Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Investment Tax Credit”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluating advanced nuclear fission technologies for future decarbonized power grids

Advanced nuclear fission, which encompasses various innovative nuclear reactor designs, could contribute to the decarbonization of the United States electricity sector. However, little is known about how cost-competitive these reactors would be compared to other technologies, or about which aspects of their designs offer the most value to a decarbonized power grid. We employ an electricity system optimization model and a case study of a decarbonized U.S. Eastern Interconnection circa 2050 to generate initial indicators of future economic value for advanced reactors and the sensitivity of future value to various design parameters, the availability of competing technologies, and the underlying policy environment. These results can inform long-term cost targets and guide near-term innovation priorities, investments, and reactor design decisions. We find that advanced reactors should cost $\$5.7$–$\$7.3$/W to gain an initial market share (assuming 30 year asset life and 3.5 %–6.5 % real weighted average cost of capital), while those that include thermal storage in their designs can cost up to $\$6.0$/W–$\$7.7$/W (not including cost of storage). Since the marginal value of advanced fission reactors declines as market penetration increases, break-even costs fall ~32 % at 100 GW of cumulative capacity and ~51 % at 300 GW. Additionally, policies that provide investment tax credits for nuclear energy create the most favorable environment for advanced nuclear fission. In conclusion, these findings can inform near-term resource allocation decisions by stakeholders, innovators and investors working in the energy technology sector.

Capacity expansion↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development of high concentration photovoltaics (HCPV) power plants in the US Southwest: Economic assessment and sensitivity analysis

High concentration photovoltaic (HCPV) technologies offer several advantages over typical PV systems. In this study, a detailed economic assessment and sensitivity analysis of deploying HCPV plants in the US southwest is performed. To do this, a 20 MWdc HCPV power plant is designed using the System Advisor Model (SAM) and is evaluated from both technical and financial aspects. The sensitivity analysis shows that reducing the installed cost per capacity of the HCPV system can significantly improve the economics and reduce the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and levelized power purchase agreement (LPPA). Also, providing proper incentives including both investment tax credits (ITC) and production tax credit (PTC), loan debt ratio, and interest rate are among the most influential parameters. The analysis shows that with the 30% ITC, the LCOE, and LPPA of the designed HCPV projects are between $65.4/MWh and $69.3/MWh and between $71.0/MWh and $75.2/MWh, respectively. The estimated LCOE and LPPA values are almost 50% higher than the utility-scale PV projects. If proper funding is provided to continue the support of the HCPV system, they would become more economical and competitive with PV plants. Federal and state government policies must also be established to advocate HCPV systems.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Techno-economic analysis and environmental benefits of solar industrial process heating based on parabolic trough collectors

In this work, detailed techno-economic and environmental analyses are conducted for employing a 5 MWt parabolic trough-based solar industrial process heat (SIPH) plant in Salt Lake City, Utah. According to the results, an optimum solar multiple of 1.5 was determined, allowing the plant to generate annual thermal energy of 15389.24 MWth with a capacity factor of 35.1% and levelized cost of heat (LCOH) of $\$ 26.3$/MWth. Considering a 30% investment tax credit and a 30% reduction in the total installed cost could reduce the LCOH to $\$ 19.30$/MWth and $\$ 18.52$/MWth, respectively. Employing parabolic trough collectors could avoid emissions of 3,582,422.47 kg, 147.99 kg, 3,341.66 kg, and 14.32 kg for CO 2 , PM, NOx, and SO 2 , respectively per year compared to a natural gas-based plant. Further, it also caused an annual external cost savings of between $\$ 99,900$ and $\$ 357,004$. Including the external costs in the LCOH analysis shows that the SIPH plant is economically competitive with a natural gas-based plant, further demonstrating its value. A further comparison demonstrated the economic superiority of a parabolic trough-driven IPH plant over a photovoltaic-driven electric boiler plant. In summary, with reducing installed costs and providing incentives, parabolic trough-driven IPH plants will be an economically and environmentally viable option.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Benchmarking Utility-Scale PV Operational Expenses and Project Lifetimes: Results from a Survey of U.S. Solar Industry Professionals

