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.

61 records · Page 4

Solar thermal technology development: Estimated market size and energy cost savings. Volume 2: Assumptions, methodology and results

Estimated future energy cost savings associated with the development of cost-competitive solar thermal technologies (STT) are discussed. Analysis is restricted to STT in electric applications for 16 high-insolation/high-energy-price states. Three fuel price scenarios and three 1990 STT system costs are considered, reflecting uncertainty over future fuel prices and STT cost projections. Solar thermal technology research and development (R&D) is found to be unacceptably risky for private industry in the absence of federal support. Energy cost savings were projected to range from $0 to $10 billion (1990 values in 1981 dollars), depending on the system cost and fuel price scenario. Normal R&D investment risks are accentuated because the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cartel can artificially manipulate oil prices and undercut growth of alternative energy sources. Federal participation in STT R&D to help capture the potential benefits of developing cost-competitive STT was found to be in the national interest. Analysis is also provided regarding two federal incentives currently in use: The Federal Business Energy Tax Credit and direct R&D funding.

Gates, W. R.↗

Flexible FlueCO2

Carbon dioxide (CO2) emission reductions remain a significant challenge on the path to clean energy. There are increasing legislative, social, and environmental factors motivating CO2 emissions reduction from power plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS). CCS in natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plants is critical to achieve a net-zero carbon electricity grid. Enhanced 45Q tax credits provide new incentives, but currently available technologies are unable to profitably operate in grids with deep variable renewable penetration which require flexible NGCC operation. Luna Labs has developed the FlueCO2 membrane to enable a profitable NGCC-CCS process. The FlueCO2 membrane couples steam transport across the membrane to CO2 transport in the opposite direction, enabling high capture efficiencies and low energy costs even at low CO2 concentrations. The dual-phase membrane can operate in the range of typical flue gas temperatures and pressures and does not require temperature or pressure cycling. Luna Labs’ FlueCO2 technology enables flexible and profitable operation of NGCC plants with lower capital investment and impact on electricity prices. In this Phase 1 project, Luna Labs utilized experimental testing, modeling, process simulation, and standardized costing methodologies to evaluate the techno-economic value of a 650 MW greenfield NGCC plant with FlueCO2 (NGCC-FlueCO2). Key design requirements for operation were established and plant performance under load-leveling conditions was validated through computational fluid dynamics and process modeling. Luna Labs developed a dynamic modeling tool which modeled plant operational modes across a variety of tax structures and electricity pricing scenarios to project the overall Net Present Value (NPV) of the NGCC-FlueCO2. FlueCO2 minimizes the impact of CCS integration on plant operation by integrating directly into the NGCC heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). By tapping into the plant’s low-pressure (LP) steam, operators can divert LP steam to the greenfield NGCC and/or CCS process in response to dynamic markets. Since FlueCO2 will not significantly affect HRSG (or NGCC) operation, CCS only turns off during peak power demand (>$250/MWh). Under baseload conditions, FlueCO2 lowers the capital (37%), energy (36%) and carbon capture (<$40/tonne) costs and can increase the overall plant lifetime NPV by approximately ~$1B in comparison with NGCC solvent-based capture reference cases (NETL Case 31B). Luna Labs has shared its costing tools with several interested partners and customers, which follows a generalizable approach to costing analysis.

Kelly, Jesse↗

Energy Project Finance - Energizing Rural Communities Prize: Training #3 [Slides]

This presentation provides a look at the full lifecycle of the financial elements of a clean energy project. It reviews approaches for obtaining up-front capital, and then describes options for recovering the investment and generating profit or revenue from the project. The presentation was produced as a training for awardees of the Energizing Rural Communities prize.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Electricity Costs and Carbon Implications for CO 2 -to-Fuels in Selected Locations in 2030

