Demand response for variable renewable energy integration: A proposed approach and its impacts
Not Available
McPherson, Madeleine↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Proposal”
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.
Toward an international practical pressure scale: A proposal for an IPPS ruby gauge (IPPS-Ruby2020)
At the 26 th AIRAPT conference in 2017, a task group was formed to work on an International Practical Pressure Scale (IPPS). This report summarizes the activities of the task group toward an IPPS ruby gauge. We have selected three different approaches to establishing the relation between pressure ( P ) and ruby R1-line shift ( Δλ ) with three groups of optimal reference materials for applying these approaches. Using a polynomial form of the second order, the recommended ruby gauge (referred as Ruby2020) is expressed by: P [ G P a ] = 1.87 ( ± 0.01 ) × 10 3 Δ λ λ 0 1 + 5.63 ( ± 0.03 ) Δ λ λ 0 , where λ 0 is the wavelength of the R1-line near 694.25 nm at ambient condition. In June of 2020, the Executive Committee of AIRAPT endorsed the proposed Ruby2020. Finally, we encourage high-pressure practitioners to utilize Ruby2020 within its applicable pressure range (up to 150 GPa), so that pressure data can be directly compared across laboratories and amended consistently as better scales emerge in the future.
75 CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS, SUPERCONDUCTIVITY AND↗
A Proposed Beam-Beam Test Facility COMBINE
The COmpact Machine for Beam-beam Interactions in Non-Equilibrium systems (COMBINE) is a proposed, dedicated, beam-beam test facility. This is currently a joint effort between Jefferson Lab and Old Dominion University to create a small, low energy pair of collider rings that would be used to study beam-beam interactions, as well as act as a teaching tool for students. The base design would make use of a pair of identical rings (2.5 meters per side) one rotated 180 degrees from the other, meeting at their common interaction point. These would be fed by an electron gun producing up to 125 keV electrons. The low energy will allow for beam-beam tune shifts commensurate with existing colliders, and will also allow for an exploration of the predicted effects of gear-changing, which would be performed using a variable pathlength scheme. Finally, this machine can also test linac-ring type systems.
Nissen, Edith↗
A proposed method for addressing large unphysical uncertainties in mubar
Mubar uncertainties in Section MF 34 MT 2 of ENDF/B-VIII.0 data are sometimes too large. Physical limitations of the bounds of mubar limit the maximum uncertainty to be < 1.0 and usually $\ll$ 1.0. Two ad hoc methods are proposed to artificially constrain the randomly sampled values of mubar to allowable values. The application of NJOY’s mubar covariance matrix to the “sandwich rule” is also discussed and a consistent way to apply sensitivity coefficients is described. Mubar uncertainties for the Jezebel k eff were found to be 156 pcm – a value comparable to other evaluated cross section uncertainties.
73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
ATHENA detector proposal—a totally hermetic electron nucleus apparatus proposed for IP6 at the Electron-Ion Collider
ATHENA has been designed as a general purpose detector capable of delivering the full scientific scope of the Electron-Ion Collider. Careful technology choices provide fine tracking and momentum resolution, high performance electromagnetic and hadronic calorimetry, hadron identification over a wide kinematic range, and near-complete hermeticity. This article describes the detector design and its expected performance in the most relevant physics channels. It includes an evaluation of detector technology choices, the technical challenges to realizing the detector and the R&D required to meet those challenges.
47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
Writing Competitive Proposals [Slides]
A proposal is a written response to an opportunity offered by a funding organization. Proposals must meet a SOLICITOR’S needs, not YOUR needs. A solicited proposal is a written response to a specific solicitation issued by a sponsor. These solicitations are typically called RFPs, or Requests for Proposals. RFPs are specific in their requirements regarding format and technical content. Scientists at Los Alamos often deal with this type of proposal — Laboratory-Directed Research and Development (LDRD) proposals are one example. An unsolicited proposal is one submitted to a sponsor who has not issued a specific solicitation. It usually comes about during interactions at meetings or conferences. In some instances, a sponsor may be visiting for another reason when the possibility for an unsolicited proposal becomes available. A pre-proposal is one in which a sponsor wishes to gage competition before having participants prepare a formal, full-length proposal. These types of scenarios imply that the actual proposal could be highly competitive and will usually be by invitation only.
