SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Assess Grid Enhancing Technologies in transmission planning by coupling economic and reliability analysis over an entire time horizon rather than a few dispatch conditions for ISO-NE.
Demand response is commonly called on to reduce load during system peak times or to respond to contingency events. In future power systems with higher shares of wind and solar generation (which we describe together as variable generation [VG]), demand response could have more opportunities to provide energy shifting or operating reserve services. This report evaluates the ability of residential electric water heaters, both electric resistance water heaters (ERWHs) and heat pump water heaters (HPWHs), to provide such services starting from detailed whole-building energy models that realistically represent New England single family home stock. We use a parsimonious surrogate model to represent operational flexibility in a form suitable for linear and mixed integer programming. This enables relatively fast determination of aggregate contingency reserve resource, price-taking energy shifting outcomes, and in some cases the determination of aggregate models at the megawatt (MW) scale that can be directly included in large-scale grid models. After selecting modeling methods and parameters through various computational experiments, we find interquartile ranges of contingency reserve resource in ISO-NE for about 603,400 ERWHs of 45 MW - 69 MW for Claim10 (50 minute responses provided with 10 minutes of advanced notification) and 65 MW - 102 MW for Claim30 (30 minute responses provided with 30 minutes of advanced notification), and for about 619,000 HPWHs of 48 MW - 88 MW for Claim10 and 52 MW - 90 MW for Claim30. The overall reserve resource is up to 32% of total load for ERWHs providing Claim10 service, 47% for ERWHs providing Claim30 service, 93% for HPWHs providing Claim10 service, and 97% for HPWHs providing Claim30 service. More work is required to determine if HPWHs are inherently more suitable than ERWHs for providing contingency reserve or if these results reflect idiosyncrasies of the single family home stock model used in this study. The value of this contingency resource in a Near-term VG model of ISO-NE is $\$ 0.40$ to $\$1.20$ per water heater-year, and significantly larger, $\$ 3.80$ to $\$ 5.30$ per water heater-year in a Mid-term VG model of ISONE. Aggregating surrogate models to the MW-scale for energy shifting service is more challenging than for contingency service and we only present such results for ERWHs, because we were unable to determine satisfactory ways to deal with HPWHs' time-varying and path dependent operational characteristics. Individual surrogate models suitable for evaluating the energy shifting resource from both ERWHs and HPWHs are created, however, and dispatched against day-ahead prices from the Near-Term VG and Mid-Term VG models of ISO-NE. The individual surrogate models are able to access and potentially shift all 640 GWh of HPWH load and 1,547 GWh of ERWH load we modeled in two different single family home stock models. In contrast, the most effective model of aggregate ERWH shifting resource we created only captured 34.7% of the total ERWH load. Energy shifting affected by price-taking dispatch against modeled day-ahead energy prices produces per water heater year profits of $\$19.44$ - $\$22.93$ for individual HPWHs, $\$39.11$ - $\$40.54$ for individual ERWHs, and up to $\$4.00$ - $\$4.24$ for aggregated ERWHs, with the variations mainly due to grid conditions (more or less VG). When the supply-side response to these changes is accounted for, the per water heater year production cost savings for ISO-NE are $\$7.50$ to $\$17.70$ for the most effective set of endogenously dispatched aggregate ERWHs, $\$15.60$ to $\$15.70$ for individual ERWHs dispatched against the DA prices, and $\$10.70$ to $\$11.20$ for individual HPWHs dispatched against DA prices. Those ranges primarily represent the difference between Near-Term VG and Mid-Term VG grid conditions.
Electric utilities and large industrial/commercial customers, which integrate multi-MW multi-string energy storage systems (ESS), are typically at a significant risk of string failure. This results in the loss of system performance and capacity. In order to evaluate the accurate costs and benefits associated with a particular battery system, it is essential to incorporate the costs associated with battery string failure and, as a result, reduced capacity. This report analyzes how the economic losses can be estimated based on market rules and ESS availability. A framework for calculation of economic losses is developed and implemented with an illustrative string failure case for Independent System Operator (ISO-NE) forward capacity market. Further scenarios and case studies are analyzed by varying the probability of string failure as well as the capacity bid into the market. These scenarios are used to assess the variability of economic losses and the impact of string failure on the final realized benefits from the battery's market participation.
