Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “cost projections”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-2 LWR Pelletized MOX Fuel Fabrication

Nature of this 2021 Module update from previous AFC-CBRs: Use of U,Pu MOX life cycle cost data from late 1970s Non-proliferation Assessment Systems Analysis Program (NASAP). This archived data has been updated in 2018-2019 to reflect today’s regulatory and economic conditions and is presented in 2017. For the lower unit cost MOX fabrication case the PuO 2 from the reprocessed LWR SNF is assumed to be fabricated immediately after aqueous PUREX reprocessing, thus minimizing the time for undesirable actinide radioisotopes, from the standpoint of radiation safety, to build in. Fabricated MOX utilizing separated and multi-year stored Pu from aqueously reprocessed SNF has also been added to this Module as a second LWR MOX fabrication variant, requiring additional and more costly glovebox design and operations to protect personnel. This new NASAP-informed data augments historical data and unit cost projections appearing in the 2009 (Shropshire et al 2009), 2012 (Dixon et al 2012), and 2017 Dixon et al 2017) AFC-CBRs. The “What-it-takes” 2017 unit fabrication cost values based on the updated NASAP studies are escalated to 2020$ for this 2021 Update Report.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Dataset for report: Non-Technical Barriers to Geothermal Development in California and Nevada

In California and Nevada, geothermal projects are subject to non-technical barriers, which may create development delays leading to higher project costs and risks and decreased competitiveness with other electricity generation technologies. These non-technical barriers may include federal and state permits, authorizations, environmental reviews, and other regulatory requirements that are applicable throughout different phases of geothermal project development. The 2022 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) report, "Non-Technical Barriers to Geothermal Development in California and Nevada" presents findings of a study on non-technical barriers that may influence geothermal project development. The set of data resources relied upon for the report includes: 1) interviews conducted with relevant geothermal stakeholders including regulators and project developers, 2) federal and state environmental review documents developed for specific projects, 3) a techno-economic analysis conducted using the NREL Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) framework, and 4) an analysis of the impacts of site-specific land access and permitting considerations on project development readiness conducted using the Geothermal Resource Portfolio Optimization and Reporting Technique (GeoRePORT) Socioeconomic Assessment Tool (SEAT).

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

River Basin Export Reduction Optimization Support Tool; a tool to screen options for reducing nutrient loads while minimizing cost

Abstract Excess loading of nitrogen and phosphorus to river networks causes environmental harm, but reducing loads from large river basins is difficult and expensive. We developed a new tool, the River Basin Export Reduction Optimization Support Tool (RBEROST) to identify the least‐cost combinations of management practices that will reduce nutrient loading to target levels in downstream and mid‐network waterbodies. We demonstrate the utility of the tool in a case study in the Upper Connecticut River Basin in New England, USA. The total project cost of optimized lowest‐cost plans ranged from $18.0 million to $41.0 million per year over 15 years depending on user specifications. Plans include both point source and non‐point source management practices, and most costs are associated with urban stormwater practices. Adding a 2% margin of safety to loading targets improved the estimated probability of success from 37.5% to 99%. The large spatial scale of RBEROST, and the consideration of both point and non‐point source contributions of nutrients, make it well suited as an initial screening tool in watershed planning.

Chamberlin, Catherine↗
DOE OSTI2025

Novel PV Array System Design to Accelerate Solar Deployment, Reduce LCOE, Reduce Land Use Competition, and Increase Siting Flexibility

The increasing demand for solar energy faces significant barriers, including inefficient construction processes, high project costs limiting LCOE reductions, and diminishing availability of "good" sites with favorable interconnection. Conventional solar installations are often constrained by long construction timelines and the need for flat, large plots. Furthermore, the industry struggles with a shortage of skilled labor. Planted Solar aims to address these challenges by fundamentally transforming solar deployment from a construction project into a streamlined manufacturing process. Our novel approach combines high-density racking, integrated terrain-following design software, and installation automation. Unlike competing solutions that either assist with standard array assembly or offer dense packing without terrain adaptability or automation, Planted's technology uniquely brings together a new array product with in-place automated manufacturing to achieve the lowest possible cost, greater site flexibility, and accelerated deployment.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Deployment Potential of Concentrating Solar Power Technologies in California