96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
A modified cosmic brane proposal for holographic Renyi entropy
We propose a new formula for computing holographic Renyi entropies in the presence of multiple extremal surfaces. Our proposal is based on computing the wave function in the basis of fixed-area states and assuming a diagonal approximation for the Renyi entropy. For Renyi index n ≥ 1, our proposal agrees with the existing cosmic brane proposal for holographic Renyi entropy. For n < 1, however, our proposal predicts a new phase with leading order (in Newton’s constant G) corrections to the cosmic brane proposal, even far from entanglement phase transitions and when bulk quantum corrections are unimportant. Recast in terms of optimization over fixed-area states, the difference between the two proposals can be understood to come from the order of optimization: for n < 1, the cosmic brane proposal is a minimax prescription whereas our proposal is a maximin prescription. We demonstrate the presence of such leading order corrections using illustrative examples. In particular, our proposal reproduces existing results in the literature for the PSSY model and high-energy eigenstates, providing a universal explanation for previously found leading order corrections to the n < 1 Renyi entropies.
72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
Hybrid Power Plants: Status of Operating and Proposed Plants, 2023 Edition [Slides]
Improving battery technology and the growth of variable renewable generation are driving a surge of interest in “hybrid” power plants that combine, for example, wind or solar generating capacity with co-located batteries. While most of the current interest involves pairing photovoltaic (PV) plants with batteries, other types of hybrid or co-located plants with wide-ranging configurations have been part of the U.S. electricity mix for decades. This annually updated briefing tracks and maps existing hybrid or co-located plants across the United States while also synthesizing data from power purchase agreements (PPAs) and generation interconnection queues to shed light on near- and long-term development pipelines. The scope includes “co-located hybrids” that pair two or more resources (e.g., multiple types of generation and/or generation with storage) that are operated largely independently behind a single point of interconnection, and “full hybrids” that also feature coordinated operations of the co-located resources. The focus is on plants with one megawatt (MW) or more of capacity; smaller (often behind-the-meter) projects are also increasingly common, but are not included in this data synthesis. Key findings from the latest briefing include: -At the end of 2022, there were 374 hybrid plants (>1 MW) operating across the United States (+25% compared to the end of 2021), totaling nearly 41 GW of generating capacity (+15%) and 5.4 GW/15.2 GWh of energy storage (+69%/+88%). PV+storage plants are by far the most common, dominating in terms of plant number (213), storage capacity (4.0 GW/12.5 GWh), storage:generator capacity ratio (49%), and storage duration (3.1 hours). But there are nearly twenty other hybrid plant configurations as well, including several different fossil hybrid categories (each dominated by the fossil component) as well as wind+storage, wind+PV, wind+PV+storage, geothermal+PV, and others. -Last year was another strong year for PV+storage hybrids in particular: 59 of the 62 hybrids added in 2022 were PV+storage. As of the end of 2022, there was roughly as much storage capacity operating within PV+storage hybrid plants as in standalone storage plants (~4 GW each). In storage energy terms, however, PV+storage edged out standalone storage by ~2 GWh (12.5 GWh vs. 10.4 GWh, respectively). -Interconnection queue data show continued strong developer interest in hybridization. At the close of 2022, there were 51% more hybrid plants—representing 59% more generating capacity—in interconnection queues across the United States than there were at the end of 2021. Solar dominates these proposed plants as well: at the close of 2022, there were 457 GW of solar capacity proposed as a hybrid (representing ~48% of all solar capacity in the queues), most typically pairing PV with battery storage. At the same time, there were 24 GW of wind capacity proposed as a hybrid (representing ~8% of all wind capacity in the queues), again most-often pairing wind with storage. Meanwhile, more than half of all storage in the queues is estimated to be part of a hybrid plant. While many of the plants proposed in the queues will not ultimately reach commercial operations, the depth of interest in hybrid plants—especially PV+storage—is notable, particularly in certain regions. For example, in CAISO, 97% of all solar capacity and 45% of all wind capacity in the queues is proposed as a hybrid. -The report also surveys power purchase agreement (PPA) price data from a sample of operating and proposed PV+storage plants. Though PV+storage PPA prices have fallen over time, “levelized storage adders” have recently increased somewhat to ~$\$ $7000/MW-month, ~$\$ $60/MWh-stored (assuming one full cycle per day), or ~$\$ $15/MWh-PV. Some of the recent price increase could simply reflect a trend towards higher battery:PV capacity ratios over time, which increases costs, all else being equal. The well-publicized impact of inflationary and supply chain pressures on battery prices is no doubt a contributor as well.
