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.
This guide provides an overview of the federal investment tax credit for those interested in commercial solar photovoltaics, or PV.
The federal investment tax credit (ITC) is an economically valuable tax incentive offered to taxable business entities that invest in certain energy technologies. The ITC is based on a percentage of the qualifying upfront capital costs of a project and directly reduces a business's tax liability (i.e., the taxes paid). This fact sheet focuses on ITC considerations for privately owned solar photovoltaic (PV) projects on federal land and buildings, although some of the considerations may be applicable to other technologies and non-federal entities.
This guide provides an overview of the federal investment tax credit for those interested in commercial solar photovoltaics, or PV.
Over the last decade, the U.S. electric power sector has gone through one of the most dramatic changes in its existence. The combination of low natural gas prices as a result of the shale gas revolution and significant reduction in construction and operating costs for renewable resources, in part due to federal tax credits such as the production tax credit and investment tax credit mainly benefitting wind and solar, respectively, has resulted in a significant shift away from coal-fired generation, and instead towards natural gas and renewable generation. Furthermore, the operating profile of existing coal-fired electric generating units has changed significantly. As new natural gas combined cycle plants have become increasingly more efficient and cheaper to operate than older existing coal-fired power plants, coal units continue to lose baseload generation share and more frequently operate as load-following, or cycling, resources. These trends are of particular importance to state public utility commissions. Functioning as economic regulators, commissions oversee investments in a reliable, efficient system while balancing emissions goals, customer demands, and other policy objectives. Changes to coal plant operations as a result of increased competition from other fuel sources may have a bearing on system reliability and economics, and therefore constitute an important area for commissions to monitor.
This analysis uses the Biomass Scenario Model, a system dynamics model of the bioenergy supply chain, to explore different scenarios of implementation of a production tax credit (PTC) and investment tax credit (ITC) for sustainable aviation fuel.
Abstract—Harnessing renewable energy from diverse sources is paramount for sustainable power systems. Recently, co-located floating PV (FPV) systems present an intriguing prospect in this context. These hybrid systems, blending hydro and solar power, may offer a more consistent electricity output and potential economic advantages. Yet, assessing their actual potential requires a comprehensive techno-economic assessment. In addition, probabilistic price forecasting has recently gained attention in electricity market because decisions based on such predictions can yield significantly higher profits than those made with point forecasts alone. To this end, this paper embarks on a journey to elucidate the electricity market potential of co-located hydro-FPV systems in a probabilistic fashion to investigate the technological merits and economic viability of co-located hydro-FPV under different market structures. Our preliminary findings suggest that LCOE and payback metrics are sensitive not only to different markets but also to different solar incentives. Concurrently, we also observe that the payback period is generally faster with a production tax credit (PTC) than an investment tax credit (ITC). This assessment serves as a cornerstone for understanding the future prospects of co-located hydro-FPV systems in modern electricity markets.
In a webinar hosted by the U.S. Department of Energy's WINDExchange initiative, experts from the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory introduce attendees to the key incentives supporting investment in wind energy deployment and manufacturing in the United States, as well as the role that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) plays in shaping those investments. Over the past few decades, incentives like the production tax credit and investment tax credit have supported the growth of wind energy deployment, while manufacturing-related incentives have helped scale up domestic manufacturing of wind energy components. With its passage in 2022, the IRA ushered in a new wave of investment in wind energy and other renewable technologies, as well as introducing new workforce requirements and equity provisions. This presentation explores the history and impact of major incentives, unpacks some of the complex provisions of the IRA, and highlights the ways federal incentives and policies will continue to shape the wind energy industry.
This guide provides an overview of the federal investment tax credit for those interested in residential solar photovoltaics, or PV.
