Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “technoeconomic analyses”

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.

66 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Pervaporative Dehydration of 2,3-Butanediol by Dense Poly(vinylidene fluoride) Hollow Fiber Membranes: Parameter Estimation, Process Design, and Technoeconomic Evaluation under Uncertainty

Pervaporation, combined with other separation processes, can effectively remove water from fermentation product streams, making it highly suitable for purifying alcohols like 2,3-butanediol (BDO). In this study, a dense poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF) hollow fiber membrane module prototype was fabricated for BDO dehydration, achieving >0.2 LMH total flux and >95% BDO rejection. With a Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) approach, Bayesian inference was used to quantify the uncertainty of the permeance parameters. A membrane cascade model was developed to scale up a process that purifies a preconcentrated BDO feed (70 wt %) to high purity (90 wt %). Through propagation of the uncertainty of the parameters and sensitivity analyses of the process variables, a cascade design was recommended. Despite data and model limitations, the framework enabled a reliable system analysis and economic evaluation, validated through tight confidence intervals in key process metrics, establishing the foundation for future applications of Bayesian methods in membrane-based processes.

Animal feed↗
DOE OSTI2021

Cryogenic Carbon Capture™ Technoeconomic Analysis

The Cryogenic Carbon Capture™ (CCC) process significantly decreases cost and energy demands for CO 2 separation and pressurization to 150 bar compared to alternatives. The process is a post-combustion technology that cools CO 2 -laden flue gas to desublimation temperatures (-100 to -135 °C), separates solid CO 2 —that forms from the flue gas—from the light gases, uses the cold products to cool incoming gases in a recuperative heat exchanger, compresses the solid/liquid CO 2 to final pressures (100–200 bar), and delivers a compressed CO 2 stream separated from an atmospheric pressure light-gas stream. The overall energy and economic costs are about 30-50% lower than most competing processes that involve air separation units (ASUs), solvents, or similar technologies. In addition, the CCC process enjoys several ancillary benefits, including (a) it is a minimally invasive Bolton technology, (b) it provides highly efficient removal of most pollutants (Hg, SOx, NO 2 , HCl, etc.), and (c) possible energy storage capacity. This report outlines the process details and economic and energy comparisons relative to other well-documented alternatives. This paper presents the results of a detailed techno-economic comparison of CCC with amine-based systems. The comparison uses identical financial and economic assumptions similar process assumptions as the detailed analyses published by US DOE in the greenfield analysis. Specifically, the comparison assumes power plants that produce the same net output, one equipped with and a second without carbon capture. Separately, the paper compares similar analyses for retrofitting existing systems using typical plant characteristics in the US (initial capital costs have been paid, high plant utilization), though there are no DOE estimates available for direct comparison. Financial and technical assumptions for all comparisons are maintained as close to the DOE reference studies as possible. The results demonstrate about 30-50% lower costs and energy demands for capture from greenfield coal plants. Natural gas plants produce substantially lower CO 2 concentrations which makes the cost of capturing a ton of CO 2 at the same capture rate as the coal plant higher for all processes while the cost of CO 2 capture per unit of power generation is lower. However, CCC maintains about the same absolute energy and cost advantages for NG as for coal compared to amine systems. Finally, the costs of retrofitting a station are compared to those of building a new station with and without capture. The retrofit costs are comparable to (slightly lower than) new plant costs without capture. In all cases operating and capital cost comparisons show that the CCC process can be retrofitted to a variety of plants to cost effectively reduce CO 2 emissions. Further process integration into the upstream processes and unique process features like water recovery, and integrated energy storage bring the effective cost of carbon capture using the CCC process down further and increase its advantages over alternatives. This technoeconomic analysis shows that the CCC process has the potential to the be lowest cost carbon capture technology under development today.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Prefeasibility Assessment for Solar PV and Storage for Critical Community Facilities in Chernihiv, Ukraine [Slides]

