Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “power purchase agreement”

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

Hybrid Power Purchase Agreements for Flexible 24/7 Energy Delivery – A Comprehensive Review of Current Practices and Research Pathways

Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) are becoming increasingly preferred among large energy consumers, such as data centers, to secure cost-effective energy and meet accelerating demand growth. Traditionally, variable renewable energy (VRE)-based PPAs operate on a pay-as-produced basis, balancing supply and demand for a relatively longer duration (e.g., annually). However, the focus is shifting toward matching supply and demand on an hourly basis to fully meet energy needs. This shift requires the integration of flexible energy resources, such as hydropower, thermal generation, and energy storage, to complement VRE sources like wind and solar, forming the foundation for 24/7 PPA. This work contributes by: (i) reviewing emerging market trends and current practices in PPA procurement, supported by data on PPA prices and technology portfolios; (ii) synthesizing the existing literature on modeling approaches for contract pricing, quantities, hybrid resource procurement, and risk management in 24/7 PPA design, while identifying key research gaps; and (iii) proposing an integrated 24/7 PPA design framework along with two contracting mechanisms from the perspectives of both PPA providers and consumers. The proposed framework highlights critical modeling challenges, risk-allocation issues, and future research opportunities for 24/7 PPA design.

24/7↗

Power Purchase Agreements: Overview

Overview guidance for the Better Buildings, Better Plants, and Better Climate Challenge programs on the types of power purchase agreements available for renewable energy procurement.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Utility-Scale Solar, 2023 Edition: Analysis of Empirical Plant-level Data from U.S. Ground-mounted PV, PV+battery, and CSP Plants (exceeding 5 MWAC)

Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2023 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2022, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.

analysis↗

Utility-Scale Solar, 2024 Edition: Analysis of Empirical Plant-level Data from U.S. Ground-mounted PV, PV+battery, and CSP Plants (exceeding 5 MWAC)

Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2024 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2023, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, net value, and interconnection queue data.

analysis↗

Near-Term Electricity Requirement and Emission Implications for Sustainable Aviation Fuel Production with CO 2 -to-Fuels Technologies

Aviation contributed approximately 10% of the U.S. transportation sector's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and about 3% of the nation's total GHG production before the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic (EPA 2022). Unlike the ground transportation sector, which can be decarbonized by using batteries and hydrogen fuel cell powertrain technologies, the technical and economic challenges of aviation electrification open the opportunity for CO 2 utilization (CO2U) using clean power sources. The U.S. government set a goal to produce 3 billion gallons per year of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) by 2030 and scale up the production to 35 billion gallons per year by 2050 (Bioenergy Technologies Office 2022). In this report, we examine three potential locations, in California, Iowa, and Louisiana, for SAF production using two production pathways that are expected to be available by 2030. We analyze the electricity cost to satisfy 10% of the SAF production potential for the select locations. Specifically, we consider (1) retail electricity cost from the default local utility in each location; (2) physical power purchase agreement (PPA) for renewable power and battery storage hybrid systems with preset prices; (3) financial PPA from a dedicated renewable plant; and (4) estimated real-time pricing (RTP) from the wholesale power market with utility delivery adders. Retail rates are available for the three potential locations; however, the developer should negotiate with the local utility in Iowa for new tariff riders, because the load of the proposed SAF plant (1.4 GW) is significantly higher than the current industrial tariff structure requirement (200 kW). The developers are not able to claim federal credits (i.e., the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022) when sourcing electricity from local utilities. Developers could consider prioritizing physical and financial PPAs as purchase options. While physical PPAs can be imported out of state, this structure imposes availability issues as developers must locate in the same electricity grid regions. Financial PPAs do not have the same location restrictions and provide the same cost savings as physical PPAs, but financial PPAs impose financial risks in the event of system curtailment and grid interruption. RTPs are available for customers in California with flexible load and hourly load management capability; however, utilities in our studied regions in Louisiana and Iowa only offer time-of-use and curtailment programs to incentivize lower energy usage in peak hours. These utilities do not currently offer RTP programs, and the developer may need to have further negotiations with the local utilities to access RTP programs. The results show that purchased electricity prices may range from 2.6 cents/kWh to 7.1 cents/kWh for the three studied plants.

02 PETROLEUM↗

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↗

Techno-Economic Viability of Flexible Dispatch of Unconventional Geothermal Systems

