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 presentation summarizes use of the NETL industrial sources carbon capture retrofit database (CCRD) to model deployment scenarios, assuming different levels of incentives provided by IRS Section 45Q, as well as a tax on CO2 emissions.
Over the course of the past few years, several new and innovative fully or partiailly reusable launch vehicle designs have been initiated with the objective of reducing the cost of space transportation. These new designs are in various stages hardware development for technology and system demonstrators. The larger vehicles include the Lockheed Martin X-33 technology demonstrator for VentureStar and the Space Access launcher. The smaller launcher ventures include Kelly Space and Technology and Rotary Rocket Company. A common denominator between the new large and small commercial launch systems is the ability to obtain project financing and at an affordable cost. Both are having or will have great difficulty in obtaining financing in the capital markets because of the dollar amounts and the risk involved. The large established companies are pursuing multi-billion dollar developments which are a major challenge to finance because of the size and risk of the projects. The smaller start-up companies require less capital for their smaller systems, however, their lack of corporate financial muscle and launch vehicle track record results in a major challenge to obtain financing also because of high risk. On Wall Street, new launch system financing is a question of market, technical, organizational, legal/regulatory and financial risk. The current limit of acceptable financial risk for Space businesses on Wall Street are the telecommunications and broadcast satellite projects, of which many in number are projected for the future. Tbc recent problems with Iridium market and financial performance are casting a long shadow over new satellite project financing, making it increasingly difficult for the new satellite projects to obtain needed financing.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Two common energy policy instruments in the United States are tax incentives and technology standards. Although these instruments have been shown to be less cost-effective as a means to reduce CO2 emissions than direct emissions pricing mechanisms, it can be challenging to compare the CO2 emissions reduction costs of such policies across sectors, given the wide range in estimates for any given policy and inconsistencies in how such estimates are constructed across studies. This study addresses this analytical gap by simultaneously comparing the cost-effectiveness of policies across the electricity and transportation sectors using three publicly available US energy system models (EM-NEMS, ReEDS, and GCAM-USA). Four policies are explicitly compared: wind and solar tax credits, a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), a renewable fuel standard (RFS), and an electric vehicle (EV) tax credit. An economy-wide carbon tax is used as a benchmark for cost-effectiveness. Results from this study confirm prior insights about the cost-effectiveness of economy-wide carbon pricing relative to sectoral instruments but also reveal several novel insights about particular sectoral policies. Specifically, this study finds that (1) current electricity tax incentives provide uneven support for wind and solar technologies, (2) despite known inefficiencies, renewable energy policies in the electricity sector are less expensive than earlier estimates due to technology advancement and changes in market conditions, (3) within transportation, an expanded RFS with increasing advanced biofuel targets is more cost-effective than an EV tax credit extension under plausible assumptions, (4) EV incentives lead to a rebound in conventional vehicle fuel economy that further erodes cost-effectiveness, and (5) the change in policy costs over time is not known a priori, but the relative cost ordering among these policies does not depend on the timeframe of analysis. These results are largely robust to the underlying modeling framework, increasing the confidence with which they can be applied to climate policy evaluation.
Achieving a net-zero emission economy in the United States requires integrating diverse low-carbon and negative-emission technologies into the existing fossil fuel-dominant power fleet. Potential technologies from the low-carbon portfolio include renewable power, fossil power with carbon capture and storage (CCS), bioenergy with CCS (BECCS), and direct air capture (DAC). Renewable power is a clean energy source but has to pair with costly battery storage to provide dispatchable electricity. Fossil power with CCS offers dispatchable electricity yet still relies on DAC to offset residual emissions, even when deploying deep CCS with more than 90% CO2 capture. Coal-biomass co-firing with CCS, a subset of BECCS, is a reliable energy production technology that can be retrofitted from existing electricity generation units (EGUs). Power plant retrofit maximizes the use of the current U.S. coal power fleet without the need for large-scale deployment of new renewable power, battery storage, or DAC. Retrofitting coal-biomass co-firing with deep CCS in EGUs is a promising option, but not a universal solution. Biomass co-firing at a power plant introduces economic challenges and indirectly poses pressure on land and water resources. Meanwhile, retrofitting deep CCS affects plant efficiency and raises electricity generation costs. Overall, the technical feasibility and economic viability of plant retrofits vary across EGUs, as they are contingent upon the regional availability of biomass, unit-specific characteristics, site-specific fuel supply costs, and adjacent CO2 storage potential. Government incentives like 45Q can improve the retrofit viability, though the impact requires further