Proposed large-scale electric generation and storage projects must apply for interconnection to the bulk power system via interconnection queues. While many projects that apply for interconnection are not subsequently built, data from these queues nonetheless provide a general indicator for mid-term trends in developer interest. Berkeley Lab compiled and analyzed data from all seven ISOs/RTOs in concert with 35 non-ISO utilities, representing an estimated 85% of all U.S. electricity load. We include all "active" projects in these generation interconnection queues through the end of 2020, as well as data on "completed" and "withdrawn" projects for five of the ISOs (CAISO, ISO-NE, MISO, NYISO, PJM). We find that the total capacity active in the queues is growing year-over-year, with over 750 GW of generation and an estimated 200 GW of storage capacity as of the end of 2020. Solar (462 GW) accounts for a large – and growing – share of generator capacity in the queues. Substantial wind (209 GW) capacity is also in development, 29% of which is for offshore projects (61 GW). In total, about 680 GW of zero-carbon capacity is currently seeking transmission access, as is 74 GW of natural gas capacity. Hybrids now comprise a large – and increasing – share of proposed projects, particularly in CAISO and the non-ISO West. 159 GW of solar hybrids (primarily solar+battery) and 13 GW of wind hybrids are currently active in the queues. However, much of this proposed capacity will not ultimately be built. Among a subset of queues for which data are available, only 24% of the projects seeking connection from 2000 to 2015 have subsequently been built. Completion percentages appear to be declining, and are even lower for wind and solar than other resources. Additionally, wait times are on the rise: in four ISOs, the typical duration from connection request to commercial operation increased from ~1.9 years for projects built in 2000-2009 to ~3.5 years for those built in 2010-2020. There are growing calls for queue reform to reduce cost, lead times, and speculation.
The U.S. Department of Energy's 2021 edition of its land-based wind market report provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. wind power market, with a focus on 2020. You can find a report, data file and presentation on the Files tab, below. Additionally, several data visualizations are available on the Visualizations tab. Highlights of this year’s update include: -Wind comprises a growing share of electricity supply: U.S. wind power capacity grew at a record pace in 2020, with 25 billion dollars invested in 16.8 GW of capacity. Wind energy output rose to account for more than 8% of the entire nation’s electricity supply, and is more than 20% in 10 states. At least 209 GW of wind are seeking transmission interconnection; 61 GW of this capacity are offshore wind and 13 GW are hybrid plants that pair wind with storage or PV. -Wind project performance has increased over time: The average capacity factor among recently built projects was over 40%, considerably higher than projects built earlier. The highest capacity factors are seen in the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country. -Turbines continue to get larger: Improved plant performance has been driven by larger turbines mounted on taller towers and featuring longer blades. In 2010, no turbines employed blades that were 115 meters in diameter or larger, but in 2020, 91% of newly installed turbines featured such rotors. Proposed projects indicate that total turbine height will continue to rise. -Low wind turbine pricing has pushed down installed project costs over the last decade: Wind turbine prices are averaging 775–850 dollars/kW. The average installed cost of wind projects in 2020 was 1,460 dollars/kW, down more than 40% since the peak in 2010, though stable for the last three years. The lowest costs were found in Texas and the (non-ISO) West. -Wind energy prices remain low, around 20 dollars/MWh in the interior of the country: After topping out at 70 dollars/MWh for power purchase agreements (PPAs) executed in 2009, the national average price of wind PPAs has dropped. In the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country, recent pricing is around 20 dollars/MWh. In the West and East, prices tend to average 30 dollars/MWh or more. These prices, which are possible in part due to federal tax support, fall below the projected future fuel costs of gas-fired generation. -Wind PPA prices are often attractive compared to wind’s grid-system market value: The value of wind in wholesale power markets is affected by the location of wind plants, their hourly output profiles, and how those characteristics correlate with real-time electricity prices and capacity markets. The market value of wind declined in 2020, following natural gas prices lower and averaging under 15 dolalrs/MWh in ERCOT, MISO, NYISO and SPP; higher values were seen in CAISO, ISO-NE and PJM. -The average levelized cost of wind energy is down to 33 dollars/MWh: Levelized costs, which exclude the impacts of federal tax incentives, vary across time and geography, but the national average stood at 33 dollars/MWh in 2020—down substantially historically, though consistent with the previous two years. Levelized costs were lowest in ERCOT, SPP, and the (non-ISO) West. -The health and climate benefits of wind in 2020 were larger than its grid-system value, and the combination of all three far exceeds the current levelized cost of wind: Wind generation reduces power-sector emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. These reductions, in turn, provide public health and climate benefits that vary regionally, but together are economically valued at an average of 76 dollars/MWh-wind nationwide in 2020. -The domestic supply chain for wind equipment is diverse: For wind projects recently installed in the U.S., domestically manufactured content is highest for nacelle assembly (>85%), towers (60-75%), and blades and hubs (30-50%), but is much lower for most components internal to the nacelle.