Flexible geothermal operations could boost project returns through the allocation of improved power purchase agreements and/or exploitation of power price arbitrage opportunities. In this study, we investigated the techno-economic feasibility of variable flow rate control and time-of-day pricing in closed-loop geothermal systems. We considered U-shaped multilateral system configurations and modeled a variety of technical system parameters. These designs were simulated using a slender-body theory (SBT) model for transient heat transfer and fluid flow. This subsurface model was integrated into the flexible geothermal economic model (FGEM) tool to evaluate the overall flexible geothermal system techno-economics. Future hourly ambient temperature conditions were based on the Sup3rCC dataset. Published datasets were used for future hourly wholesale electricity prices. We analyzed four operating strategies: 1) baseload operation, 2) seasonal dispatch (high flow rate during summer and nominal flow rate during the rest of the year), 3) net generation maximization by varying flow rate to maximize net power output, and 4) revenue maximization by varying flow rate to maximize revenue. We ran all four scenarios for a multiloop configuration with 12 lateral passes, 7-km vertical depth and 87-km total drilling length. Furthermore, we assumed a 60 degrees C/km geothermal gradient and ambient temperature and wholesale electricity prices for New Mexico as a typical state location. The nominal flow rate was set to 80 kg/s. When considering drilling costs of $1,000/m and a discount rate of 7%, the generation maximization scenario resulted in the lowest levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of ~$150/MWh. When considering project return on investment (ROI), defined as lifetime net income divided by upfront capital costs, all flexible operation scenarios performed better than the base case scenario. The highest ROI of 80% was obtained with the revenue maximization scenario. With drilling costs of $200/m and a discount rate of 5%, the generation maximization scenario resulted in LCOE of $49/MWh.

flexible geothermal↗

Model results and data for Nontechnical Barriers to Geothermal Development

Data included in this submission support the analysis conducted for the report "Nontechnical Barriers to Geothermal Development" which is linked bellow. These data include information about the power purchase agreements (PPAs) analyzed for the report, inputs and model results for the pro forma economic analysis, and outputs from the regression analysis conducted on PPAs comparing geothermal and other power generation technologies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utility-Scale Solar, 2022 Edition: Analysis of Empirical Plant-level Data from U.S. Ground-mounted PV, PV+battery, and CSP Plants (exceeding 5 MWAC)

Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2022 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2021, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.

2022↗

Status and Trends in the Voluntary Market (2020 Data)

Green power refers to renewable electricity voluntarily purchased by retail electricity customers. Renewable energy sources for green power include solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and small-scale hydropower. This report summarizes data on the various ways in which voluntary purchasers - including residential, commercial, and institutional customers - purchase green power. We summarize key historic trends in U.S. voluntary green power markets and the current status of green power sales through seven products: utility green pricing programs, utility renewable contracts, competitive suppliers, unbundled renewable energy certificates, community choice aggregations, and power purchase agreements. It includes discussion of how the voluntary market may impact the grid.

community choice aggregation↗

Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition

Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2021 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2020, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.

2021↗

External Financing for Carbon Reduction Projects

This fact sheet summarizes 7 common external financing modes and provides examples for each: Energy-as-a-Service, Energy Savings Performance Contracts, Power Purchase Agreements, Sustainability Linked-Loans, Green Loans, Property Assessed Clean Energy, and On-Bill Financing/Repayment.

carbon emissions↗

LH CO 2 MENT Colorado Project (Final Report)

The objective of Electricore’s pre-FEED project “LH CO 2 MENT COLORADO PROJECT” is to accelerate the implementation of a 1.5 million tonnes per year (TPY), and first-of-a-kind (FOAK) at world scale, Svante VeloxoTherm™ carbon capture plant. This project represents a quantum leap to a large-scale facility that will launch Svante’s carbon capture technology into the next era of accomplishments and market acceptance. By completing the Front-End Loading (FEL) Feasibility Study Report (FEL-2) for a fit-for-purpose design at the HOLCIM cement plant, located near Florence Colorado, USA, this technology can be proven as the future of large-scale deployment for carbon capture and storage. This carbon capture plant was designed with the goal of reaching a target of near Net Zero Emissions by capturing 90% of the carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from the HOLCIM cement plant and from the boiler which produces steam required to regenerate the adsorbent. Additionally, this project will be leveraging a renewable Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) using solar energy to acquire power at the target price of 0.04 $/kWh or less. In its current configuration CO 2 emissions from the HOLCIM cement plant is around 700 – 800 kg/ton of clinker produced. The proposed new carbon capture plant will allow a reduction of CO 2 emissions to about 100 kg/ton of clinker produced. The scope of work consists of the process design and capital & operating cost estimation (Class IV) for a total plant capacity of 4,750 TPD of pipeline grade CO 2 . The Svante VeloxoTherm™ technology is comprised of a Rotary Adsorption Machine (RAM) for intensified Thermal Swing Adsorption (TSA) using Structured Adsorbent Beds (SABs) and related Balance of Plant (BOP), including CO 2 compression. A business case (financial analysis) evaluation has been undertaken for the Owner’s management review. Recommendations on how best to proceed to the next stage of the project have been conveyed and are documented within this report. This analysis has relied on a detailed and comprehensive Project Financial Model, evaluating the Total Project IRR (after tax, unlevered, and including all forecast 45Q PTCs and 100% tax efficiency) – the project financial analysis (as opposed to standard TEA analysis) only considered a 12 year plant economic lifetime as a result of 45Q being the sole driver considered at this stage. The Total Project IRR was evaluated across a large number of potential scenarios. The evaluation demonstrated that if the 45Q PTD is increased to $85/MT for sequestration, there are a large number of feasible scenarios which demonstrate economic returns.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Electricity Costs and Carbon Implications for CO 2 -to-Fuels in Selected Locations in 2030