As states within the United States respond to future grid development goals, there is a growing demand for reliable and resilient nighttime generation that can be addressed by low-cost, long-duration energy storage solutions. This report studies the potential of including concentrating solar power (CSP) in the technology mix to support California’s goals as defined in Senate Bill 100. A joint agency report study that determined potential pathways to achieve the renewable portfolio standard set by the bill did not include CSP, and our work provides information that could be used as a follow-up. This study uses a capacity expansion model configured to have nodal spatial fidelity in California and balancing-area fidelity in the Western Interconnection outside of California. The authors discovered that by applying current technology cost projections CSP fulfills nearly 15% of the annual load while representing just 6% of total installed capacity in 2045, replacing approximately 30 GWe of wind, solar PV, and standalone batteries compared to a scenario without CSP included. The deployment of CSP in the results is sensitive to the technology’s cost, which highlights the importance of meeting cost targets in 2030 and beyond to enable the technology’s potential contribution to California’s carbon reduction goals.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

EVSE Soft Costs

This presentation is an overview of the VTO Annual Merit Review for EVSE soft costs project.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hot Springs and Geysers: Exploring Historical and Modern Impacts of Geothermal Energy Production on Associated Natural Surface Systems and Standardizing Management Practices

Surface thermal features, most notably hot springs and geysers are increasingly being recognized for their importance to ecosystems, indigenous cultures, and in some cases agriculture, recreation, and tourism. Geothermal project development poses a potential risk to these natural features but current regulatory requirements for assessing and managing these risks during exploration, permitting and monitoring are somewhat inconsistent and unpredictable across different geothermal fields. This has resulted in uncertainty and increases in exploration risk for geothermal energy developers that have led to costly project delays, cancellations, or hesitation to commit. Varying regulatory requirements may also influence public perception, fostering confusion, distrust and ultimately opposition to geothermal projects, further contributing to project delays or cancellations. At a time when there is an increasing urgency for reliable baseload clean energy, geothermal is a net-zero, renewable solution that additionally provides access to more equitable and environmentally just clean power. Continued integration of geothermal energy into the national energy roadmap can be facilitated through consistent and predictable permitting, providing regulators the framework they need, developers a clear path forward, and transparency that the public deserves. This project, currently in its beginning phases, seeks to address this important issue by providing a technical basis from which to build a preliminary protocol for assessing and managing potential impacts from new or existing geothermal energy projects to surface thermal features and their associated ecosystems. Development of this preliminary protocol will be informed by (1) a literature review of well-documented case studies in the western U.S. and New Zealand to understand the range of conditions that exemplify geothermal-surface thermal systems; (2) development of generic illustrative conceptual-numerical models to quantify, understand, and predict the first-order controls (e.g., pressure and permeability) on surface flows; and (3) additional independent and scientifically rigorous evaluations of geothermal-surface thermal system case studies from the Basin and Range Province that incorporate publicly available data as well as data provided by industry through data-sharing agreements. Learning from the successes of the process used to develop the Induced Seismicity Management Protocol (ISMP), we ultimately aim to use these initial efforts as a springboard for establishing a surface thermal feature management working group that will work collaboratively to finalize the protocol as well as co-create recommended best practices for implementation. We envision that the working group will primarily be composed of representatives from regulatory entities, government agencies, Tribes, academia, national laboratories, and industry, and will include early and regular engagement with community organizations and environmental groups. This will help ensure broad acceptance and implementation of the protocol, which will facilitate a more consistent, predictable, and standardized regulatory process, and help to ensure that geothermal energy continues to provide a reliable source of clean energy, and a pathway to achieving greater energy equity in the U.S.

Best Practices↗
DOE OSTI2020

Evaluation of smart charging for electric vehicle-to-building integration: A case study

Higher electric vehicle (EV) adoption will stress the importance of demand flexibility to achieve more economic, efficient, and reliable grid operation. Charging technologies will be paramount in shifting temporally to better fit the variable generation of wind and solar. As such, analysis is warranted on the benefits of EV charge scheduling with respect to installation cost, operation cost, difficulty of implementation, and grid flexibility. We tackle this by analyzing the cost savings of implementing an EV charge scheduling infrastructure to reduce demand charges and installation costs. In this paper, we analyze a case study for operation of 16 level 2 chargers and 1 fast charger for two different building types. We then evaluate various test phases for controlling building and charging loads using an adaptive charging network (ACN) algorithm to characterize the ACN’s potential to reduce overall project cost.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Capture, Transport, And Storage (CTS) Cost Modeling Of The Onshore Gulf Coast