25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
Summary of Technical Peer Review on the Risk Assessment Framework proposed in Report INL/RPT-22-68656 for Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems
This report summarizes the peer review activities initiated by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during fiscal year (FY) 2023 for the evaluation and improvement of the methodology developed under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a technical basis to support effective and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. A framework was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk-informed capability to quantitatively and accurately estimate the risk impact of plant modernization, considering the introduction of high safety-significant safety-related (HSSSR) DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing risk-informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of HSSSR DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. The R&D efforts of this project from FY 2019 through FY 2022 were focused on methodology improvement and demonstration of the proposed framework for the risk assessment and design optimization of safety-critical DI&C systems. Collaborations with the nuclear industry have been initiated to support the reliability and risk assessment of their DI&C systems by using the proposed framework. In FY 2023, the framework has reached to a point for a technical peer review and obtain stakeholder feedback. This peer review activity includes coordination of the reviews performed by a group of industry stakeholders, documentation of the peer review suggestions, providing resolutions and responses to the peer review comments. The objective of this technical peer review is to obtain representative feedback on the proposed framework to improve the technical qualities of its methodology and readiness for deployment to the industry. Feedback may identify potential areas for improvement and further development. The Subject Matter experts were invited to review the latest project report documenting the methodology developed in the project and provide evaluations of the technical qualities of the proposed framework and relevant methods. The reviewed project report is “An Integrated Framework for Risk Assessment of High Safety-significant Safety-related Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems in Nuclear Power Plants: Methodology and Demonstration” INL/RPT-22-68656 (short as “INL/RPT-22-68656” in this report). This peer review report documents the technical questions provided for technical peer review and introduces the technical peer reviewers from the stakeholders including nuclear utilities, regulators, and universities. Comments from technical peer reviewers and the resolutions and responses to these comments are outlined. Insights and lessons learned from the technical peer review are summarized in conclusions and future work. The primary audience of this report are DI&C designers, engineers, and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) practitioners. This includes stakeholders, such as the nuclear utilities and regulators who consider the deployment and upgrade of DI&C systems, DI&C software developers and reviewers, and cybersecurity specialists.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
Proposed Classifications of Remote Operations for Nuclear Reactors Based on Physical and Cybersecurity Considerations
The incorporation of remote operations into reactor operations is a topic of high interest among advanced and small modular reactor (A/SMR) vendors, with some considering it essential to the success of their business models. However, remote operations are a concept novel to the nuclear industry. While various technical aspects of remote operations have been explored, a significant gap remains in understanding the security implications of integrating remote operations into reactor designs, particularly concerning the security requirements for remote-operations facilities and infrastructure. This report aims to address this gap by first defining classes of remote operation based on the extent of remote access to reactor control systems and grounded in the existing regulatory framework with compatible terminology. Secondly, the report outlines the physical and cybersecurity requirements applicable to remote-operations facilities and infrastructure at each defined class. These requirements are based on existing licensing frameworks provided by 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 50 and 10 CFR Part 52, as well as the upcoming A/SMR licensing framework in the proposed Part 53. The assessment focuses specifically on security regulations, such as 10 CFR Part 73, which includes provisions for both cybersecurity (§ 73.54) and physical security (§ 73.55). This report proposes five classes of remote reactor operations. Class 1 involves remote monitoring only, with no control over reactor systems. Class 2 allows for the remote issuance of allowlisted commands to the reactor facility. Class 3 extends control to non-safety-significant, non-safety-related, or not important to safety systems and equipment. Class 4 permits remote control of safety-significant systems. Finally, Class 5 allows remote control of safety-related systems. It is important to note that these classes were defined purely with functionality in mind, without considering the practicality or feasibility of implementation for each class under current or upcoming regulatory guidance. The intention behind this approach is to enable an assessment of which security requirements apply to each class, allowing readers to evaluate the implementation possibilities for their specific use cases. Following the definition of remote-operation classes, the report assesses the specific physical and cybersecurity requirements applicable to the remote-operations facility and infrastructure within each defined class. This includes defining the types and