Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “fuel cost”

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.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Scale effects on core design, fuel costs, and spent fuel volume of pressurized water reactors

The desire to improve the economic competitiveness and deployment pace of nuclear energy through modularization, manufacturing, and series production had led to the development of smaller size reactors. As the standard 17x17 fuel technology is mainly maintained in the pressurized water reactors (PWRs) category, this translates into a lower number of fuel assemblies in the core and sometimes a reduced fuel height. To assess the impact of such scale change in core design on fuel cycle cost and spent fuel volume, a scoping analysis tool is developed based on infinite lattice calculations, leakage, fuel management reduced models, and levelized unit cost of electricity (LCOE) estimate. As such, cost dynamics driven by fuel specific power, burnup, core leakage, feed, cycle length, fuel assembly height as well as uranium market data are captured with consistent set of assumptions and analysis methods. A selection of 5 reactor designs representative of leading PWR developers is assessed and compared. Pursuing higher specific powers and optimal burnups are highlighted as the main fuel cost reduction drivers, nevertheless, practical limitations and opportunities must be evaluated to establish the feasibility of such enhanced fuel operation. In consequence, a detailed core design is performed using SIMULATE3 code for 5 PWR variations including natural and forced coolant circulation modes, two reactor scales, power densities of 73, 112, and 123 kW/l and higher discharge burnups. Design and optimization are performed at the lattice level, for the reflector, and at the core loading level. Satisfactory steady-state operation including power distribution, coolant operating limits, and reactivity requirements are analyzed and reported in this paper. The fuel economics of the detailed core designs confirm the scoping analysis findings. Despite the unlocked power uprates in small PWRs, the achievable burnup for a given fuel specific power requires more enrichment and shorter fuel height results in higher fabrication costs per mass of fuel, which makes scaling down core size a more expensive endeavor on the fuel cycle front. Spent fuel volumes are reported for the PWRs designed in this paper. Furthermore, these volumes are driven by the core average discharge burnup regardless of the scale in consideration. Additional cost and core performance aspects related to heavy reflector gains, fuel-reflector substitution, and disposal cost policy in the U.S. are examined.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Co-Optimization of Sustainable Aviation Fuel: Cost, Emissions, and Performance

The combustion of petroleum-based fuels contributes to increases in atmospheric CO2, contributing to climate change. As other sectors electrify, current battery technology makes this impractical for the aviation industry. The fastest pathway to reducing the carbon contributions of aviation is to create low or no net carbon-emitting drop-in petroleum alternatives. This research explores 3 potential sorghum derived jet fuel molecules from 4 different production routes, hydro-processed esters and fatty acids (HEFA), and Jet A, to identify how blends including these fuels could offer improved performance (MJ/kg, MJ/L) and improved emissions (gCO2/MJ) while minimizing costs. Different applications will value each target metric differently. This research utilizes the Jet Fuel Blend Optimizer (JudO) to create a 4-dimensional Pareto front across potential solutions. The molecules considered will not offer reduced cost compared to conventional jet fuel (Jet A), but they can be utilized to create blends with higher specific energy, greater energy density, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Considerations including carbon credits, the sale of byproducts, and the valuation of improved performance will make the proposed molecules more commercially viable. At the lowest region of GHG solutions, coupled with equivalent LCFS approximations, JudO determined blends that could achieve as high as 69% overall carbon reductions at a premium of $0.34/L.

Feldhausen, John J.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Affordability of Household Transportation Fuel Costs by Region and Socioeconomic Factors

Transportation energy is an important component of household budgets. Household vehicle fuel, one part of total transportation energy costs is over 3% of total household expenditures nationwide in the U.S. The average annual expenditure of over $2,000 for vehicle fuel (mostly gasoline) is comparable to the total average household expenditures for electricity and natural gas combined. However, these average values vary geographically, and lower income households can face higher energy cost burdens. The highly resolved data developed in this study reveals the variation of household energy burdens across the country and provides localized data to support local decision making.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electricity Market of the Future: Potential North American Designs Without Fuel Costs

Electricity markets across the United States and Canada have evolved since their inception in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Not all states and provinces moved toward restructured organized electricity markets, but rather those that have belonged to markets operated by independent system operators (ISOs) and regional transmission organizations, with designs developed through stakeholder processes and approved through state, provincial, or federal agencies, such as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Optimizing design and dispatch of a resilient renewable energy microgrid for a South African hospital