This paper draws on a survey of solar industry professionals and other sources to clarify trends in the expected useful life and operational expenditure (OpEx) of utility-scale photovoltaic (PV) plants in the United States. Solar project developers, sponsors, long-term owners, and consultants have increased project-life assumptions over time, from an average of ~21.5 years in 2007 to ~32.5 years in 2019. Current assumptions range from 25 years to more than 35 years depending on the organization; 17 out of 19 organizations surveyed or reviewed use 30 years or more. Levelized, lifetime OpEx estimates have declined from an average of ~$\$$35/kW DC -yr for projects built in 2007 to an average of ~$\$$17/kW DC -yr in 2019. Across 13 sources, the range in average lifetime OpEx for projects built in 2019 is broad, from $\$$13 to $\$$25/kW DC -yr. Operations and maintenance (O&M) costs—one component of OpEx—have declined precipitously in recent years, to $\$$5-8/kW DC -yr in many cases. Property taxes and land lease costs are highly variable across sites, but on average are—together—of similar magnitude. Other OpEx line items include security, insurance, and asset management. Given 2007-2009 values for not only project life and OpEx but also other drivers of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE, excluding the investment tax credit), the LCOE for utility-scale PV projects built from 2007 through 2009 averaged $\$$305 /MWh. Using 2019 values for all parameters yields an average LCOE of $\$$51 /MWh. The decline in LCOE from $\$$305 /MWh to $\$$51 /MWh was predominantly caused by reductions in up-front expenditures (and, to a much lesser extent, by changes in capacity factors, financing costs, and tax rates), but 9% ($\$$22 /MWh) of the overall decline is due to improvements in project life and OpEx. Project life extensions and OpEx reductions have had similarly sized impacts on LCOE over this period, at $\$$11 /MWh each. Had project life and OpEx not improved over the last decade, LCOE in 2019 would have instead been $\$$73 /MWh—43% higher. Given the limited quantity and comparability of previously available data on these cost drivers, the data and trends presented here may inform assumptions used by electric system planners, modelers, and analysts. The results may also provide useful benchmarks to the solar industry, helping developers and assets owners compare their expectations for project life and OpEx with those of their peers.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Utility-Scale Solar Data Update (2020 Edition) [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s 2020 update of utility-scale solar data and trends provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. market, with a focus on 2019. Highlights of this year’s update include: More than 4.5 GWAC of utility-scale solar (i.e., ground-mounted solar projects larger than 5 MWAC) achieved commercial operations in 2019, bringing cumulative capacity to 29 GWAC. Projects are spread across all 10 regions that we track, though more heavily concentrated in the sunniest regions. The median installed cost of projects that came online in 2019 fell to $\$$1.4/WAC ($\$$1.2/WDC), down 20% from 2018 and down by more than 70% from 2010. 77% of projects and 88% of capacity added in 2019 used single-axis tracking. Average capacity factors range from 17% in the least-sunny regions to 30% where it is sunniest. Single-axis tracking adds roughly five percentage points to capacity factor in the regions with the strongest solar resource. Nationwide average levelized power purchase agreement (PPA) prices fell to $\$$24/MWh in 2019, down 17% from 2018 and more than 80% since 2010. Thirty-nine projects (totaling 4.2 GWAC) in our PPA price sample include battery storage (totaling 2.3 GWAC and 9.5 GWh). In the “lower 48” states, a number of these recent PV+battery PPAs have been inked in the mid-$\$$20/MWh range (levelized in 2019 dollars).Not including the 30% investment tax credit (ITC), the median levelized cost of energy (LCOE) from utility-scale PV has declined by 85% since 2010, to $\$$40/MWh in 2019. When the 30% ITC is included within the LCOE calculation, the median LCOE closely tracks the median PPA price over time. In higher-penetration markets like CAISO, the value of solar has been declining, but falling PPA prices have largely kept pace, preserving solar's net value. At the end of 2019, there were nearly 370 GW of solar in interconnection queues from all 7 ISOs and 30 additional utilities across the country. Nearly a third of this proposed solar capacity is paired with battery storage.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Representing DC-Coupled PV+Battery Hybrids in a Capacity Expansion Model