The U.S. Department of Energy's 2022 edition of its Land-Based Wind Market Report provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. wind power market, with a focus on 2021. You can find a report, data file and presentation on the Files tab, below. Additionally, several data visualizations are available on the Visualizations tab. Despite ongoing supply chain challenges, wind energy in 2021 continued to see strong growth, technology improvements, and low prices in the U.S. Key highlights include: Wind comprises a growing share of electricity supply: U.S. wind power capacity grew at a strong pace in 2021, with the 13.4 GW of new additions representing a $\$20$ billion investment and 32% of all newly added U.S. generation capacity. Wind energy output rose to account for more than 9% of the entire nation’s electricity supply. At least 247 GW of wind are seeking transmission interconnection; 77 GW of this capacity are offshore wind and 19 GW are hybrid plants that pair wind with storage or solar PV. Wind project performance has increased over the decades: The average capacity factor among recently built projects was nearly 40%, considerably higher than projects built earlier. The highest capacity factors are seen in the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country. Turbines continue to get larger: Improved plant performance has been driven by larger turbines mounted on taller towers and featuring longer blades. In 2011, no turbines employed blades that were 115 meters in diameter or larger, but in 2021, 89% of newly installed turbines featured such rotors. Proposed projects indicate that total turbine height will continue to rise. Low wind turbine pricing has pushed down installed project costs over the last decade: Wind turbine prices averaged $\$800$–$\$950$/kW in 2021, a 5% to 10% increase from the year prior but substantially lower than in 2010. The average installed cost of wind projects in 2021 was $\$1,500$/kW, down more than 40% since the peak in 2010, though relatively stable in recent years. The lowest costs were found in Texas and the (non-ISO) West. Wind energy prices are on the rise, but generally remain low, around $\$20$/MWh in the interior of the country with higher prices in the West and East. After topping out above $\$75$/MWh for power purchase agreements (PPAs) executed in 2009, the national average price of wind PPAs has dropped—though supply-chain pressures have resulted in increased prices in recent years. In the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country, recent pricing is around $\$20$/MWh. In the West and East, prices tend to average above $\$30$/MWh. These prices, which are possible in part due to federal tax support, fall below the projected future fuel costs of gas-fired generation. Wind PPA prices are often attractive compared to wind’s grid-system market value: The value of wind in wholesale power markets is affected by the location of wind plants, their hourly output profiles, and how those characteristics correlate with real-time electricity prices and capacity markets. The market value of wind increased in 2021, averaging $\$16$/MWh in MISO, $\$19$/MWh in SPP, $\$23$/MWh in NYISO, $\$31$/MWh in ERCOT, $\$33$/MWh in PJM, $\$44$/MWh in ISO-NE, and $\$48$/MWh in CAISO. The average levelized cost of wind energy was $\$32$/MWh for plants built in 2021: Levelized costs, which exclude the impacts of federal tax incentives, vary across time and geography. The national average stood at $\$32$/MWh in 2021—down substantially historically, though relatively stable in recent years. Levelized costs were lowest in ERCOT, SPP, and the (non-ISO) West. The health and climate benefits of wind in 2021 were larger than its grid-system value, and the combination of all three far exceeds the current levelized cost of wind: Wind generation reduces power-sector emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. These reductions, in turn, provide public health and climate benefits that vary regionally, but together are economically valued at an average of over $\$90$/MWh-wind for plants built in 2021.
Electric transmission system operators (ISOs, RTOs, or utilities) require new large generators seeking to connect to the grid to undergo a series of impact studies before they can be built. This process establishes what new transmission equipment or upgrades may be needed before a project can connect to the system and assigns the costs of that equipment. Berkeley Lab has collected interconnection cost data from interconnection studies for the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO), representing nearly 50% of all projects requesting interconnection from 2010 to 2020. Project-level cost summary data are available for download on this page. We find: -Average interconnection costs have grown as the number of interconnection requests have escalated -Projects that have completed all required interconnection studies have the lowest cost compared to applicants still actively working through the interconnection process or those that have withdrawn. -Broader network upgrade costs are the primary driver of recent cost increase. -Potential interconnection costs for wind, storage, and solar are larger than for natural gas -Larger generators have greater interconnection costs in absolute terms, but economies of scale exist on a per kW basis. -Interconnection costs vary by location Berkeley Lab will publish a series of short analytical papers of generator interconnection costs to the transmission system for MISO, PJM, SPP, ISO-NE and NYISO, which you can find at https://emp.lbl.gov/interconnection_costs.
