total_cost_allwells ($): total annual energy and non-energy cost for each and all wells in a grid cell a unit_cost ($/m³), unit_cost_per_km3 ($/km³), unit_cost_per_acreft ($/acre-ft): total cost of pumping a unit of groundwater, indicated for different spatial units Key Resources Model documentation: Niazi, H., Ferencz, S., Graham, N., Yoon, J., Wild, T., Hejazi, M., Watson, D., & Vernon, C. (2024; In-prep). Long-term Hydro-economic Assessment Tool for Evaluating Global Groundwater Cost and Supply: Superwell v1. Geoscientific Model Development. Input data: Niazi, H., Watson, D., Hejazi, M., Yonkofski, C., Ferencz, S., Vernon, C., Graham, N., Wild, T., & Yoon, J. (2024). Global Geo-processed Data of Aquifer Properties by 0.5° Grid, Country and Water Basins. MSD-LIVE Data repository. https://doi.org/10.57931/2307831 superwell source code: https://github.com/JGCRI/superwell Cite as Niazi, H., Ferencz, S., Yoon, J., Graham, N., Wild, T., Hejazi, M., Watson, D., & Vernon, C. (2024). Globally Gridded Groundwater Extraction Volumes and Costs under Six Depletion and Ponded Depth Targets. MSD-LIVE Data repository. https://doi.org/10.57931/2307832 Contact Reach out to Hassan Niazi or Stephen Ferencz or open an issue in the superwell repository for questions or suggestions.

Earth Systems↗
DOE OSTI2022

Comparative techno-economic assessment of osmotically-assisted reverse osmosis and batch-operated vacuum-air-gap membrane distillation for high-salinity water desalination

New developments in pressure- and thermally driven membrane desalination technologies offer the potential to cost-effectively treat high-salinity waters, especially when powered by low-cost solar electricity and thermal energy. This paper presents a comparative techno-economic assessment of the state-of-the-art most promising pressure- and thermally driven membrane technologies for high recovery desalination, namely, osmotically-assisted reverse osmosis (OARO) and batch-operated vacuum-air-gap membrane distillation (batch V-AGMD), to produce potable water while concentrating brine within the range of 140–290 g/L TDS for minimum-liquid-discharge (MLD) and zero-liquid-discharge (ZLD) applications. It is shown that both OARO and batch V-AGMD can treat feedwater and brines with TDS in the range of 30–125 g/L with corresponding fresh water recovery rates of 85–25%. When low cost solar electricity and thermal energy are used, the resulting levelized cost of water (LCOW) from OARO is in the range of 0.70–6.28 $/m 3 , and that from batch-V-AGMD is in the range of 1.74–2.77 $/m 3 . OARO is more cost-effective than batch V-AGMD when feedwater salinity is below 70 g/L and recovery below 75%, whereas batch V-AGMD is more cost-effective at higher recovery rates and salinity levels. Finally, the sensitivity of this comparison on energy prices and module costs is discussed.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Austin Sustainable and Holistic Integration of Energy Storage and Solar PV [Austin SHINES]. Final Report, Version 2