locations of operators that are possible at each class of operation and, based on operator type and location, as well as functionality within each class, outlining the physical and cybersecurity requirements. By detailing the security requirements by class, the report provides readers with the information needed to determine the type of security program they may need to implement for their desired concept of operation. The next contribution of this report was to assess the practicality of implementing each proposed class of remote operations based upon the security requirement assessment. In short, three of the five proposed remote-operation classes were found to possibly have a practical path forward to implementation under the U.S. regulatory framework. Class 1 remote operations are currently in use in the U.S. while Class 2 and 3 remote operations may be logistically possible to implement under the U.S. regulatory framework. The final two Classes, 4 and 5, would likely be logistically difficult, if not infeasible to implement within the current U.S. physical- and cybersecurity regulatory framework. Given the results of the feasibility assessment, an example architecture is proposed for both Class 2, remote allowlisted commands, and Class 3, remote control of non-safety systems as well as security implication assessments of each architecture. These example implementations are not meant to be prescriptive in terms of how Class 2 or Class 3 remote operations should be deployed; instead, they are intended to be informative to stakeholders on how Class 2 or Class 3 could potentially be applied in order to inform their system design. An example architecture for Class 1 remote monitoring was not provided as Class 1 in already in use in U.S. nuclear operations. Example architectures for Class 4 and Class 5 were not provided due to their assessment of being likely infeasible to implement. The final contribution is an assessment of the physical- and cybersecurity implications of introducing autonomous operations into an A/SMR. What was found was that the security implications can be separated into two cases. Autonomous operations supported by SSCs located only at the reactor site, and autonomous operations supported by SSCs outside of the reactor site. For the first case, the introduction of autonomous systems will likely not change the facility’s requirement to comply with existing cyber and physical security regulation
22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
FY27 Annual LDRD Call for Proposals - external release
Proposals are now being accepted for the fiscal year 2027 (FY-27) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) call, the FY-27 Annual LDRD Call for Proposals. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has renewed its research and development (R&D) portfolio to align with its strategy, and this call seeks high-quality proposals that address these renewed research priorities. The LDRD Office encourages proposals that offer the potential to achieve breakthroughs in the three science and technology (S&T) strategic initiatives: • Unleashing America’s Energy Abundance: Enabling the Quadrupling of Nuclear Power by 2050; • Securing America’s Future by Developing Domestic Supply Chains for Critical and Strategic Minerals and Materials (CSMM); and • Delivering Critical National Security Technology. Proposals that support INL’s four strategic thrust areas are also encouraged: • Enabling Future Fusion Energy Systems; • Delivering Small Nuclear Reactor Technology for Space Exploration and Defense Missions; • Accelerating Technologies for Hybrid Energy and Nuclear Applications; and • Securing America’s Energy Future Through Artificial Intelligence (AI).
99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
Hybrid Power Plants: Status of Installed and Proposed Projects [Slides]
As battery prices fall and wind and solar generation rises, power plant developers are increasingly combining wind and solar projects with on-site batteries, creating “hybrid” power plants. But hybrid or co-located plants have been part of the U.S. electricity mix for decades, with widely ranging configurations that extend beyond pairing a generator with a battery. This new summary tracks and maps existing hybrid and co-located plants across the United States while also synthesizing data from generation interconnection queues to illustrate developer interest in the next wave of plants. The scope is inclusive of co-located hybrid plants that pair two or more generators and/or that pair generation with storage at a single point of interconnection, and also full hybrids that feature co-location and co-control. The focus is on larger, 1 MW+ systems: smaller (often behind-the-meter) projects are also increasingly common, but are not included in the data synthesis. Based in part on EIA Form 860 data, there were at least 125 co-located hybrid plants (>1 MW) already operating across the United States at the end of 2019, totaling over 14 GW of aggregate capacity. Some of the most common configurations include wind+storage (13 projects, 1,290 MW wind, 184 MW storage), PV+storage (40 projects, 882 MW PV, 169 MW storage), and fossil+storage (10 projects, 2,414 MW fossil, 91 MW storage). Data from interconnection queues demonstrates the considerable commercial interest that exists in hybrid power plants, especially solar co-located with storage. By the end of 2019, there were at least 367 GW of solar plants in the nation’s queues; 102 GW (~28%) of this capacity was proposed as a hybrid, most typically pairing PV with battery storage. For wind, 225 GW of capacity sat in the queues, with 11 GW (~5%) proposed as a hybrid, again most-often pairing wind with storage. The proposed solar+storage plants are located throughout the United States, but with California and the non-ISO West being the most prominent areas of commercial interest. Proposed wind+storage and standalone storage plants also center to a degree on these regions of the country.
