Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “real options technology selection option pricing”

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.

A Real-Options Approach for NASA Strategic Technology Selection

In this paper, we examine the use of real options valuation in the context of prioritizing advanced technologies for NASA funding. Further, we offer a set of computational procedures that quantifies the option value of each technology.

real options technology selection option pricing↗

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↗

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↗