The Austin SHINES project and solution is a software management platform, for an electric grid with a high penetration of dispersed photovoltaic (PV) solar generation sites, which maintains the traditional power quality and reliability associated with grid service. This project developed and deployed the platform as a Distributed Energy Resource Management System (DERMS), engaging multiple advanced controls, to evaluate operation and optimization of a fleet of diverse DER assets, installed at several locations among Austin Energy’s customers and distribution system. The project also produced a methodology to create a replicable DERMS template, adaptable to other regions and market structures. Last, Austin SHINES aimed to demonstrate the solution’s methodology would enable the DER grid ecosystem to serve load at a technical cost (System Levelized Cost of Electricity, or System LCOE) of less than the U.S. Department of Energy SHINES program metric of $0.14/kWh, in a defined boundary, while enabling a high penetration of distributed PV. Research was categorized in 6 reports (Final Deliverables = FD) listed below, with titles and descriptions indicating which area of understanding was investigated: FD-1: System Levelized Cost of Electricity (System LCOE) Methodology The creation and use of the System LCOE to Serve Load metric that encompasses the holistic, system-level costs and benefits of all resources, and enables them to be evaluated based on their ability to support an efficient and low-cost integrated grid ecosystem. FD-2: Software Platform Product Description The creation of new DER control methodologies deployable within a utility-grade software platform that enable DER's to maximize their benefit within a grid, that is capable of serving load enabling a high penetration of distributed PV generation. FD-3: Optimal Design Methodology Optimal design methodologies for individual DER installations that enable utilities to determine the optimal combinations and sizing for individual DER sites. FD-4: Austin SHINES Ownership and Operation Models for DER System Performance A comparison of multiple DER aggregation and ownership methodologies including direct utility control, third-party aggregator, and autonomous. FD-5: Economic Modeling & Optimization A comparison of multiple DER technology mixes and configurations within the distribution system, providing insight into an optimal blend of technologies that best enable the distribution system to serve load at the lowest cost at high penetrations of solar. FD-6: Fielded Assets Deployed DER assets within the Austin Energy SHINES circuits. Austin SHINES provided an opening for state-of-the-art technology products to be deployed, providing a rich opportunity for improving how each of the products perform as stand-alone products, and in concert with other complementary products. The Austin SHINES project comprised of two key metrics for System LCOE: SystemLCOE_SHINES<$0.14/kWh Modeled ΔSystemLCOE_SHINES/ΔSystemLCOE_Base≥20% at same solar penetration The System LCOE calculation uses the costs of the utility-owned infrastructure as it exists today, the cost of the DERs that exist in the system today, and the cost of the purchase of energy from ERCOT wholesale markets over the course of the calendar year. All costs are on an annualized basis. The capital and operating costs are derived from the rate case, which produces a yearly cost. The net cost of energy and services imported to the system is integrated over the test year, as is the load served and solar penetration. The first metric was easily achieved by every scenario considered. The goal was set when the Department of Energy’s SHINES Funding Opportunity Announcement was written in 2015 and was a more difficult target at the time. Due mostly to rapidly declining costs for DERs and the significant decrease in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) energy market prices, which results in lower net cost of energy purchases, the System LCOE is well below this target for all scenarios considered. A fleet of DERs can assume different mixtures, each of which serves the load at a different LCOE. The optimal mixture of DERs serves load at the smallest System LCOE. The second metric (hereinafter %delta metric) asks that the holistic DERMS controls reduce the incremental cost above the baseline of going to a high solar penetration future by at least 20% as compared to the case of a DER deployment with no sophisticated controls (autonomous). Many comparison sets were created throughout this project. Physical technology was installed for informing utility engineering and testing several types of operational control schemes, through the DERMS. The types of operational control which were compared for valuation of the System LCOE Metric were: Holistic control = using the full suite of the DERMS platform to decide and optimize how/why the systems operate depending on weather, market, and reliability signal input. Autonomous control = a local mode at the asset site, wherein a schedule operates the asset, with visibility into performance only No control = the baseline for comparing value against the other two types of control The types of ownership control included: Direct Utility control = the utility dispatches a signal to each asset Third-Party Aggregator = a third party aggregates a fleet of assets and the utility dispatches one signal for all Autonomous = a local mode is set for operation at the asset site, wherein a schedule operates the asset, with visibility into performance only The types of control methodologies deployable within a utility-grade software platform included: Utility Peak Load Reduction = Lower transmission cost obligation Day-Ahead Energy Arbitrage = Realize economic value through price differential Real-Time Price Dispatch = Realize economic value from real-time price spikes Voltage support = Reduce losses and increase solar generation Distribution Congestion Management = Increase local grid reliability Demand Charge Reduction = Lower customer bills and realize system benefit The fielded assets deployed for the project were: Utility Scale Kingsbery Energy Storage System: 1.5 MW / 3 MWh Li-Ion battery storage Mueller Energy Storage System: 1.75 MW / 3.2 MWh Li-Ion battery storage, 7 Energy Storage Units (250 kW each) La Loma Community Solar: 2.6 MW Commercial Scale Aggregated storage installations at 3 sites, with existing solar (300+ kW): One 18 kW / 36 kWh Li-Ion battery storage Two 72 kW / 144 kWh Li-Ion battery storage Residential Scale Aggregated storage installations: -Six stationary battery storage systems (10 kWh each) at homes with existing solar -One Electric Vehicle installed as Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) Utility-Controlled Solar via Smart Inverters at 12 homes Autonomously-Controlled Smart Inverters at 6 homes Over the course of the project, Austin SHINES undertook installing more than 3 MW of distributed battery energy storage, smart PV inverters, a DER control platform, and other enabling technologies utilizing customer and utility locations and aggregation models. All of these resources were to be integrated and optimized at the utility level. DER assets and control methodologies were designed to achieve a credible pathway to a System LCOE for energy delivered to load of $0.14//kWh or less by 2020, while maximizing distributed solar generation and maintaining acceptable standards of power quality. The project also established a template for other regions to follow, to maximize the adoption of distributed solar PV in support of an economic and efficient grid. In total, the Austin SHINES project added value to the DER subject area in each layer of integration. From utility, to commercial to residential scales, the sheer hierarchy of communication and coordination was a significant accomplishment in addition to learnings from what these communications revealed was unique to each. Economically, the most effective method demonstrated was the criticality of planning phases. Contingencies and multiple projection scenarios helped guide the project to deploy optimal design as close as feasible, in real world conditions. The project and reports will serve public benefit by outlining specific areas of DER strategy and installation where many stakeholders and needs can be addressed with improved efficiency. Overall, communities and utilities should use the results to guide the increasing options available for powering the grid with DER, renewables, and carbon considerate energy.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