Lack of access to reliable energy is a major concern for countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The national grids are unable to consistently satisfy demand. Therefore, users turn to distributed generation systems in the form of back-up generators. However, such systems are usually designed based on a rule of thumb. We employ a mixed-integer linear programming model that considers several options such as renewable energy, combined heat and power, and storage technologies, in addition to those on-site, to provide optimal design and dispatch decisions that minimize total cost. We apply this model to a case study for a hospital in South Africa, considering its need for reliable electricity in light of multiple outages that might occur over the course of a year, as well as its high heating and cooling loads. Our results show that optimal design and dispatch decisions for the distributed generation system address reliability challenges, regardless of the time at which they occur. And, these solutions yield millions of dollars in savings, suggesting that technologies such as the absorption chiller may be overlooked in typical designs; its integration can reduce demand charges even in the absence of combined heat and power. We show that total cost is most sensitive to changes in site electrical demand, followed by capital cost, fuel cost, photovoltaic production, and monthly demand charges; changes in fuel cost primarily affect system sizes of combined heat and power and the absorption chiller, while photovoltaic system size is more sensitive to the changes in capital and fuel costs, photovoltaic resource availability, and hourly electrical demand. Finally, an outage simulator demonstrates the ability of our optimized system to sustain with no interruptions in power five-hour outages with probability 1.0 and ten-hour outages with probability 0.65, significant improvements over 0.5 and 0.0, respectively, under a business-as-usual case.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Performance and cost of fuel cells for urban air mobility

Several companies are developing enabling elements of urban air mobility (UAM) for air taxis, including prototypes of electric vertical take-off and landing (eVTOL) vehicles. These prototypes incorporate electric and hybrid powertrains for multi-rotor and tilt-rotor crafts. Many eVTOLS are using batteries for propulsion and charging them rapidly between the flights or swapping them for slow charging overnight. Rapid charging degrades the battery cycle life while swapping requires multiple batteries and charging stations. This study has conducted a technoeconomic evaluation of the eVTOL air taxis with alternate powertrains using hydrogen fuel cell systems being developed for light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles. We consider performance metrics such as fuel cell engine power, weight, and durability; hydrogen consumption and weight of storage system; and maximum take-off weight. The metrics for economic evaluation are capital cost, operating and maintenance cost, fuel cost, and the total cost of ownership (TCO). In this work, we compare the performance and TCO of battery, fuel cell and fuel cell – battery hybrid powertrains for multi-rotor and tilt-rotor crafts. We show that fuel cells are the only viable concept for powering multi-rotor eVTOLs on an urban scenario that requires 60-mile range, and hybrid fuel cells are superior to batteries as powertrains for tiltrotor eVTOLs

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-1: Uranium-based Ceramic LWR Fuel Fabrication (Rev.2)

Cost module on LWR fuel fabrication to accompany the Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report. In this update, we are adding detailed life cycle cost data and a calculated, levelized fabrication cost derived from a non-proprietary bottom-up estimate prepared in 1978 by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) (Judkins and Olsen 1978a). In 2018, the 1978 ORNL estimate was escalated by SA&I authors to 2017 USD using factors that represent inflation, escalation above inflation typical of nuclear projects, and the effects of more stringent safety and environmental regulations. In this FY-21 document, the $/kgU results in 2017 USD from the unpublished 2018 interim study (Williams and Ganda 2018) can be escalated to 2020 USD using a factor of 1.052. The literature-based unit cost (or price) data from previous (2004–2017) AFC-CBRs are escalated to 2020 USD using factors from Chapter 8 of the main FY-21 AFC-CBR document. This data, in addition to the results of the updated bottom-up estimate, are used to define the “what-it-takes” (WIT) range for the unit fabrication costs for conventional ceramic UOX light-water reactor (LWR) fuel. This FY-23 document also includes calculated unit costs for accident-tolerant LWR fuels (ATFs) of three different types. Some of these fuels constitute a ceramic pelletized form with fuel meat uranium compounds other than UO2 (a.k.a.,. UOX), thus the change in the title of this module in which the word “UO2” is changed to “Uranium-based Ceramic.”

