Results for “Cost Savings” — Page 5

DOE OSTI2022

An analytical method for identifying synergies between behind-the-meter battery and thermal energy storage

Electric utilities build generation capacity to meet the highest demand period, and they often pass on the costs associated with these peaking generators to building owners through demand charges. Building owners can minimize these demand charges by shifting energy use away from peak periods with behind-the-meter storage. This storage can include batteries, which can directly shift the metered load, or thermal energy storage, which can shift thermal-driven electric loads like air conditioning. However, there is a lack of research on how best to combine battery and thermal energy storage. In this study, we develop an analytical sizing method to calculate the potential demand reduction and annualized cost savings for different combinations of thermal and battery energy storage sizes. We show that adding batteries to a thermal energy storage system can increase the total system's load shaving potential. This is particularly true when the building has onsite photovoltaic generation or electric vehicle charging, which add significant variability to the load shape. We also show that for a given total storage size, selecting a higher fraction of thermal energy storage can significantly lower the cycling of the battery, and therefore extend the battery life. This, combined with the expected lower first cost of thermal energy storage materials compared to batteries, shows that hybrid energy storage systems can outperform a standalone battery or standalone thermal storage system. Assuming the thermal storage has a capital cost 6x lower than the battery, our analysis shows that the optimal system is 71% thermal energy storage and 29% battery energy storage for a scenario with electric vehicle charging. The annualized cost savings for this system are $48.6 k/yr, whereas an equivalently sized standalone thermal energy storage system would provide annualized cost savings of $28.5 k/yr and a standalone battery would lead to savings of $8.72 k/yr. The hybrid system also reduces battery cycling by 52% compared to a standalone battery, extending battery lifetime.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2020

Virtual storage capability of residential buildings for sustainable smart city via model-based predictive control

This paper evaluates the virtual storage capability of a residential air-conditioning (AC) system by utilizing the building mass as a thermal storage to enable sustainable cities through model-based predictive control (MPC). The control-oriented building model was developed with a grey-box model structure based on the experimental data to predict the indoor air temperature. Based on the model, the operation cost-saving potential of the MPC was investigated in a single house with different comfort levels, electricity prices, and prediction horizons. The cost-saving of the MPC was approximately 10.6 % compared to the conventional control. The MPC was expanded to a residential building cluster considering the peak demand charge. In an hourly shedding and load-up scenario, the performances of the MPC and the heuristic prior-based control (PBC) are promising. When shedding was enforced all day, the peak demand saving of the MPC was 36~38 %, whereas that of the PBC was 25.7 % compared to the baseline. In addition, the monthly electricity bill, including the operation and peak demand cost, was investigated with different demand charge rates and weather conditions. The total saving decreased with a low demand charge rate and hot conditions, and the operation cost saving was compromised with more aggressive demand shedding.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2023

Energy Cost Analysis and Operational Range Prediction Based on Medium- and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicle Real-World Deployments across the United States

While the market for medium- and heavy-duty battery-electric vehicles (MHD EVs) is still nascent, a growing number of these vehicles are being deployed across the U.S. This study used over 2.3 million miles of operational data from multiple types of MHD EVs across various regions and operating conditions to address knowledge gaps in total cost of ownership and operational range. First, real-world energy cost savings were determined: MHD fleets should experience energy cost savings each year from 2021 to 2035, regardless of vehicle platform, with the greatest savings seen in transit buses (up to USD 4459 annually) and HD trucks (up to USD 3284 annually). Second, to help fleets across various geographies throughout the U.S. assess the suitability of EVs for their year-round operating needs, operational range was modeled using the XGBoost algorithm (R2: 70%) given 22 input features relevant to vehicle efficiency. Finally, this paper recommends (1) that MHD fleets apply energy-saving practices to minimize the impacts of cold temperatures and high congestion levels on vehicle efficiency and range, and (2) that local hauling fleets select trucks with a nominal range nearly double the expected maximum daily range to account for range losses under local, urban driving conditions.