Recent technology cost and performance improvements and the federal investment tax credit (ITC) have driven growing interest in coupling solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery systems. Combining these technologies into co-located or hybridized PV+battery systems has the potential to lower costs and increase energy output relative to multiple independent systems. In this work, we provide an overview of PV+battery systems and demonstrate methods for incorporating them into NREL’s Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) capacity expansion model. Although the methods are applied to a specific model, we anticipate that the approaches used here can be useful for informing PV+battery method development for other capacity expansion models. The implemented method relies heavily on the native representations of PV and battery technologies; therefore, the focus of this work is on capturing and parameterizing the interactions between them for a configuration in which the PV and battery technologies share a single bi-directional inverter. This work also demonstrates the impacts of including PV+battery systems in the ReEDS optimization for the conterminous United States through 2050. In particular, we perform parametric sensitivities for input assumptions that are uncertain and expected to influence PV+battery deployment levels, including (a) the cost of PV+battery systems relative to independent PV and battery systems, (b) the battery component’s qualification for the ITC, and (c) future cost trajectories for PV and battery systems. We find that PV+battery deployment could occur throughout the conterminous United States if there are cost savings associated with DC coupling PV and battery technologies. If even modest (5%) cost savings can be achieved (through a shared inverter and balance-of-system costs), then approximately one-third of utility-scale PV deployment through 2050 adopts the DC-coupled hybrid configuration, resulting in total PV+battery deployment that exceeds the magnitude of PV+battery projects in U.S. interconnection queues in 2020. If greater cost savings can be achieved through DC coupling (e.g., due to a growing amount of shared balance-of-system costs, reduced financial risk, or modularity) or more rapid cost and performance improvements are realized for PV and battery technologies, then total PV+battery deployment and the share of PV and battery deployment that adopts the hybrid configuration grows (to >50%). In all cases, growing PV+battery deployment primarily displaces independent PV and battery technologies, indicating the strong competition between the hybrid and independent configurations comprising technologies with similar performance characteristics.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition: Empirical Trends in Deployment, Technology, Cost, Performance, PPA Pricing, and Value in the United States [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s “Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition” provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. market, with a focus on 2020. Highlights of this year’s update include: A record of nearly 9.6 GWAC of new utility-scale PV capacity came online in 2020, bringing cumulative installed capacity to more than 38.7 GWAC across 43 states. 89% of all new utility-scale PV capacity added in 2020 uses single-axis tracking. Median installed project costs declined to $\$$1.4/WAC (or $\$$1.1/WDC) in 2020. Project-level capacity factors vary widely, from 9% to 36% (on an AC basis), with a sample median of 24%. The report explores drivers of this variation. Utility-scale PV’s LCOE fell to $\$$34/MWh in 2020 ($\$$28/MWh if factoring in the federal investment tax credit, or ITC). PPA prices have largely followed the decline in solar’s LCOE over time, but have stagnated more recently. Prices from a sample of recent contracts average just above $\$$20/MWh (levelized). In 2020, solar’s average market value (defined in the report to include only energy and capacity value) exceeded average wholesale prices in 12 of the 17 balancing authorities analyzed (including 4 of the 7 independent system operators across the United States). Adding battery storage is one way to increase the value of solar. Our public data file tracks metadata for more than 150 PV+battery hybrid projects that are already online or that have secured offtake arrangements. At the end of 2020, there were at least 460 GW of utility-scale solar power capacity within the interconnection queues across the nation, 160 GW of which include batteries. For more information, and to explore related interactive data visualizations, go to utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utility-Scale Solar, 2022 Edition: Empirical Trends in Deployment, Technology, Cost, Performance, PPA Pricing, and Value in the United States [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s “Utility-Scale Solar, 2022 Edition” provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. market, with a focus on 2021. Highlights of this year’s update include: -A record of nearly 12.5 GWAC of new utility-scale PV capacity came online in 2021, bringing cumulative installed capacity to more than 51.3 GWAC across 44 states. -90% of all new utility-scale PV capacity added in 2021 uses single-axis tracking. -Median installed project costs declined to $\$1.35$/WAC (or $\$1.02$/WDC) in 2021. -Project-level capacity factors vary widely, from 9% to 35% (on an AC basis), with a sample median of 24%. The report explores drivers of this variation. -Utility-scale PV’s LCOE fell to $\$33$/MWh in 2021 ($\$27$/MWh if factoring in the federal investment tax credit, or ITC). -PPA prices have largely followed the decline in solar’s LCOE over time, but have recently stagnated and even moved slightly higher. Prices from a sample of recent contracts average around $\$20$/MWh (levelized) in the West and $\$30-40$/MWh elsewhere in the continental US. In 2021, solar’s average market value (defined in the report to include only energy and capacity value) rose by 55% to $\$47$/MWh and exceeded average wholesale prices in 13 of the 17 balancing authorities analyzed. -Adding battery storage is one way to increase the value of solar. Our public data file tracks metadata and PPA prices from 67 PV+battery hybrid projects that are already online or that have secured offtake arrangements. -At the end of 2021, there were at least 674 GW of utility-scale solar power capacity within the interconnection queues across the nation, 284 GW of which include batteries. For more information, and to explore related interactive data visualizations, go to utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Utility-Scale Solar, 2023 Edition: Empirical Trends in Deployment, Technology, Cost, Performance, PPA Pricing, and Value in the United States [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s “Utility-Scale Solar, 2023 Edition” presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC (PV plants of 5 MWAC or less, including residential rooftop systems, are covered separately in Berkeley Lab’s companion annual report, Tracking the Sun). Highlights of this year’s update include: -10.4 GWAC of new utility-scale PV capacity came online in 2022, bringing cumulative installed capacity to more than 61.7 GWAC across 46 states. -94% of all new utility-scale PV capacity added in 2022 uses single-axis tracking. -Median installed project costs declined to $\$1.32$/WAC (or $\$1.07$/WDC) in 2022. -Plant-level capacity factors vary widely, from 9% to 35% (on an AC basis), with a sample median of 24%. The report explores drivers of this variation. -Utility-scale PV’s LCOE fell to $\$39$/MWh in 2022 ($\$29$/MWh if factoring in the federal investment tax credit, or ITC). -PPA prices have largely followed the decline in solar’s LCOE over time, but have recently stagnated and even moved slightly higher. Prices from a sample of recent contracts average around $\$20-30$/MWh (levelized) in the West and $\$30-40$/MWh elsewhere in the continental US. -In 2022, solar’s average market value (defined in the report to include only energy and capacity value) rose by 40% to $\$71$/MWh and exceeded average wholesale prices in 4 of the 7 ISOs/RTOs and 11 of 18 other balancing authorities analyzed. -Adding battery storage is one way to increase the value of solar. Our public data file tracks metadata and PPA prices from ~100 PV+battery hybrid projects that are already online or that have secured offtake arrangements. -the end of 2022, there were at least 947 GW of utility-scale solar power capacity within the interconnection queues across the nation, 456 GW of which include batteries. For more information, and to explore related interactive data visualizations, go to utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Opportunities for Pumped Storage Hydropower under the Inflation Reduction Act [Slides]