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-4 and Module D1-5 Ceramic Pelletized Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) Fuel Fabrication Ceramic Vibrocompacted Fuel Fabrication

This is a cost module that is part of the Advanced Fuel Cycle -- Cost Basis Report. Module D1-4: Nature of this module update (Rev 1) from previous advanced fuel cycle cost basis reports (AFCCBRs): new life cycle cost data on U,Pu SFR mixed oxide (MOX) fuels is derived from the Nonproliferation Assessment Systems Analysis Program (NASAP) conducted in the late 1970s. Highassay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) ceramic fuel is also discussed in more detail compared to earlier AFC-CBRs, since some advanced SFR concepts currently under development will require this HALEU fuel type for startup. Module D1-5: Nature of this FY-21 module update from previous AFC-CBRs: this module includes a few new references and a somewhat expanded discussion of vibrocompaction fuel fabrication technology. The WIT values for VIPAC are pegged directly to those for conventional LWR and SFR pelletized U,Pu MOX (note that this module now includes VIPAC MOX fuel for LWRs in addition to SFRs). Based on information from Russia, where VIPAC has been studied extensively, the unit costs are expressed as a percentage of those in the new updated Module D1-2 (pelletized U,Pu MOX) and new updated Module D1-4 (pelletized U,Pu MOX) for large NOAK fabrication facilities of the same production capacity. Since both ceramic pelletized MOX Modules D1-2 and D1-4 benefitted from analysis of 1970s NASAP data, by extension this Module D1-5 also benefits.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-2 LWR Pelletized MOX Fuel Fabrication

Nature of this 2021 Module update from previous AFC-CBRs: Use of U,Pu MOX life cycle cost data from late 1970s Non-proliferation Assessment Systems Analysis Program (NASAP). This archived data has been updated in 2018-2019 to reflect today’s regulatory and economic conditions and is presented in 2017. For the lower unit cost MOX fabrication case the PuO 2 from the reprocessed LWR SNF is assumed to be fabricated immediately after aqueous PUREX reprocessing, thus minimizing the time for undesirable actinide radioisotopes, from the standpoint of radiation safety, to build in. Fabricated MOX utilizing separated and multi-year stored Pu from aqueously reprocessed SNF has also been added to this Module as a second LWR MOX fabrication variant, requiring additional and more costly glovebox design and operations to protect personnel. This new NASAP-informed data augments historical data and unit cost projections appearing in the 2009 (Shropshire et al 2009), 2012 (Dixon et al 2012), and 2017 Dixon et al 2017) AFC-CBRs. The “What-it-takes” 2017 unit fabrication cost values based on the updated NASAP studies are escalated to 2020$ for this 2021 Update Report.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Adoption of Plug-in Electric Vehicles: Local Fuel Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Across the U.S.

The dependence on gasoline-powered light-duty automobiles has made U.S. households vulnerable to the burden of fuel costs. Tailpipe emissions from these vehicles constitute 58% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the U.S., which are damaging to the environment (EPA, 2023). The adoption of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) has been shown to effectively reduce fuel costs and GHG emissions. However, local effects on these benefits are not well understood by American consumers, potentially limiting adoption and therefore the realization of PEV benefits at scale (MacInnis & Krosnick, 2020; EY Americas, 2023). To fill this research gap, this study estimates the fuel cost savings and GHG emission reductions at the state and ZIP code levels by considering local fuel prices, vehicle class preference, average vehicle model year, fuel efficiencies, and driving intensities. The study's findings reveal that the adoption of PEVs can yield substantial benefits in terms of fuel cost savings and GHG emission reductions nationwide. Specifically, driving a battery electric vehicle (BEV) is estimated to result in annual savings of up to $\$2,200$, while driving a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) can lead to savings up to $\$1,500$, when compared to an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) of equivalent size. Moreover, using population-weighted averages by ZIP code, BEVs and PHEVs show the potential to save 400 and 200 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per mile, respectively, compared to a representative ICEV of the same class. The magnitude of fuel cost savings and emissions reduction vary by region due to various factors. Generally, regions with high gasoline prices, low electricity prices, preferences for larger vehicles, and high driving intensities tend to see relatively large fuel savings. The emissions reductions are more pronounced in areas with clean grids where consumer preferences lie with large vehicles. This regional variability underscores the importance of considering local contextual factors when assessing the potential benefits of PEV adoption. In more than 99% of U.S. ZIP codes, PEVs result in overall savings in fuel use (and subsequent costs) and GHG emissions. While not a central focus of this analysis, reductions in GHG tailpipe emissions from PEV adoption would also come with reductions in criteria pollutant emissions, contributing to improved local air quality depending on the PEV penetration, population density, and electricity generation infrastructure in the locality.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Natural fiber-derived gas diffusion layers for high performance, lower cost PEM fuel cells