With the growing interest in converting carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) to fuels and products to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions and extend carbon from biogenic and other sources, the development of carbon capture and utilization (CO2U) technologies and industry is crucial. The Markets, Resources, and Environmental and Energy Justice of CO 2 -to-Fuels Technologies (short title: MarkeRs & EEJ) project supports this goal by assessing the resource and market potential and infrastructure requirements for mid-term (-2030) and long-term (-2050) deployment of CO2U technologies. The overall project analyzes CO2U economic and resource requirements as well as sustainability and environmental and energy justice (EEJ) metrics. This report focuses on short-term (-2030) aspects of the project. It identifies three CO2U locations in the Midwestern United States and quantifies the costs for potential electricity resources and marginal emissions for each site in the near term (e.g., 2030). We focus on four electricity purchase options, including retail rate, physical power purchase agreement (PPA), financial PPA, and real-time pricing (RTP), for each of the three sites and consider potential policies such as production tax credits (PTCs). We also assess time-dependent hourly marginal electricity costs and the marginal emission rates using modeled scenarios from Cambium (Gagnon et al. 2021).The results of the analysis are expected to inform other projects within the U.S. Department of Energy's CO 2 -to-Fuels Consortium, especially the Economics and Sustainability of CO 2 Utilization Technologies with Techno-Economic Analysis and Life Cycle Analysis (TEA/LCA) project, led by Michael Wang of Argonne National Laboratory and Ling Tao of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The project results are also expected to inform the investment and technology communities and policymakers at the U.S. Department of Energy, state, and regional levels and guide investment by government and industry in research and development portfolios.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

GeoRePORT Protocol Volume VI: Resource Size Assessment Tool

GeoRePORT is based on the concept that a geothermal system can be described both in terms of the quality of the geothermal resource as it relates to the potential to extract heat ("Resource Grade") and the progress of research and development over the lifetime of the project ("Project Progress"). Resource grade and project progress are reported for three assessment categories: geologic, technical, and socio-economic. Each category has specific criteria and guidelines for assessing both resource grade and project progress, as outlined in each of the following assessment tools (and associated colors): (1) Geological Assessment Tool (representative colors: reds, oranges, browns); (2) Technical Assessment Tool (representative colors: blues, purples); (3) Socio-Economic Assessment Tool (representative colors: greens, yellows). Additionally, users may need to estimate the project size (often reported in MWe or MWth). The resource size assessment tool (RSAT) is an essential addition to GeoRePORT due to the economic and legal context of geothermal development. In order to utilize a geothermal resource, a competitive Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), or similar, often must be obtained, for which the resource's power capacity must be demonstrated. To determine that a geothermal heat or power project is worthy of development, investors or other funding mechanisms often require information on the anticipated heat and/or power potential of the reservoir. They might also be interested in the certainty of that estimate. However, proving the existence and size of a geothermal resource is comparatively expensive and risky relative to other renewable technologies; it can cost developers 5 to 10 million USD to demonstrate a financially viable geothermal resource (Young et al. 2017). GeoRePORT aims to address this barrier to development by providing a consistent and clear assessment of resource quality and certainty. The RSAT will enable GeoRePORT users to not only qualitatively report on a given a resource, but also to compare standard methodologies for quantitatively estimating a resource size in terms of potential heat and/or power output.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Status and Trends in the Voluntary Market (2021 Data)

Green power refers to renewable electricity voluntarily purchased by retail electricity customers. Renewable energy sources for green power include solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and small-scale hydropower. This report summarizes data on the various ways in which voluntary purchasers including residential, commercial, and institutional customers purchase green power. We summarize key historic trends in U.S. voluntary green power markets and the current status of green power sales through seven products: utility green pricing programs, utility renewable contracts, competitive suppliers, unbundled renewable energy certificates, community choice aggregations, and power purchase agreements. It includes discussion of how the voluntary market may impact the grid.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Navigating Integration: Key Challenges for Data Centers, Nuclear Stakeholders, and Utility Operators

he exponential growth of data centers—driven by artificial intelligence and cloud computing—is reshaping the U.S. energy landscape, presenting urgent challenges and transformative opportunities for data center developers, nuclear energy providers, and utility operators. As data centers are projected to consume up to 12% of U.S. electricity by 2028, stakeholders must address rapid deployment needs, grid congestion, and the demand for reliable, high-quality power. This presentation explores the multifaceted barriers to integrating data centers with nuclear and utility infrastructure, including land use constraints, public perception, regulatory complexity, and workforce alignment. It highlights the distinct priorities and operational cultures of each sector, and the friction that arises from misaligned planning horizons and risk tolerances. We examine collaborative strategies such as co-siting, hybrid power-purchase agreements, unified community engagement, and innovative financing models.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