The onshore Gulf of Mexico region presents significant opportunities for CO2 capture, transport, and storage due to its numerous CO2 sources, such as power plants, refineries, and its substantial CO2 storage potential. However, operators face critical decisions in designing an efficient and cost-effective CO2 pipeline network. This study examines the economic implications of two primary strategies: constructing a trunkline with excess initial capacity versus developing dedicated pipelines incrementally as new CO2 sources come online. Building a trunkline first offers the advantage of future-proofing the network, allowing for the accommodation of increased CO2 volumes from various sources over time. However, this approach incurs higher upfront costs and risks underutilizing the transport capacity in the initial stages, potentially resulting in economic inefficiencies. Conversely, constructing dedicated pipelines for each new CO2 source as it becomes operational may avoid the initial overcapacity issue but fails to capitalize on the economies of scale. This could lead to higher overall costs due to the duplication of infrastructure and increased complexity in network management. This research employs a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis, integrating factors such as capital expenditure, operational costs, projected CO2 volumes, and potential economies of scale. Through this analysis, we aim to provide operators with insights into the most economically viable strategy for CO2 pipeline network design in the region. The findings underscore the importance of strategic planning and highlight the trade-offs between immediate capacity utilization and long-term cost savings, ultimately guiding stakeholders towards informed decision-making in the development of CO2 transport infrastructure. Presented at the 41st USAEE/IAEE North American Conference, 3-6 November 2024, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.

Shih, Chung Yan↗
DOE OSTI2026

An Uncertainty-Informed and High-Fidelity Performance Forecasting Framework for Heliostat Fields

Concentrating Solar Thermal (CST) tower systems employ heliostat fields to direct solar energy to a central receiver, which then transfers the heat either directly to a thermal process (e.g., steam production) or to a thermal energy storage system for future use. Heliostat fields compose a significant proportion of the project costs of a CST tower system and the performance of the heliostats determines a plant's productivity at a given location. While CST characterization tools such as SolarPILOT and System Advisor Model (SAM) include a large collection of inputs that influence the performance of a CST tower system, many are uncertain prior to the development of the project and may have a significant impact on the overall energy delivery and profitability of a project; moreover, the fidelity of these models under default conditions may be insufficient to determine the value of component improvements such as those under development in the Heliostat Consortium. This work introduces a Monte Carlo simulation framework that incorporates uncertainty in key performance parameters to generate confidence intervals and percentile estimates for a CST solar field's energy delivery.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Simple Panel System to Overcome Interface Challenges for Retrofits: Preprint

Retrofitting buildings is usually an expensive and labor-intensive process. Weatherization measures can improve comfort and energy affordability to some extent, but deep energy retrofits are needed to optimize performance and comfort, and to achieve significant energy cost savings. Barriers to deep energy retrofits include a limited supply of skilled labor, different building types, planning complexity, split incentives, and a long or non-existent ROI horizon. The "Simple Panel System" (SPS) workflow developed and demonstrated in this effort streamlines deep energy retrofits by applying advanced site capture, machine learning, and mixed reality to panelized construction. The result is a one-stop, product-independent solution for rapidly scalable retrofits with the potential to reduce construction time and project costs by 50%. Soft costs are reduced by more than 66%, total costs by more than 50%, and field construction time by more than 50% - not to mention the reduction in construction waste, improvement in working conditions, and the ability to scale without an influx of skilled labor. This paper presents the SPS and the preliminary results and findings from the pilot project.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

EVI-LOCATE User Manual

One of the longest stages in the deployment of electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) is the initial planning of the infrastructure itself. Engineers and fleet experts from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) have supported dozens of charging infrastructure site plans over the past couple decades, including the generation of site schematics, determinations of electric capacity, and estimates for likely costs. As the market for electric vehicles (EVs) has matured, this approach should no longer require a time and personnel intensive process. In order to shorten the time taken to develop site plans and cost estimates, NREL developed a tool that fleet managers, facility managers, electricians, EVSE installers, and members of the public can use to develop initial schematics and ballpark pricing for charging station installations. The Electric Vehicle Infrastructure - Locally Optimized Charger Assessment Tool and Estimator (EVI-LOCATE) provides a structured and consistent way for users to enter information about their planned EVSE project in a relatively simple web-based format. EVI-LOCATE then calculates electrical equipment capacity, wiring runs, and project costs. It produces a site diagram optimized around surface characteristics with differential trenching costs for softscape such as grass compared to hardscape such as asphalt that can be adjusted by users in the tool. It also stores the resulting site plans and costs in a dashboard for access at a later date, including plan revisions if necessary. This document guides users through the EVI-LOCATE screens and associated questions. It contains tip text boxes throughout on how best to interface with the tool and find additional information or context. The appendices contain the assumptions and calculations underpinning the tool. Much of the information for EVI-LOCATE was gathered through industry engagements with EVSE installers, invoices from completed EVSE installations, Gordian's RS Means construction data, and the General Services Administration blanket purchase agreement for EVSE. For a visual tutorial of the tool, users can watch EVI-LOCATE Step-by-Step Video. The tool itself is available at https://evi-locate.nrel.gov.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

The prospective impacts of 2019 state energy policies on the U.S. electricity system