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) creates significant incentives for clean energy technologies including pumped storage hydropower (PSH). The investment tax credit (ITC) is expected to sunset in 2033 (or later). This decade-long window of opportunity can accommodate the lead times typically necessary for developing PSH. The ITC for PSH likely ranges from 6%-50%. Portions of the ITC are spatially dependent. 22 states have the potential for deployment of PSH at a feasible site with the maximum ITC of 50%, based on currently defined areas under the energy community tax credit bonus. Regions including the central Rockies, Appalachia and the California-Nevada border have especially high combined potential for site feasibility and ITC.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Floating Photovoltaics in Hydropower Reservoirs in the United States

This report presents a comprehensive analysis of the feasibility of floating photovoltaics (FPV) in federally regulated reservoirs within the continental United States (CONUS) and to present a methodology for capturing the true costs of deployment, potential environmental impacts, and regulatory pathways for open-loop hydropower reservoirs. It is intended for stakeholders who may not be solar industry experts but who are interested in exploring the potential for FPV in their reservoirs. While there are promising opportunities, particularly in enhancing dissolved oxygen (DO) levels and potentially improving compliance with existing hydropower licenses, the current capital costs of FPV are not yet competitive with traditional land-based solar installations at the utility-scale when comparing the LCOE results. A competitive financial outlook is achievable when applying a 30% Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and considering a 5% reduction from the baseline capital expenditures (CapEx) at the Tuckertown Reservoir in North Carolina case study. The study is structured around three key pillars of research: technical potential, environmental impacts and regulatory considerations, and technoeconomic analysis. This report provides a nationwide assessment of the opportunities for FPV in terms of capacity, measured in direct current megawatts (MWDC), in reservoirs managed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Additionally, the report introduces a heuristic model for estimating the CapEx of utility-scale FPV projects (1–100 MW), offering a baseline cost estimate for stakeholders. Finally, the report applies these models to a case study of a hydropower reservoir in North Carolina to present site-specific results.