The gas diffusion layer (GDL) is a critical component of proton exchange membrane fuel cells. GDL manufacture is dominated by the use of polyacrylonitrile (PAN) fibers, resulting in high production costs. Those costs contribute to the high cost of fuel cell stacks. Thus, reducing GDL manufacturing costs without sacrificing performance, should help reduce the overall cost of the fuel cell stack. Using inexpensive, natural fiber-based papers and fabric as substrates, here we examine the inherent performance these materials as GDLs, and the improvements enabled by the addition of a microporous layer, gas-phase hydrophobic treatment, and densification. The resulting GDLs achieve equivalent performance the commercial baseline GDL and demonstrate the potential of lower cost GDLs.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-7 Contact-Handled Pelletized Pressurized Heavy Water (PHWR) UOX Fuel Fabrication (Rev.1)

In addition to literature-based pressurized heavy-water reactor (PHWR) fuel price information in the 2017 AFC-CBR, the what-it-takes (WIT) unit cost data in this update is informed by new analysis and escalation of the 1978 PHWR-UOX fuel life cycle cost (LCC) data from ORNL reports prepared for the 1977–1980 Nonproliferation Alternative Systems Assessment Program (NASAP). (These reports are referenced and summarized in detail in Module D1-PR.) The PHWR fuel fabrication LCC data in these reports is scaled from a bottom-up cost estimate for a reference technology pressurized-water reactor (PWR)—uranium oxide (UOX) fuel fabrication plant by using algorithms that consider the manufacturing process complexity, fuel design complexity, plant floor space requirements, and the radiation and health, safety, and environmental (HS&E) regulatory environment of PHWR-UOX fuel production vis-à-vis light-water reactor (LWR)-UOX production (PWR fuel in this case). The module name has been changed from “Canadian Deuterium Uranium (CANDU)” to the more generic PHWR fuel fabrication in recognition that not all power reactors that might use this fuel type are considered. Unfortunately, the detailed algorithms and their design bases were not archived at the end of the NASAP effort of the commercial CANDU concept specifically developed in the middle of the last century by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

SDOM (Storage Deployment Optimization Model) [SWR-21-73]

SDOM is designed to accurately represent the operation of energy storage across different timescales, including long-duration and seasonal applications, and the spatiotemporal diversity and complementarity among VRE sources. SDOM uses an hourly temporal resolution, a fine spatial resolution for VRE sources, and a 1-year optimization window. SDOM assumes that all builds of VRE are accompanied by sufficient additional transmission capacity to allow full utilization of these additional resources. Nuclear, hydropower, and other renewable generation (e.g., biomass and geothermal energy sources) are fixed based on operational data (time series) for a given year; thus, SDOM minimizes total system cost using conventional generators as balancing units and using VRE and storage technologies to achieve a user-defined carbon-free or renewable energy target. The total system cost includes capital costs, fixed operation-and-maintenance (FO&M) costs, variable operation-and-maintenance (VO&M) costs, and fuel cost for power generation and storage technologies.

Guerra Fernandez, Omar Jose↗
DOE OSTI2024

Assessing Total Cost of Driving Competitiveness of Zero-Emission Trucks

This file includes supporting data on modeled medium and heavy-duty vehicle (MHDV) stock, sales, energy consumption, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and total cost of driving (TCD) for the scenarios presented in "Assessing Total Cost of Driving Competitiveness of Zero-Emission Trucks". It also includes input assumptions for vehicle technology attributes (cost and fuel economy), fuel costs, maintenance costs, and the opportunity cost of charging time for the central scenario and relevant sensitivities. Values are reported at the national (United States) level for all vehicle classes and technologies. Tab 'B' inclues definitions, while data is provided in subsequent sheets.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Cost-effective valorization of 2,3-butanediol to high-value chemicals and jet fuel

Here, this work outlines an optimized process for converting 2,3-butanediol (BDO) into sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and C4 chemicals. BDO is reactively separated from fermentation broth by forming dioxolanes, which are converted to isobutyraldehyde, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), and 1,3-butadiene. These intermediates are reduced and dehydrated over Cu/ZSM-5 to form alkenes, which can be oligomerized and hydrotreated to jet-range alkanes. Previous BDO-dioxolane-alkene processes are limited by the requirement for a continuous aldehyde source for dioxolane formation. Brønsted acidic zeolites catalyze dioxolane deacetalization to form isobutyraldehyde and MEK in a >2:1 molar ratio, providing an internal, recyclable aldehyde source. Dioxolane formation optimization was performed to achieve >95% dioxolane yields over Amberlyst-15 and minimize isobutyraldehyde recycle. The overall BDO-dioxolane-fuel process yields an alkane mixture that enables at least a 50% v/v blend with Jet-A. Techno-economic analyses and life cycle assessments for this BDO-dioxolane-fuel process yield scenarios with <$2.50 per gallon gas equivalent and >58% reduction in CO2 emissions.

2,3-butanediol↗