Over the past several years state energy policies have been evolving rapidly, and are more frequently including higher targets, including 100% clean energy targets. This study assesses the aggregate impacts of state clean energy standards and emissions policies on national electricity generation, power sector carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions, and electricity prices and system costs. To do so, we apply the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model, which is a detailed electric sector capacity expansion model, to evaluate scenarios with and without state policies and using a range of renewable energy technology cost projections. Across the scenarios analyzed, we find that the state policies drive 1.9%–10.7% of total nationwide clean energy and reduce cumulative power sector CO 2 emissions by 2.6%–5.4% over the 2020–2050 study period. This incremental generation is predominantly, but not exclusively, from renewable energy technologies. In most cases, the state policies result in increases to electricity prices and electricity system costs, and policy costs are sensitive to the future cost of clean energy technologies. Across all scenarios, the levelized cost of incremental policy-driven clean energy generation is estimated to be $17–38/MWh and the average cost of CO 2 abatement from the state-level policies is estimated to be $29–74/metric ton.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Discrete versus continuous: Enhancing battery optimization in capacity expansion models

This study compares two battery modeling approaches for capacity expansion models: discrete-duration and continuous-duration formulations. In the discrete approach, battery duration is fixed, and power capacity is optimized. In the continuous approach, both power and energy capacities are decision variables, allowing storage duration to be optimized endogenously. Although both discrete-duration and continuous-duration battery formulations are used in long-term power system planning models, the literature has provided limited direct, systematic comparisons of their implications within a common modeling framework. To address this gap, this study implements both approaches in the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS TM ) capacity expansion model using two resource adequacy methods, across a range of future system conditions, and with varying battery cost projections. Results show continuous-duration and high-resolution discrete approaches produce similar capacity expansion outcomes. The continuous formulation achieves faster runtimes compared to discrete-duration runs with many discrete-duration options. However, the discrete-duration approach allows users to choose to have limited fidelity for storage duration options, which in some cases can outperform the continuous formulation. The continuous formulation has the lowest overall system costs, indicating its ability to fine-tune storage duration to better meet specific system needs. This study's findings provide a side-by-side evaluation of discrete and continuous battery modeling approaches and offer guidance for improving the representation of real-world systems, flexibility, and computational efficiency for representing energy storage in long-term power system planning models.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
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 OSTI2025

Innovative approach to counterfeit and noncompliant refrigerant detection: A cost-effective, portable solution

The increasing prevalence of counterfeit and incompatible refrigerants presents significant risks to Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning, and Refrigeration (HVAC&R) systems, including compromised equipment performance, safety hazards, and non-compliance. This article details the development of a novel, cost-effective, and portable detection device designed to accurately verify refrigerants. The device utilizes a controlled gas sampling and analysis system within a sealed chamber, ensuring precise measurements while maintaining safety through a purging mechanism. The system features a high-sensitivity sensor integrated with an onboard control module that analyzes gas composition in real-time, providing feedback within a 2-minute duration. Laboratory validation demonstrated the device’s high accuracy (>95 % based on correct identification of compliant vs. non-compliant blends) in detecting unauthorized refrigerant blends. The projected cost of the product stands at ∼ $150, based on the retail pricing of individual components. Laboratory validation demonstrated the device’s high accuracy (>95 % for composition identification, 100 % rejection of tested counterfeit/incorrect blends) in detecting unauthorized refrigerant blends with a response time <2 min. The device correctly identified authentic R-454A/B/C blends and reliably rejected R-407F and closely related counterfeit mixtures. Key advantages include affordability, ease of use, rapid response time, and compatibility with a wide range of refrigerants. This solution supports compliance with regulatory frameworks, enhances safety in HVAC&R operations, and mitigates the risks associated with counterfeit refrigerants.

Counterfeit refrigerants↗
DOE OSTI2023

Phase-based design of CO 2 capture, transport, and storage infrastructure via SimCCS 3.0

The design of optimal infrastructure is essential for the deployment of commercial and large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. During the design process, it is important to consider CO 2 capture and storage locations and CO 2 transportation pipelines to minimize the total project cost. SimCCS, first introduced in 2009, is an integrated open-source tool to optimize CCS infrastructure. The core CCS infrastructure design problem in SimCCS is structured as a mixed-integer linear programming problem by selecting the optimal pipeline routes, searching CO 2 source capture and storage locations, and determining the corresponding CO 2 amounts to meet desired capture targets. Multiple important and practical features have been developed to the latest version of SimCCS, SimCCS 3.0 . One of these features is phase-based modeling which enables users to dynamically design the CCS infrastructure. We demonstrate the phased-based modeling capability using two CCS infrastructure optimization case studies. The results from these case studies reveal that the phase-based modeling capability in SimCCS is particularly useful to optimize the dynamic deployment of CCS projects.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