A prefeasibility analysis is performed for integrating solar photovoltaics and battery energy storage at four critical facilities in Chernihiv, Ukraine. The facilities were identified by Chernihiv city officials and include Hospital No. 2, the Maternity Hospital, Secondary School No. 11, and Preschool No. 4. The analyses were performed using NREL's REopt decision-support software tool. The analysis identifies potential capacities for PV and battery energy storage to provide both economic and resilience benefits. The conceptual architecture and estimates of key summary financial and performance metrics are presented.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Cost and Energy Metrics for Municipal Water Reuse

Municipal water reuse can contribute to a circular water economy in different contexts and with various treatment trains. This study synthesized information regarding the current technological and regulatory statuses of municipal reuse. It provides process-level information on cost and energy metrics for three potable reuse and one nonpotable reuse case studies using the new Water Techno-economic Assessment Pipe-Parity Platform (WaterTAP3). WaterTAP3 enabled comparisons of cost and energy metrics for different treatment trains and for different alternative water sources consistently with a common platform. A carbon-based treatment train has both a lower calculated levelized cost of water (LCOW) ($0.40/m3) and electricity intensity (0.30 kWh/m3) than a reverse osmosis (RO)-based treatment train ($0.54/m3 and 0.84 kWh/m3). In comparing LCOW and energy intensity for water production from municipal reuse, brackish water, and seawater based on the largest facilities of each type in the United States, municipal reuse had a lower LCOW and electricity than seawater but higher values than for production from brackish water. For a small (2.0 million gallon per day) inland RO-based municipal reuse facility, WaterTAP3 evaluated different deep well injection and zero liquid discharge (ZLD) scenarios for management of RO concentrate. Adding ZLD to a facility that currently allows surface discharge of concentrate would approximately double the LCOW. For all four case studies, LCOW is most sensitive to changes in weighted average cost of capital, on-stream capacity, and plant life. Baseline assessments, pipe parity metrics, and scenario analyses can inform greater observability and understanding of reuse adoption and the potential for cost-effective and energy-efficient reuse.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demonstration and technoeconomic analysis of dodecanol production from acetate using metabolically engineered Escherichia coli

In a circular bioeconomy, the one-way conversion of petroleum to chemicals and CO 2 is replaced with processes that reduce CO 2 to energy carriers and useful materials that are returned to CO 2 upon combustion. A circular bioeconomy that relies on photosynthesis to generate sugars as the chief energy carrier and precursor to chemical building blocks has yet to overcome many recalcitrant aspects of plant-based photosynthesis, namely, high feedstock costs, arable land scarcity, food competition, and fertilizer overuse. Acetate is a potential sustainable energy carrier because it can be produced from CO 2 either electrocatalytically or by acetogens via the Wood-Ljungdahl pathway. Here, in this work, we conducted a metabolic engineering study of Escherichia coli 's ability to convert acetate into dodecanol as a model oleochemical product. We performed techno-economic and life cycle analyses to determine break-even points with alternative fossil fuel-based strategies and identified critical process performance parameters for supporting an industrial acetate-based bioprocess. These analyses showed that oleochemical yield is the primary driver of minimum oleochemical selling price and carbon intensity. Therefore, to increase yield on acetate, we deleted the aceBAK operon, which facilitates funneling of acetate into biomass instead of product. We performed additional strain engineering to increase flux towards dodecanol and increase acetate uptake. Finally, we demonstrated increased yield in controlled bioreactors, improving from 13% of the maximum theoretical yield to 37%. Rigorous uncertainty analyses assuming a range of market conditions and future technological performances resulted in 88% and 37% of simulated scenarios having lower carbon intensities than fossil fuel-based routes and lower minimum selling prices than the market price.