13 - HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Screening Tool for Equitable Adoption and Deployment of Solar (STEADy Solar)

The Screening Tool for Equitable Adoption and DeploYment of Solar (STEADy Solar) is a database and mapping tool designed to promoting clean energy investments for low-income communities across the United States. The tool indicates locations that may be eligible for the Investment Tax Credit bonus adders defined in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and combines this information with demographics, social vulnerability, solar technical potential, solar economics (modeled net present value), and building counts by use-type. It can be used by states, municipalities, community-based organizations, developers, and researchers to identify sites where solar projects may be economical and where federal incentives may be available to support equitable adoption of solar. Specific values include: Areas eligible for the Energy Communities Tax Credit Bonus Program (including brownfield site counts) Areas eligible for the Low Income Communities Bonus Credit Program (including Tribal Lands, and covered affordable housing project counts) Areas categorized as disadvantaged by Justice40 Commercial and Residential Solar economics characterized by the Net Present Value and Simple Payback Period Total Population, Race, and Ethnicity Median Household Income, Poverty rate, Household Tenure Social Vulnerability Count of buildings, developable rooftop solar capacity (in kWdc) and estimated annual generation potential (in kWh) on four building types: Government General Services, Government Emergency Response, Grade Schools, and Colleges/Universities. The linked report describes the STEADy dataset metadata and presents high level insights from the data. The downloadable and formatted excel dataset makes it easy for users to gain insights for their locations. Supporting .csv and shapefiles provide users with the full data to run their own analyses on equitable solar siting.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Estimating the Value of Worker Training: A System Reliability & LCOE Perspective

This workshop presentation briefly describes the labor standards required for large photovoltaic (PV) systems (>1MWac) to receive the full investment tax credit from the Inflation Reduction Act. The potential for labor standards to affect aspects other than upfront installation costs (such as energy generation or maintenance expenses) is analyzed using levelized cost of energy (LCOE) calculations. This considers benefits which may come from better training for workers, more productive workers, or improved installation quality, using NREL's simplified PV-specific LCOE calculator at pvlcoe.nrel.gov.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY,SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nuclear Thermal Energy Storage Configurations for Industrial Combined Heat and Power Supply: Conceptual Study and Engineering Designs

The industries examined in this report primarily rely on moderate-temperature heat provided by gas- or coal-fired boilers and combined heat and power (CHP) plants, delivered through standard process steam systems. High-temperature energy demands are often industry-specific and typically exceed the capabilities of high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs). While it is technically feasible to replace process steam from fossil-based heat sources with nuclear energy, certain industries, such as methanol production and pulp and paper, face technoeconomic challenges in integrating nuclear energy without major changes or a technological shift. This is mainly due to the limited external energy demand remaining after the use of internal byproducts, waste heat recovery, and simple efficiency improvements. Achieving full decarbonization of these processes with nuclear energy would require significant technological advancements, involving experimental technology and substantial investments, making widespread adoption in existing industrial plants unlikely in the near term. This study reviews TES options in the context of enabling a flexible CHP supply while maintaining a steady nuclear heat input. Heat storage systems that interface between the reactor primary fluid and the CHP system offer superior performance and flexibility. Specifically, steam extraction downstream of the reheater with a two-tank molten-salt TES appears as the best solution regarding thermodynamic system benefits and system drawbacks. Using selected system configurations, a conceptual design of an industrial energy park was developed for industries with varying energy demands, such as steel production plants utilizing electric arc furnaces (EAFs) and chemical plants, as well as for those with constant energy demands, like petroleum refineries. This design highlights the capabilities of TES and explores its potential business cases. The study also conceptually develops the potential for integrating additional energy sources with nuclear systems through the implementation of TES. The potential of the HTGR-TES-CHP system was also evaluated considering key uncertainties such as industrial demand profiles, external grid access availability, and eligible tax credit levels, using the Holistic Energy Resource Optimization Network. Sensitivity of net present value to these uncertainties was analyzed to determine the optimal number of nuclear reactors (and CHP systems) and the suitable TES capacity. The results were interpreted from a decision-maker’s perspective, focusing on three key areas: deployment strategy (oversized units vs. undersized units with TES support), industrial process characteristics (thermal-intensive single profiles vs. electricity-intensive combined profiles), and operational goals (maximizing profits vs. minimizing natural gas (NG) consumption or external grid dependence). The optimization results indicate that the HTGR-TES-CHP system significantly reduces reliance on NG boilers for individual industrial processes by 9-60% (in NG capacity factor), with an average reduction of 38%, compared to standalone NG boiler operation case (Business As Usual [BAU]). For combined industrial processes, the reduction ranges from 37-77%, with an average of 60%. Additionally, the system greatly reduces dependence on external grids. In meeting industrial electrical demands, a 33-100% self-sufficient internal electricity supply is achieved for single industrial process, with an average of 74%, compared to the BAU scenario, where 100% of electricity is imported. For combined processes, 35-100% of internal electricity demands are met by the reactor, with an average of 73%. At last, the relative NG price levels at which the proposed HTGR-TES-CHP system can cost-effectively enter the market currently dominated by existing NG boilers were estimated. For a moderate HTGR CAPEX level ($\$$2500/kWth, $\$$6329/kWe), the analysis suggests that NG prices must be 2.5 to 7 times higher than HTGR variable operating and maintenance costs for single industrial process, and 5.5 to 9.5 times higher for a combined process scenario. Tax credit modeling shows that the Investment Tax Credit significantly reduces the price threshold needed to break even, making the system competitive with NG boilers in certain cases.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Assessing the Impact of the Inflation Reduction Act on Nuclear Plant Power Uprate and Hydrogen Cogeneration