Driven by dramatic declines in up-front cost, the U.S. solar photovoltaics (PV) industry has taken off over the past decade, growing from 1 gigawatt of installed capacity in 2009 to 89 gigawatts in 2020—or enough capacity to power roughly 19 million homes. The industry is expected to double in size over just the next 5 years.1 Much of the growth has been driven by large, utility-scale projects that can produce 5 mega- watts or more of power—enough to power at least 1,000 homes. The cost of electricity produced by these projects has decreased by more than 70 percent since 2010. As of Q3 2020, development costs of large, util- ity-scale solar PV power plants were under $1 per watt, down by more than 70 percent from 2010.2 A robust array of investors has come forward to efficiently deliver capital to these kinds of utility-scale projects including large banks, insurance companies, pension funds, and others. But low- and moderate-income communities, including communities of color, are at risk of being left behind in the transition to clean energy. Mission- driven solar project developers and financial institu- tions have been working alongside energy justice advocates to open up solar access for these communi- ties, using strategies ranging from community solar, to solar installations on affordable multifamily housing, to distributed solar and storage programs, and more. Their goals go beyond simply generating more green energy to advancing social equity by: • empowering communities to control their energy future • stabilizing energy prices, saving money, and build- ing wealth for low-income families • creating quality jobs • improving health by reducing pollution • providing energy resilience for vulnerable communities Mission-driven actors are successfully deploying a wide variety of strategies to meet these goals, from helping low-income homeowners get solar—and some- times battery storage, to developing solar projects serv- ing affordable rental housing and community facilities, to building larger “shared solar” projects to which households from across the community can subscribe. However, the financing ecosystem does not work nearly as well for these “mission driven” solar proj- ects as it does for utility-scale projects. For home rooftop solar, even if low-income consumers have a home and suitable roof, they may fail to qualify for federal tax incentives, lack adequate credit to qualify for a loan—or the mission-driven lenders seeking to serve them may not be adequately capitalized to make long-term loans. For mission-driven commercial or community-scale projects, assembling nearly every component of the project capital stack—whether bridging early-stage costs, attracting tax credit equity investors, securing long-term debt, or coming up with sponsor equity and filling gaps—can present challenges. A variety of obstacles contribute to the scarcity of financing for low-income solar, including small project sizes, lack of developer balance sheet capacity, both real and perceived issues with credit risk, elevated technical assistance needs, and greater subsidy requirements to pursue goals such as deep energy affordability, climate resilience, or job creation. Still other obstacles are regulatory: for example, not all states allow community solar projects or Power Purchase Agreements, common strategies used for providing low-income solar—and the potential for regulations to shift over time creates risks that mission-driven projects can ill afford. This report synthesizes information garnered from 47 key informant interviews, four focus group discus- sions involving 60 stakeholders, and a review of the substantial existing literature on low-income solar finance to assess the current landscape of mission- driven solar development in the United States, examine the roles that community-based financial institutions could play, and recommend public invest- ments and policy changes that could help to scale the provision of equitable solar finance. Key recommen- dations for policymakers and funders in the renew- able energy and community development fields that emerge from this process include the following: • Help to capitalize and support community-based lenders to provide flexible, low-cost, and long- term financing to mission-driven solar projects— including providing guarantees or other forms of credit enhancement. • Provide federal support for equitable solar, including a grant-in-lieu-of-credits option for the Investment Tax Credit to improve access to this critical government subsidy. • Develop pools of government and philanthropic support that can complement financing from community-based lenders to complete the capi- tal stack for mission-driven projects, as well as to support education and technical assistance to both consumers and potential project sponsors. • Create a national Renewable Energy Credits pro- gram that includes social equity targets to provide a baseline of support for clean energy generation. • Change utility regulations to remove barriers to low-income solar projects; lower permitting costs; provide greater certainty for developers, consumers and owners; and measure progress toward equity in renewable energy policy implementation.
The U.S. solar photovoltaics (PV) industry has taken off over the past decade, but without deliberate action low- and moderate-income communities could be left behind. Key recommendations for policymakers and funders in the renewable energy and community development fields that emerged from this process include the following: • Help to capitalize and support community-based lenders to provide flexible, low-cost, and long- term financing to mission-driven solar projects— including providing guarantees or other forms of credit enhancement. • Provide a grant-in-lieu-of-credits option for the Investment Tax Credit as was done during the last recession. • Develop pools of government and philanthropic support that can complement financing from community-based lenders to complete the capi- tal stack for mission-driven projects, as well as to support education and technical assistance to both consumers and potential project sponsors. • Create a national Renewable Energy Credits pro- gram that includes social equity targets to provide a baseline of support for clean energy generation. • Change utility regulations to remove barriers to low-income solar projects, provide greater certainty for developers, and measure progress toward equity in renewable energy policy implementation.
This guide provides an overview of the federal investment tax credit for those interested in residential solar photovoltaics, or PV.
Offshore wind energy has the potential to play a critical role in fostering a renewable energy transformation in the United States. This owes to its massive technical potential, strategic location near densely populated coastlines, and - relative to onshore wind and solar - high capacity factors and consistent production. The Biden Administration's target to build 30 GW of offshore wind capacity by 2030 (from 0.04 GW today) requires the creation and swift development of a new industry that interlinks the wind and power industries with the maritime sector. Critical to its success is financing. While financial capital is abundant, deploying it for offshore wind faces major challenges. We identify and describe five grand challenges affecting offshore wind finance in the U.S. Failing to address these challenges may put deployment targets at risk. The challenges include (1) Early years financing: navigating the complexities, timing mismatches, and high costs of projects in the development phase; (2) Policy support for project financial solvency: addressing the uncertainty and systematic transfers of tax credits away from offshore wind, characteristic of the U.S. Investment Tax Credit; (3) Workforce development: building a skilled workforce for an emerging market; (4) Transmission and integration barriers: upgrading the power grid to reliably support large scale offshore wind integration; and (5) Floating wind development: financing the development and scale-up of floating offshore wind technologies. The second challenge has already been solved to a large extent by the Inflation Reduction Act.