Acetate↗
DOE OSTI2022

Energy-Storing Cryogenic Carbon Capture™ for Utility and Industrial-scale Processes (Final Report)

This project leverages work completed under funding from previous U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) projects and other sources of funding around the Cryogenic Carbon Capture Process™ (CCC). The purpose of this project is to further develop a perturbation of the CCC process that stores energy called the Cryogenic Carbon Capture™ Energy Storing (CCC-ES) process. The successful completion of the tasks in this project has prepared the CCC-ES process for scaling and developed initial plans and a feasibility analysis for an engineering-scale or small-commercial scale system that can store at least 10 MWh of energy. The specific areas of work in this project are: (1) Develop a conceptual, site-specific integrated process flow diagram: Sustainable Energy Solutions (SES) developed a conceptual, site-specific plan including a process flow diagram for integrating CCC-ES at a specific location. The proposed system was based on a typical engineering-scale CCC system designed to capture 30-50 metric tonnes of CO 2 per day (TPD), with modifications and additional changes and equipment put in place to add the energy storage element to the system. The 30-50 TPD scale corresponds to the required 10 MWh of stored energy. This task includes updating simulation software for transient analysis. SES also coordinated with the Jim Bridger Power Plant in Point of Rocks, Wyoming to get site-specific data. Using these data, SES completed site-specific preliminary process flow diagrams, estimated capital and operating costs for the CCC-ES system, and used the upgraded software package to estimate the primary figures of merit. (2) Complete a technoeconomic analysis (TEA): SES completed a full-scale TEA of the CCC-ES system to meet specific success criteria. This TEA used process information from the host site selected above. (3) Technology and data gap assessment for the CCC-ES process: As part of the technology gap assessment, SES performed an assessment of the best alternative energy storage solutions including figures of merit and operational strengths and weaknesses. SES then compared the proposed system with a discussion of how it addresses the weaknesses of alternative systems, showing for example a cost of stored energy at less than $50/MWh and with a roundtrip efficiency of greater than 95%. This assessment includes technical and other risk analyses and technology gaps with research and development needs to commercialize the process by 2030. Finally, work includes a commercialization roadmap/development pathway outlining the major milestones to move to a commercially operating CCC-ES system. (4) Phase II pre-FEED project plan: SES completed a project plan for the Phase II pre-FEED analysis using the same host site as in the Phase I conceptual study.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon storage cost modeling for the offshore Gulf of Mexico

Groundbreaking for geologic carbon storage (GCS) projects in the offshore Gulf of Mexico is imminent, and there is great interest in utilizing this region for GCS projects. Offshore saline reservoirs provide a significant and accessible resource for GCS. However, conducting GCS in the offshore environment will pose distinct challenges pertaining to site selection, operations, infrastructure use, and monitoring compared to operating onshore that ultimately affect technoeconomic assessment of offshore GCS projects. Carbon storage and transport costs are critical to project developers looking to deploy carbon storage in the offshore environment. We present CO2_S_COM_Offshore, a model developed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) as a screening-level offshore saline GCS cost modeling tool. Based on NETL’s widely used CO2_S_COM cost model for onshore saline CS, CO2_S_COM_Offshore enables technoeconomic analysis of GCS in offshore areas. This model comprehensively incorporates multiple facets of offshore GCS projects, from regional evaluation and site selection to permitting, transport, operations, monitoring, site closure, and decommissioning. In general, the model can explore the cost implications for potential offshore GCS project(s) by enabling the user to change several project operational and financial attribute configurations. Key inputs include offshore storage formation options, CO2 injection rate and duration, infrastructure types, monitoring intensity, project financing, and post-injection site care duration. Supporting cost algorithms within CO2_S_COM_Offshore were compiled utilizing S&P Global’ s QUE$TORTM cost estimation software alongside a variety of open-source scientific literature. In addition to reviewing key model components, we discuss several sensitivity analyses, input variabilities, and results on analysis of break-even CO2 price required by a project based on different regulation/policy and operational scenarios for the offshore Gulf of Mexico. These results indicate the value of modeling offshore GCS specifically, and the potential of offshore GCS within a decarbonization value chain. Presented at the 41st USAEE/IAEE North American Conference, 3-6 November 2024, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.