With the growing interest in converting carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) to fuels and products to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions and extend carbon from biogenic and other sources, the development of carbon capture and utilization (CO2U) technologies and industry is crucial. The Markets, Resources, and Environmental and Energy Justice of CO 2 -to-Fuels Technologies (short title: MarkeRs & EEJ) project supports this goal by assessing the resource and market potential and infrastructure requirements for mid-term (-2030) and long-term (-2050) deployment of CO2U technologies. The overall project analyzes CO2U economic and resource requirements as well as sustainability and environmental and energy justice (EEJ) metrics. This report focuses on short-term (-2030) aspects of the project. It identifies three CO2U locations in the Midwestern United States and quantifies the costs for potential electricity resources and marginal emissions for each site in the near term (e.g., 2030). We focus on four electricity purchase options, including retail rate, physical power purchase agreement (PPA), financial PPA, and real-time pricing (RTP), for each of the three sites and consider potential policies such as production tax credits (PTCs). We also assess time-dependent hourly marginal electricity costs and the marginal emission rates using modeled scenarios from Cambium (Gagnon et al. 2021).The results of the analysis are expected to inform other projects within the U.S. Department of Energy's CO 2 -to-Fuels Consortium, especially the Economics and Sustainability of CO 2 Utilization Technologies with Techno-Economic Analysis and Life Cycle Analysis (TEA/LCA) project, led by Michael Wang of Argonne National Laboratory and Ling Tao of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The project results are also expected to inform the investment and technology communities and policymakers at the U.S. Department of Energy, state, and regional levels and guide investment by government and industry in research and development portfolios.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

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↗

Optimizing an Integrated Renewable-Electrolysis System

Hydrogen is a versatile energy carrier that is used in a wide variety of chemical and industrial processes. Producing hydrogen using electrolysis can enable integration of multiple sectors including electricity, heating, and industrial sectors; however, the cost of producing hydrogen from electrolysis remains a challenge for encouraging greater adoption. With growing amounts of renewable generation on the California grid, there is downward pressure on wholesale electricity prices, particularly during the afternoon from photovoltaics (PV). These lower, or even potentially negative prices, challenge the business cases for new and existing PV plants. In addition, as the grid transitions to less flexible generation, there is greater need for system flexibility. To help improve the economics for both solar PV and hydrogen production using electrolyzers, we explore the benefit of combining PV and electrolysis systems. The optimal breakeven hydrogen production cost for six unique market participation configurations is calculated at six candidate locations where PV is already installed. The six market configurations include islanded, separated, retail, net energy metering (NEM), hybrid retail/wholesale and wholesale. Using the Revenue Operation and Device Optimization Model (RODeO) model, the optimal breakeven hydrogen price over the lifetime of the equipment is calculated. The cost includes production, storage, and compression in preparation for gaseous delivery trucks. Revenue streams include the sale of hydrogen, low carbon fuel standard (LCFS) credits, renewable electricity sold to the grid, and Renewable Energy Credits (REC). The costs included are the electricity costs, capital and fixed operation and maintenance cost (FOM) for the electrolyzer, PV, and storage and compression systems as well as taxes and financing costs. In addition, cost reductions are achieved through retail and wholesale rate optimization, by which electricity is purchased at the lowest price and sold, if possible, at the highest price. For all locations, the breakeven hydrogen production cost results show that, in the order of decreasing cost, the system configurations are islanded (highest), separated, NEM, retail, hybrid retail/wholesale, and wholesale (lowest). The resulting system design balances between the capital and maintenance cost components, the operation costs (i.e., electricity costs) and the additional market revenues. The integration of solar PV and electrolysis is shown to provide a mutually beneficial relationship. For PV, integration with electrolysis offers the potential to hedge against wholesale market price volatility, and integration with electrolysis may offer the potential to defer or avoid transmission investment to deliver power to the point-of-use and instead use it on-site. When compared with SMR without considering any renewable hydrogen premiums, this study finds that PV + Electrolysis systems with current costs are likely not competitive; however, with cost reductions for electrolysis equipment consistent with DOE projections, it was found that systems with wholesale market access would be competitive, largely on account of both low capital costs and low-cost electricity. The electrolysis units can provide greater flexibility than is required based on retail rate optimization, so there is an opportunity for a utility or CAISO to increase system flexibility with PV + Electrolysis systems in return for commensurate compensation. In this way, there are potentially several solutions that fall between the hybrid configuration and the wholesale configuration that could provide sufficient compensation for a PV + Electrolysis unit to compete with SMR while also providing greater flexibility to the grid.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Emissions and Energy Impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act

If goals set under the Paris Agreement are met, the world may hold warming well below 2 degrees C (1); however, parties are not on track to deliver these commitments (2), increasing focus on policy implementation to close the gap between ambition and action. Recently, the US government passed its most prominent piece of climate legislation to date - the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) - designed to invest in a wide range of programs that, among other provisions, incentivize clean energy and carbon management, encourage electrification and efficiency measures, reduce methane emissions, promote domestic supply chains, and address environmental justice concerns (3). IRA's scope and complexity make modeling important to understand impacts on emissions and energy systems. We leverage results from nine independent, state-of-the-art models to examine potential implications of key IRA provisions, showing economy-wide emissions reductions between 43 and 48% below 2005 levels by 2035.

electricity↗