24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Energy Conservation Standards for Manufactured Housing
This draft environmental impact statement (EIS) analyzes the impacts related to DOE’s proposed energy conservation standards for manufactured homes. DOE’s proposed energy conservation standards are based on the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and relate to the building thermal envelope; air sealing; installation of insulation; duct sealing; heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC); service hot water systems; mechanical ventilation fan efficacy; and heating and cooling equipment sizing. The draft EIS evaluates DOE’s proposed action (energy conservation standards tiered based the manufacturers retail list price), alternatives to the proposed action (including energy conservation standards tiered based on size of the manufactured home and untiered standards), and a no action alternative. The draft EIS presents analysis of impacts related to (1) energy resources; (2) air resources (including greenhouse gases, climate change, ambient air quality and indoor air quality); (3) health and safety; (4) socioeconomics; and (5) environmental justice.
MacDonell, Margaret↗
Core Model Proposal #373: Add Exogenous Shutdown Decider
This core model proposal adds an exogenous shutdown decider that can scale the output of a vintaged technology in years after its initial operating period. The output can be scaled above or below the technology vintage's original output. This proposal also includes code changes to disable the behavior of the s-curve shutdown decider and profit shutdown decider in calibration periods. The proposal does not include any changes to data to utilize the new exogenous shutdown decider (it only introduces the capability). It should be noted that the exogenous shutdown decider and s-curve shutdown decider serve similar functions and generally should not be used together; however, the exogenous shutdown decider and profit shutdown decider reflect different dynamics and can be used in combination.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
The SDRD Proposal Process
Presentation to be given at the December 2022 WIP Seminar. This is a guide to the SDRD proposal process, particularly how to write a successful SDRD proposal for the FY24 proposal cycle.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
A proposed criteria to identify wind turbine drivetrain bearing loads that induce roller slip based white-etching cracks
In this article, the type of roller slip behavior that may result in the formation of white-etching cracks (WECs) in wind turbine gearbox bearings is identified. A new hypothesis based on the inner raceway normal contact load magnitude at the time of roller slip is proposed as the probable cause of WECs. For this purpose, the maximum normal contact loads are identified when roller slip occurs in high-speed shaft bearings at different mean wind speeds. Subsequently, the annual probability of occurrence of the maximum normal loads are obtained. The probability of maximum load under slip exceeding a limit probability is hypothesized as a probable cause for WEC. In order to apply the proposed hypothesis, two different wind turbines high-speed shaft bearings are used: the cylindrical roller bearing of the General Electric 1.5 SLE turbine and the tapered roller bearing of Vestas V52 turbine. Both the chosen bearings are on the generator side of the high-speed shaft. For both turbines, measurement data together with analytical models are used for identifying the slip and the maximum normal contact loads. We propose forecasting the probability of exceedance of a threshold maximum normal contact load level during slip to identify the possibility for inducing WECs.