Mark-Moser, Mackenzie K.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Considerations for Improving the Technoeconomic Viability of Heat Pipe Microreactors by Employing a Functional Containment Approach

The economic cost of a microreactor is being investigated by leveraging MARVEL cost information in conjunction with some simplified design and analysis activities to present a hypothetical, yet feasible, option for investigation. This bottom-up cost estimate for a hypothetical commercial microreactor will be used to provide guidance to the industry and research communities regarding where priorities should be set to improve the viability of broad microreactor deployment. To support the design and analysis activities required to present a feasible option, some understanding of maximum accidental radionuclide releases and consequences is needed to provide bounding estimates on containment or confinement systems for radionuclide retention. To estimate fission product barrier and retention performance, a gaussian plume dose and dispersion model is employed, with isotopic inventories being propagated between barriers assuming conservative fractional release rates. Demonstrably conservative meteorological assumptions are also assumed. Standard reference release rates are assumed where safety requirements could be easily and economically employed. Results are provided in units of total effective dose equivalent as a function of distance from the release (i.e., the reactor). Initial results indicate that the hypothetical microreactor will likely need to credit the fuel cladding and at least one other barrier, or combination of barriers, to ensure public health and safety as required during a postulated accident. This approach is referred to as “functional containment,” since no single barrier will be relied upon for satisfying regulatory requirements and fundamental safety functions for radionuclide retention. Finally, a set of barrier options are provided so that future economic analyses can select the most viable design path.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Bottom-Up Cost Estimation Tool for Nuclear Microreactors

The rising interest in nuclear microreactors has highlighted the need for comprehensive technoeconomic assessments. However, the scarcity of publicly available designs and cost data has posed significant challenges. To address this issue, the Microreactor Optimization Using Simulation and Economics (MOUSE) tool is developed. MOUSE is a tool that integrates nuclear microreactor design with reactor economics. The design calculations encompass core simulations using the OpenMC Monte Carlo Particle Transport Code [romano2015], along with simplified balance of plant calculations. On the economic side, MOUSE provides detailed bottom-up cost estimates, calculating both the total capital cost and the levelized cost of energy for first-of-a-kind and nth-of-a-kind microreactors. The cost estimation correlations are developed using data from the MARVEL project and additional literature sources. MOUSE has released as an open-source tool on GitHub (MOUSE Tool). By combining design calculations with cost equations, MOUSE enables users to evaluate the impact of various technological consideration, advanced moderators, design changes, material/fuel changes, and geometry modifications—as well as economic parameters like interest rates and construction duration. This comprehensive framework can guide stakeholders towards technological solutions that enhance microreactor competitiveness. Additionally, powered by the WATTS toolkit [romano2022], MOUSE supports optimization studies, parametric analyses, and uncertainty calculations/propagation. Currently, preconceptual designs of three microreactor types are included in MOUSE: a liquid metal thermal microreactor (LTMR), gas cooled TRISO-fueled microreactor (GCMR) and heat-pipe TRISO fueled microreactor (HPMR). To showcase its ability, MOUSE was used to conduct detailed bottom-up cost estimates for the first of a kind (FOAK) and Nth of a kind (NOAK) of the following microreactors • A 20MWt LTMR that is built on the ongoing MARVEL demonstration at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) • A 15 MWt GCMR that was designed to be more representative of the typical commercial microreactor • A 7 MWt HPMR that was built on previous work (Choi 2024) The The reader should note that these three designs and corresponding cost estimates are examples to demonstrate the MOUSE capability. The designs are pre-conceptual, the reactor designs were not optimized, and the cost estimates were developed with incomplete information. Additionally, stakeholders might be interested in a variety of designs that may differ from the examples provided in this report. The MOUSE tool can also be used to study how design choices affect economics. To demonstrate its capability, MOUSE was used conduct parametric studies such as examining the economic impact of the reflector's material and thickness, the moderator's booster material and dimensions, fuel composition and enrichment, core size, and power level. Several insights were gained from these parametric studies.