On August 16, 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to promote investment in new, carbon-free power generation and sustainable operation of existing carbon-free assets. Specifically, the IRA includes both a production tax credit (PTC – Section 45Y of the IRA) and an investment tax credit (ITC – Section 48E) which utilities may leverage to offset the costs of power uprate. Further, the IRA includes a provision (Section 45V) for a PTC associated with carbon-free hydrogen cogeneration. These tax credits, along with recent legislation efforts to decarbonize the country, have re-emphasized the importance of maintaining and optimizing the existing nuclear plant operating fleet. As a result, utilities are reexamining the possibility of uprating their existing nuclear assets to further maximize carbon-free electricity generation.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2023

The Effect of Clean Energy Generation Targets on the Portfolio of Electric Grid Generation Technologies

A least-cost generation and transmission expansion planning model is used to optimize the U.S. generation portfolio in 2030 under a range of Clean Energy Generation Target (CEGT) policy goals. As reference cases for comparison, the model is used to optimize the generation portfolio for the future electric grid with and without the Investment and Production Tax Credits (ITC and PTC). Next, the model is used to optimize the generation portfolio with a CEGT ranging from 10% to 70%. The results show that due to the ITC and PTC extensions by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, there is little additional investment in renewable energy generation assets at low CEGT levels. Significant additional installations of both renewable energy generation and energy storage systems – both batteries and pumped storage hydro – become important at CEGT levels above approximately 30%.

Aldeman, Matthew↗
DOE OSTI2023

Uncovering hidden market opportunities for advanced nuclear reactors

Decarbonizing to meet aggressive climate change mitigation targets requires energy transition within all sectors. In the industrial sector, global emissions will need to decrease by 65–90% by 2050 to avert warming greater than 1.5°C (Pörtner et al., 2022). Recent U.S. laws, including the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), Defense Production Act, Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (or CHIPS), state programs, and other recent laws, have clean energy requirements and provide financial incentives to accelerate the use of clean energy technologies in the industrial sector. These new laws include supporting mechanisms with direct financial support for nuclear power (e.g., advanced reactor development and hydrogen production). However, advanced nuclear could also gain these financial benefits by coupling with low-carbon industrial projects. For example, microreactors could supply low-carbon energy to producers of critical metals that (1) are eligible to receive investment and production tax credits and favorable loans, and (2) the low-carbon product could gain preference in emerging markets for green products.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

AquaPV: Foundational Analysis and Industry Guidance on Floating PV Results

This dataset contains results of the technical potential analysis of floating photovoltaics (FPV) on federally owned or permitted reservoirs in the United States. Estimates of the area of reservoirs that is technically feasible for FPV development are provided for reservoirs that are owned by the US Army Corps of Engineers or the US Bureau of Reclamation, or are associated with hydropower dams licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Other associated data are included, such as estimates of the potential evaporative losses of FPV development, and whether the waterbody is associated with an energy community or disadvantaged community that could qualify it for investment or production tax credits. Data is provided both as a spreadsheet and in a geospatial format including the waterbody geometries. Please read the included readme for more detailed field definitions.

area↗