Electric transmission system operators (ISOs, RTOs, or utilities) require new large generators seeking to connect to the grid to undergo a series of impact studies before they can be built. This process establishes what new transmission equipment or upgrades may be needed before a project can connect to the system and assigns the costs of that equipment. Berkeley Lab has collected interconnection cost data from interconnection studies for the PJM Territory, representing nearly 86% of all new unique generators requesting interconnection from 2000 to 2022. Project-level cost summary data are available for download on this page. We find: -Average interconnection costs have grown as the number of interconnection requests have escalated -Projects that have completed all required interconnection studies have the lowest cost compared to applicants still actively working through the interconnection process or those that have withdrawn. -Broader network upgrade costs are the primary driver of recent cost increase. -Potential interconnection costs for wind, storage, and solar are larger than for natural gas -Larger generators have greater interconnection costs in absolute terms, but economies of scale exist on a per kW basis. -Interconnection costs vary by location Berkeley Lab will publish a series of short analytical papers of generator interconnection costs to the transmission system for MISO, PJM, SPP, ISO-NE and NYISO, which you can find at https://emp.lbl.gov/interconnection_costs.
Electric transmission system operators (ISOs, RTOs, or utilities) require new large generators seeking to connect to the grid to undergo a series of impact studies before they can be built. This process establishes what new transmission equipment or upgrades may be needed before a project can connect to the system and assigns the costs of that equipment. Berkeley Lab has collected interconnection cost data for 845 projects from interconnection studies for the Southwest Power Pool (SPP) Territory. The studies were performed between 2002 and 2023 and include all of the most refined cost estimates available. Project-level cost summary data are available for download on this page. We find: -Project-specific interconnection costs can differ widely. -Average interconnection costs are stable for projects that complete all interconnection studies but have escalated for those that withdraw. -Broader network upgrade costs are the primary driver of recent cost increases, especially for withdrawn projects. -Potential interconnection costs of all solar and wind requests have been greater than those of storage and natural gas projects. -Economies of scale exist for completed wind and solar projects but not for other fuel types or withdrawn projects. -Interconnection costs vary by location. Berkeley Lab publishes a series of short analytical papers of generator interconnection costs to the transmission system for MISO, PJM, SPP, ISO-NE and NYISO, which you can find at https://emp.lbl.gov/interconnection_costs.
Electric transmission system operators (ISOs, RTOs, or utilities) require new large generators seeking to connect to the grid to undergo a series of impact studies before they can be built. This process establishes what new transmission equipment or upgrades may be needed before a project can connect to the system and assigns the costs of that equipment. Berkeley Lab has collected interconnection cost data for 194 projects in New England from interconnection studies performed between 2010 and 2021. Project-level cost summary data are available for download on this page. We find: -Interconnection costs have grown over time, especially for projects that withdraw. -Interconnection costs are highest for onshore wind, followed by solar and storage. Natural gas and offshore wind projects tend to cost less to interconnect, in comparison. -Economies of scale exist for solar and possibly storage projects, but not for other resource types. -Wind and solar projects requesting capacity network resource interconnection service have higher interconnection costs, despite being evaluated using the same interconnection standard in the analyzed studies. -Low and high interconnection costs can be found throughout the ISO-NE footprint. -Costs are split fairly evenly between investments at the point of interconnection and within the broader network for active and withdrawn projects, while complete projects incur most costs at the point of interconnection.
Berkeley Lab provided technical assistance to the New England Conference of Public Utilities Commissioners on challenges that participants in retail demand response programs face to accessing ISO-NE wholesale markets. This report summarizes findings from the technical assistance and includes actions that New England regulators can take to address the challenges to wholesale market access.