Qiu, Yin (ORCID:0009000900948794)↗

DOE OSTI2025

The Technical, Economic, Risk, and Adoption Assessment for Evaluating Work Reduction Opportunities in the Nuclear Industry

Automation and cost-saving initiatives, such as process automation with advances in artificial intelligence, are gaining traction in modernization efforts across the nuclear industry. As these innovations are increasingly adopted, it becomes crucial to evaluate their impacts comprehensively. Various technical and economic attributes, along with risk and human readiness factors, must be achieved to ensure that innovative projects enabling automation and modernization are successful. However, no systematic or integrated framework exists that allows plants to evaluate these innovative projects. To address this gap, the Technical, Economic, Risk, and Adoption (TERA) assessment offers a structured method to evaluate innovative technologies, ensuring solutions meet both operational and safety standards. The TERA framework integrates the disparate perspectives to assess modernization opportunities in nuclear operations. It combines qualitative and quantitative models to evaluate the relationship between performance and business impacts, while also enabling continuous re-evaluation during project development. This approach helps plant owners identify high-priority opportunities, optimize cost savings, and minimize risks, ensuring projects remain on track to achieve desired returns. By providing a comprehensive, systematic methodology, TERA enables informed, data-driven decisions that support successful modernization efforts, enhancing efficiency, safety, and cost savings across nuclear operations. This paper explains the TERA framework and its benefits for the nuclear industry.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Simulation-based Performance Evaluation of Model Predictive Control for Building Energy Systems

The performance of model predictive control (MPC) can be significantly affected by different choices of controller parameters such as the time intervals for model discretization and control sampling. Due to the lack of a systematic understanding on how these parameters affect control performance, they are usually selected arbitrarily in practice.In this paper, the combined impacts of selected time intervals for model discretization and control sampling on the performance of MPC are comprehensively investigated for the first time through detailed simulations. Specifically, a typical MPC strategy is first designed to improve building operations based on a reduced-order model of building dynamics. Then, the performance of the designed MPC is evaluated against different choices of time intervals for model discretization and control sampling on a simulated office building. The detailed simulation results reveal that the time interval for model discretization has a much greater influence on the performance of MPC than the time interval for control sampling. Although the time interval for control sampling usually receives more attentions in practice, it turns out that the time interval for model discretization affects the prediction performance, cost saving, and computation time simultaneously and more significantly. Therefore, the simulation-based performance evaluation presented here sheds light on the impacts of different time intervals and facilitates their selection for practical applications of MPC to building operations

Huang, Sen↗

DOE OSTI2023

Model-based predictive control of multi-stage air-source heat pumps integrated with phase change material-embedded ceilings

This paper presents a model-based predictive control strategy to optimize the operations of phase change material (PCM) ceiling panels coupled with a multi-stage air-source heat pump. A three-stage prototype heat pump unit has been built and tested in the laboratory, with the low and medium stages designed for space heating/cooling and the high compression stage dedicated to charging of the PCM energy storage. To facilitate optimal control of the integrated heat pump system, a mixed-integer linear programming formulation is derived through linearization of the heat pump model and a mixed-integer reformulation of the PCM dynamic governing equations. A predictive control strategy is synthesized based on the resultant control formulation and implemented in a receding horizon scheme that optimizes the PCM charging and the zone temperature schedules simultaneously to leverage both the passive (associated with building construction materials) and active (PCM) storage capacities of a building. The control strategy has been tested along with three benchmarking control scenarios using a co-simulation platform for a prototypical detached house in Atlanta, GA. In this study, test results showed that application of the proposed control strategy to the PCM-integrated heat pump could provide 27.1% electricity cost savings while a fine tuned rule-based control strategy could achieve cost savings of 20.4%, compared to a baseline case without PCM storage, under a time-of-use rate tariff.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the District of Columbia

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Alabama

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Alaska

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Arkansas

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Arizona

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Colorado

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Connecticut

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Delaware

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for Delaware. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Florida

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for Florida. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Georgia

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for Georgia. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Hawaii

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for Hawaii. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for the State of Idaho

This report describes the methodology and results of a state cost-effectiveness analysis of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2016 for Idaho. Moving to the Standard 90.1-2016 edition from Standard 90.1-2013 is found to be cost-effective for the state. Annual energy cost savings, added construction costs, and life-cycle costs are all described and presented here for various building types and climate zones.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