17 WIND ENERGY↗
129 I and 99 Tc Distribution Coefficients of Subsurface Sediments Collected from the Proposed Site of the Environmental Manage Disposal Facility
Performance Assessment calculations are presently underway to evaluate the Environmental Management Disposal Facility (EMDF), a proposed new low-level radioactive waste (LLW) disposal facility on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). Among the large number of input parameters needed for such calculations, are distribution coefficients (K d values; radionuclide concentration solid:liquid ratio) that provide a measure of the tendency of radionuclides to bind to sediments. The objective of this study was to measure K d values of two radionuclides that may pose a disproportionately large amount of risk, 129 I and 99 Tc. The average I K d value for the 10 geological materials recovered from the proposed EMDF site was 52.3 mL/g and ranged from 2.7 to 140.9 mL/g. These values were consistent, but somewhat larger than previous measurements made with ORR sediments and were about an order of magnitude greater than those used in previous EMDF PA calculations. The median Tc K d value was 807.2 mL/g, much greater than previously reported using ORR geological materials. Five of the ten tested geological materials sorbed large quantities of Tc, suggesting that the weakly sorbing Tc(VII) species had been reduced to the very strongly binding and sparingly soluble Tc(IV) species. The five strongly sorbing sediment had apparent solubility values of approximately <10 -8 mol/L. Based on sediment properties and general ORR geological considerations, it was proposed that much of the I and Tc sorption could be attributed to the low pH (average pH = 4.94), low redox status, and/or the elevated levels of iron oxides, manganese oxides, and natural organic matter. An implication of this study is that the areas of the EMDF subsurface environment may have natural properties for attenuating I and Tc movement, thereby potentially reducing risk posed by burial of LLW at this site.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Hybrid Power Plants: Status of Operating and Proposed Plants, 2022 Edition [Slides]
Falling battery prices and the growth of variable renewable generation are driving a surge of interest in “hybrid” power plants that combine, for example, wind or solar generating capacity with co-located batteries. While most of the current interest involves pairing photovoltaic (PV) plants with batteries, other types of hybrid or co-located plants with wide-ranging configurations have been part of the U.S. electricity mix for decades. This annually updated briefing tracks and maps existing hybrid or co-located plants across the United States while also synthesizing data mined from power purchase agreements (PPAs) and generation interconnection queues to shed light on near- and long-term development pipelines. The scope includes co-located hybrid plants that pair two or more generators and/or that pair generation with storage at a single point of interconnection, and full hybrids that feature co-location and co-control. The focus is on plants with one megawatt (MW) or more of capacity; smaller (often behind-the-meter) projects are also increasingly common, but are not included in this data synthesis. Key findings from the latest briefing include: -At the end of 2021, there were nearly 300 hybrid plants (>1 MW) operating across the United States, totaling nearly 36 gigawatts (GW) of generating capacity and 3.2 GW/8.1 GWh of energy storage. PV+storage plants are by far the most common, dominating in terms of plant number (140), storage capacity (2.2 GW/7.0 GWh), storage:generator ratio (53%), and storage duration (3.2 hours). But there are nearly twenty other hybrid plant configurations as well, including several different fossil hybrid categories (each dominated by the fossil component) as well as wind+storage, wind+PV, wind+PV+storage, geothermal+PV, and others. -Last year was a breakout year for PV+storage hybrids in particular: 67 of the 74 hybrids added in 2021 were PV+storage. By the end of 2021, there were more GW of battery capacity installed in PV+storage hybrids (2.2 GW) than as standalone storage plants (1.8 GW). The difference is even starker in energy terms, with PV+storage plants hosting twice as much battery capacity as standalone storage plants (7 GWh vs. 3.5 GWh, respectively). Much of the battery capacity added in hybrid form in 2021 was a battery retrofit to a pre-existing PV plant. -Data on plants under development from the interconnection queues of all seven ISOs/RTOs plus 35 individual utilities suggest that these hybridization trends are likely to continue. At the close of 2021, there were more than 670 GW of solar plants in the nation’s queues; 285 GW (~42%) of this capacity was proposed as a hybrid, most typically pairing PV with battery storage (PV+storage represented nearly 90% of all hybrid capacity in the queues). For wind, 247 GW of capacity sat in the queues, with 19 GW (~8%) proposed as a hybrid, again most-often pairing wind with storage (wind+storage represented ~4% of all hybrid capacity in the queues). Meanwhile, nearly half of all storage in the queues is estimated to be part of a hybrid plant. While many of these proposed plants will not ultimately reach commercial operations, the depth of interest in hybrid plants—especially PV+storage—is notable.
24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