This scoping study synthesizes information that will help stakeholders understand the scope, scale, and drivers of recent increases in investor-owned utility (IOU) expenditures on local distribution power grids, while providing regulators and other decision-makers with potential strategies to keep electricity bills down. The study includes five distinct components. Drawing first on data from FERC Form 1, it summarizes key trends in past and recent IOU distribution costs. Next, through a review of a sample of distribution-system plans, it characterizes material drivers of planned distribution expenditures. Ultimately, regulators must approve cost recovery for IOU expenditures, including those for the distribution system. The study therefore also: examines trends in utility requests and regulatory approvals related to changes in retail rates and return on equity; identifies areas where utility shareholder and customer incentives may be misaligned; and develops a menu of options that state regulators might consider to optimize distribution system expenditures. Some of the key findings include: - IOU distribution spending at a national level has grown by 6%/yr since 2014 in real dollar terms, 4x faster than in the prior 20 years and consisting mostly of capital (not operating) expenditure. - On a per-kWh basis, increases in IOU distribution costs since 2014 represent over 30% of the overall national-average increase in retail electricity rates. - Regional spending growth has ranged from 2-8%/yr, with larger estimated rate impacts in CAISO, then NYISO & ISO-NE, and then the Southeast, MISO & PJM (see figure). - Some utilities are planning for significantly increased distribution system spending. Planned spending on managing the existing system (asset replacement, safety & reliability, and resilience are all important drivers) exceeds that for capacity expansion. - IOU rate increase requests ($18 billion in 2025) and public utility commission (PUC) approval levels (average of 64% of requested amounts from 2021-2025) have recently hit multi-decadal highs. - PUCs in New England and the Southeast have recently approved a greater fraction of rate requests (>75%, on average) than in ther regions, while PUCs in California and the Southeast have generally authorized higher equity returns than in other regions. - Regulators have many tools to tackle potential misalignments between utility and customer interests and, more specifically, to optimize and reduce distribution costs. Shorter-term options include those related to return on equity, capital structure, depreciation, trackers, construction work in progress, and securitization. Longer-term options include performance-based regulation and a wide variety of planning-related requirements. All options embed important tradeoffs.
This report describes a cloud-based implementation and field demonstration of the Eastern Interconnection Situational Awareness and Monitoring System (ESAMS). ESAMS was developed to support the detection and source localization of forced oscillations using synchrophasor measurements from tie-lines connecting areas served by different reliability coordinators (RCs), so that RCs could better coordinate their response to wide-area events. A previous effort had identified deployment barriers associated with hosting shared situational awareness tools at a single RC. To address these barriers, ESAMS was migrated to Amazon Web Services and evaluated in a six-month field demonstration. ISO New England (ISO-NE) and PJM streamed data to the platform using AWS Direct Connect and a site-to-site VPN, respectively. The resulting multi-utility measurement footprint enabled regional source localization across major portions of the U.S. Eastern Interconnection and supported routine identification of oscillation events. During the final three months of the trial, 24 events above 2 MW/MVAR were detected. The largest detected oscillation approached a 25 MW peak-to-peak amplitude, and the longest persisted intermittently for more than 11 hours. The demonstration also assessed operational considerations—including data transfer volumes, end-to-end latency, and cloud computing costs—and found that network and compute requirements were modest relative to typical cloud capabilities while providing performance comparable to prior on-premises deployments. Overall, the results indicate that cloud hosting can provide a practical path to shared interconnection-wide oscillation monitoring. The cloud ESAMS demonstration establishes a foundation for broader utility participation and for building future wide-area analytics that leverage measurements across organizational boundaries.
Electric utilities and large industrial/commercial customers, which integrate multi-MW multi-string energy storage systems (ESS), are typically at a significant risk of string failure. This results in loss of system performance and capacity. In order to evaluate the accurate costs and benefits associated with a particular battery system, it is essential to incorporate the costs associated with battery string failure and, as a result, reduced capacity. This report analyzes how the economic losses can be estimated based on market rules and ESS availability. A framework for calculation of economic losses is developed and implemented with an illustrative string failure case for Independent System Operator (ISO-NE) forward capacity market. Further scenarios and case studies are analyzed by varying the probability of string failure as well as the capacity bid into the market. These scenarios are used to assess the variability of economic losses and the impact of string failure on final realized benefits from the battery's market participation.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) estimates hourly project-level generation data for utility-scale solar projects and hourly county-level generation data for residential and non-residential distributed photovoltaic (PV) systems in the seven organized wholesale markets and 10 additional Balancing Areas. To encourage its broader use, Berkeley Lab has made this data file public here at OEDI, covering the years 2012-2020. The public project-level dataset is updated annually with data from the previous calendar year. For more information about the research project, including a technical report, briefing material, visualizations, and additional data, please visit the project homepage linked in this submission.