Hanna, Botros↗
DOE OSTI2024

Abstract for CRADA between NETL and Rivalia Chemical Co

The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) will assist Rivalia Chemical Co (Participant) with system analyses to aid the Participant with setting priorities and securing funding. The Participant is an early-stage startup pioneering new chemical extraction technology to solve two important problems: critical mineral scarcity and coal ash waste management. The U.S. generates coal fly ash from coal combustion for power generation and has amassed over two billion metric tons of ash, which contains valuable rare earth elements. The ash is often stored in unlined ponds and frequently contaminates the local environment. The Participant’s patent-pending process harvests rare earths from ash, then transforms the residual ash for use in green concrete, providing an economic pathway for utilities to empty and remediate the ash ponds. Founder Laura Stoy created the company in July 2022 after developing the core intellectual property during her Ph.D. at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Stoy is currently participating in the Chain Reactions Innovations (CRI) program at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) where she will be optimizing the core technology and scaling from bench scale to demonstration scale. The technology has been validated at bench scale (TRL3); the goal is to approach TRL5 by the conclusion of the CRI program and prepare to raise capital investment for a pilot facility. NETL and the Participant will develop an updated technoeconomic analysis (TEA) and identify key sustainability performance parameters to inform ’s research and development priorities and de-risk the technology. NETL will also provide the Participant with guidance to prepare a more detailed life cycle assessment (LCA), and a narrative on the Participant’s product markets. These tools will aid the Participant with the next steps of commercialization.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2025

Conversion of Waste PET Plastic to Aramid Fiber

A three-step synthesis was used to convert waste polyethylene terephthalate (PET) into the high value polymer, poly-para-phenylene terephthalamide (PPTA), used in the production of high strength aramid fiber, such as Kevlar. Improvements to the polymerization reaction by addition of calcium chloride to the solvent, N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), and rigorous anhydrous conditions enabled the production of a PET-derived PPTA with a 4.15 dL/g inherent viscosity in sulfuric acid that is amenable to fiber spinning. PPTA fibers were spun using a wet spinning apparatus under varied process parameters to assess their impact on fiber surface morphology, diameter, and the mechanical properties of the fibers. Select fibers were subjected to a post-spinning heat treatment at 150 °C , which improved the tensile strength and modulus by 100% and 30%, respectively, relative to the as-spun fibers. Techno-economic and life cycle analyses were conducted to evaluate the economic feasibility and the life-cycle greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions of the approach. In conclusion, the results suggest the potential for up to a 30% cost reduction, and comparable GHG emissions against conventional petroleum-based processes.

Lifecycle Analysis↗
DOE OSTI2022

Techno-Economic Analysis Using REopt for Community Solar on Multifamily Affordable Housing Properties [Slides]

Multifamily affordable housing (MFAH) providers can identify and prioritize properties in their portfolios for which community solar development is feasible by following portfolio screening steps in a process outlined by NREL. Once MFAH providers have identified the most feasible sites, they can conduct more detailed analyses for a select number of sites to assess how distributed energy resources such as solar plus storage can help them meet their goals. The step is completed using NREL's REopt (https://reopt.nrel.gov/tool), a free techno-economic optimization model that determines DER sizes and dispatch strategies that minimize the life cycle cost of energy at a site. This presentation describes how to perform this step using REopt to help MFAH providers answer questions such as: What size solar PV system will result in the most energy bill savings at this site? What size solar-plus-storage system would be needed to power critical loads through a utility grid outage? What is the financial impact of rate switching, net metering, and/or meter aggregation? What percentage of the site's load can be offset with renewable energy? What are the emissions benefits of this renewable generation?

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