The Inflation Reduction Act has created substantial new programs that support adoption of solar power by low-income households, including the $7 billion Solar For All program and the Low-Income Communities Bonus Credit Program, which increases the investment tax credit for certain types of deployment. In addition, a growing number of states are using solar programs to reduce energy burdens and create energy justice opportunities for low-income households and disadvantaged communities. Verifying the income of participating customers is an important component of these programs. Program managers are seeking strategies to verify a large number of subscribing customers in an accurate, timely, and cost-efficient manner. To help inform program managers, Berkeley Lab investigated how a number of energy and non-energy programs manage income verification. The most common approach is to require proof through tax documents, pay stubs, or other formal income documentation, which can pose an impediment to enrolling eligible customers and create a paperwork burden for administrators. In order to reduce the burden for both the applicant and the program manager, some programs use alternative methods. We identify three common alternative verification methods: -Categorical eligibility: Customers enrolled in other, similar income-verified assistance programs are automatically eligible for enrollment in other income-qualified programs. -Geographic eligibility: Eligibility is based on the customer’s location within a specified area, typically a low-income or disadvantaged community or census tract, and; -“Self-attestation”: The participant claims eligibility with or without further documentation. We describe these options, their pros and cons, give examples of how they are used, and explore how some low-income programs address administrative issues, audits, or other quality control measures. Finally, we explore the risk of mistaken verifications (finding a participant eligible when they are not) in the different strategies. While this memo was initiated by a request relating to income-based community solar programs, the methods are applicable to any program with income eligibility requirements in the energy or non-energy sector. Funding was provided for this research by the Solar Energy Technologies Office of the US Department of Energy, through the National Community Solar Partnership.
Nationwide, four U.S. federal tax credits promote the adoption of geothermal heat pumps (GHPs) and geothermal power plants and were recently updated with enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).1 However, uptake of these geothermal tax credits has lagged behind other eligible technologies.2 With the support of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)'s Geother- mal Technologies Office, researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) engaged with the geothermal industry to determine: 1) how the industry will use the tax credits, 2) remaining challenges to utilizing tax credits, and 3) suggestions on solutions that could help accelerate tax credit uptake. Insights were obtained through two industry question- naires (59 responses)3 and 21 interviews with representatives from geothermal industry groups, project developers, com- ponent manufacturers, and financiers, as shown in Figures 1 and 2. This article synthesizes the industry's perception of these tax credits, i.e., Section 25D (residential GHP), Section 48 (commer- cial GHP), Section 48E (investment tax credit [ITC] for electricity), and Section 45Y (production tax credit [PTC] for electricity).
The Screening Tool for Equitable Adoption and DeploYment of Solar (STEADy Solar) is a database and mapping tool that indicates locations that may be eligible for the Investment Tax Credit bonus adders defined in the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The tool combines publicly available information on demographics, solar technical potential, solar economics (modeled net present value), building counts by use-type, and eligibility for tax credit adders. It can be used by states, municipalities, community-based organizations, developers, and researchers to identify sites where solar projects may be economical and where federal incentives may be available to support equitable adoption of solar. This report describes the STEADy dataset and presents high level insights from the data.
The U.S. Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 provides a wide array of tax credits and other incentives for low-carbon energy. The technology-neutral clean generation production tax credit (PTC) (Section 45Y of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code) and the technology-neutral investment tax credit (ITC) (Section 48E) lower the net cost of new electricity generation projects with zero or negative greenhouse gas emission rates. We evaluate the impact of the IRA legislation—specifically the PTC and ITC—on the cost-competitiveness of small modular reactors (SMRs). We use the Argonne Low-carbon Energy Analysis Framework (A-LEAF) model to calculate the capacity factor of an SMR with a range of hypothetical variable operating and maintenance (O&M) costs in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) electricity market. We selected ERCOT for market modeling because of its competitive structure, available data, and extensive use in prior literature. We use a discounted cash flow model to calculate the SMR’s net present value based on the market prices and capacity factors from A-LEAF, hypothetical ranges of capital and variable O&M costs, and other input parameters, with or without the IRA tax credits. We determine the SMR owner’s optimal choice of PTC or ITC for the hypothetical ranges of capital and variable O&M costs. We also evaluate potential shifts in the SMR owner’s optimal choice of PTC or ITC based on historical patterns of nuclear capital cost overruns in the United States. We also assess the sensitivity of our results to longer PTC period and electricity prices from the New England market, which tend to be higher than electricity prices in ERCOT. We find that even with the IRA tax credits, only SMRs with low capital and variable O&M costs would be economically feasible in the low-price ERCOT market scenario modeled. A longer PTC period and higher-price market such as New England, however, would significantly expand the economic feasibility of SMRs in the United States.
The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 introduced, for the first time, place-based federal tax incentives for projects sited in “Energy Communities,” potentially changing the economic calculus of where projects are best sited. Storage projects can qualify for a 10-percentage-point bonus to the Investment Tax Credit (e.g., from 30% to 40%), while wind and solar projects may qualify for either the ITC bonus or a 10% bonus to the Production Tax Credit (e.g., from $\$27.5$ to $\$30.25$/MWh). Energy Communities are areas with historical ties to fossil fuel industries and above average unemployment levels (FFEU), with closed coal mines or power plants, or contaminated properties. They seek to identify locations across the US that could especially benefit from economic revitalization. This report explores how the new federal tax credit incentives are impacting clean energy deployment patterns and establishes historical baselines against which future changes can be compared. We include a few case studies of clean energy projects going specifically to areas that were recently impacted by coal power plant closures to provide concrete examples of investments in Energy Communities. However, this publication does not assess how much of the incentive benefits pass from clean energy developers to hosting communities, nor does it offer a comprehensive view of the economic effects of clean energy deployment on Energy Communities. Key highlights include: - As clean energy projects take multiple years to conceptualize and develop, it is likely too early to see shifts towards Energy Community locations either among newly built projects or those that entered interconnection queues in 2023. - Approximately 35% of onshore wind, 50% of solar, and 60% of storage capacity built in 2023 and the first half of 2024 are located in Energy Communities, making them likely eligible for bonus incentives. While these bonus incentives were not available to projects coming online before 2023, we used 2023 Energy Community definitions to classify whether past projects were built in what is now considered an Energy Community. The deployment levels for 2023-2024 are similar to recent years (2020-2022) for solar and storage but slightly lower for wind. - Clean energy capacity has surged in the interconnection queues over the last few years, with about 45-50% of both recently proposed and total queued capacity being located in Energy Communities. While the amount of capacity in Energy Communities has also grown, its relative share is either stable (solar and storage) or slightly lower (wind) among projects that entered the queue in 2023. - Clean energy projects can be built at lower costs in Energy Communities. The levelized cost of energy after incentives was on average $\$9$/MWh (24%) lower for solar projects and $\$2$/MWh (6%) lower for wind projects built in 2023, relative to projects not located in Energy Communities. Wholesale electricity values at Energy Community locations relative to the rest of the market vary by region. The average value was often higher for wind projects (-$\$3$ to $\$11$/MWh) but lower for solar projects (-$\$6$ to 0/MWh). - Distributed solar that is owned by commercial entities is eligible for the Energy Community bonus and also, potentially, a Low-Income Community bonus. Residential solar installations in qualifying Energy Communities that are third-party owned represent about 10% of the total residential market. Larger commercial and industrial solar installations in Energy Communities make up 17% of the total market in 2023. Nearly 2 GW of distributed solar was built in areas qualifying as Low-Income Communities in 2023, exceeding the available annual program cap of 700 MW. Continued tracking of these trends will be important for system planners, investors, and local communities.
The completion of Vogtle Units 3 and 4, despite significant cost and schedule overruns, a major bankruptcy, and a pandemic, demonstrates that the U.S. nuclear industry can still develop new supply chains, train a highly skilled workforce, and build large nuclear power plants. Vogtle, being a first-of-a-kind (FOAK) plant, faced overruns, but FOAK overruns can decrease with more deployments through a combination of design standardization and modularization, transferring and implementing lessons learned between consecutive projects, and innovation. This report quantifies the potential cost and schedule reductions in future AP1000 plants in the US and identifies the barriers in achieving those reductions. It starts with a summary and analysis of the cost and construction timeline data for AP1000 plants that started construction in the United States (Vogtle) and China. Motivated by the steep schedule reductions from the first to second series of AP1000 plants in China, a cost reduction model was developed to quantify potential reductions for future AP1000 builds in the US. Results show that within about 3 more builds, AP1000s can become economically attractive in large markets in the U.S., without leveraging the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) or Production Tax Credit (PTC), and much sooner if these tax credits are available. Importantly the financial risks for future AP1000 builds in the US might be much smaller than observed in the FOAK plants. The study also identifies various barriers for future builds including the availability of a supply chain and a skilled workforce, and emphasizes the importance of making investments to gather and implement lessons learned between consecutive projects.