quantification. A comprehensive analysis at the unit level is essential to address the question regarding the fate of the U.S. coal-fired electricity generation fleet toward the net-zero emission goal. This study conducts a systematic techno-economic-environmental assessment of EGUs to identify the viability of biomass co-firing and deep CCS retrofits in the U.S. coal-fired power fleet. Specifically, it characterizes the techno-economic performance of deep carbon capture, estimates life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and conducts a fleet-level assessment on retrofit viability. The key objectives are (1) to estimate the unit-specific performance and retrofitted cost under various biomass co-firing levels and CO2 capture rates; (2) to determine the possibility of reaching net-zero emission at the fleet level; (3) to quantify the cumulative capacities that are suitable for plant retrofits under current and future biomass supply scenarios; and (4) to improve the understanding of policy impacts on such retrofits to help the power sector’s transition to a net-zero economy. Techno-economic Model of Deep Carbon Capture. This study develops the performance and economic models for Monoethanolamine-based post-combustion CO2 capture at 95–99% capture rates. The process is simulated in Aspen Plus, analyzing the performance of carbon capture technology by varying the plant sizes, solvent lean loading, CO2 concentrations, and flue gas inlet temperature. Based on the key inputs and output parameters of CO2 capture, a reduced-order performance model of deep carbon capture is formulated. In addition, an engineering-economic model integrating the performance metrics is developed to estimate the capital as well as operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Capital cost estimations follow the framework of the Integrated Environmental Control Model (IECM) and incorporate data regressions from three technical reports by IECM, the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The O&M cost estimation utilizes the actual inventory consumption rate and labor requirements. Both performance and cost models are embedded into IECM v13.0-beta, a fossil-fuel power plant modeling tool. Life Cycle Assessment of Power Plants. This study estimates the GHG emissions of power plants through life cycle assessment (LCA). The LCA scope includes fuel supply, combustion-based power generation, and CO2 transport and storage. The fuel-based life cycle module is designed following the framework of the NETL Unit Process Library and CO2U LCA Guidance Toolkit. The module is then incorporated into IECM v13.0-beta. The process-based LCA is applied to estimate the GHG emissions of coal and biomass supply, coal- and coal-biomass co-firing power plant operation, as well as CO2 pipeline transport and geographical sequestration. An uncertainty analysis is conducted to quantify the variability and uncertainty associated with the LCA using the Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) method. Fleet-level Assessment. This study evaluates the technical and economic feasibility of selected coal-fired EGUs, examines the role of tax credits in retrofit viability, and assesses the competitiveness of retrofitted units against other low-carbon options. Unit screening identifies EGUs for the study, focusing on new, efficient baseload units with air pollution controls. The power plant databases are then established to organize unit-specific information on performance and operating conditions from the relevant public databases. Biomass for co-firing retrofits is selected based on home and neighboring county availability, ensuring sustained operation with at least a 5% co-firing level. The CO2 storage site is determined by state-level storage potential, with ArcGIS Pro and NETL CO2 Saline Storage Cost Model used to identify the optimal balance between the nearest transport distances and affordable storage costs. The latest IECM v13.0-beta is then employed to configure and evaluate the eligible EGUs with or without the deployment of deep CCS and biomass co-firing. A supply curve is established to illustrate the cumulative installed capacity suitable for retrofits at different cost levels. A sensitivity analysis on tax credits for carbon sequestration is performed. Finally, a unit-level cost comparison is conducted among retrofitted plants, renewable power with battery storage, and abated fossil fuels with DAC. Expected Results. This study evaluates the technical, economic, and environmental metrics of each EGU across an array of CO2 capture rates and biomass co-firing level scenarios. Unit-level comparisons will identify critical factors influencing technical performance. The supply curves with and without tax incentives will provide insights into the impact of tax credits on biomass co-firing and CCS deployment. The cost comparisons with renewables and DAC-retrofit will assess the competitiveness of the retrofitted units. Life cycle emissions from each unit will be assessed to identify the scenarios under which net-zero emissions can be achieved. These analyses are expected to determine the total coal-fired capacity suitable for serving as a low-carbon energy source with or without tax incentives. The study results are novel in identifying optimal unit-specific strategies for producing carbon-neutral power, whether through retrofitting EGUs with deep CCS, biomass co-firing, DAC, or installing renewable power with battery. The findings will provide insight into nationwide efforts to ensure reliable, affordable, and low-carbon electricity. It also will inform investment decisions and policies in the deployment of deep carbon capture and negative emission technologies for a net-zero energy future.
Manufactured homes offer American consumers an affordable option for decent single-family detached housing. For working-class American families in many U.S. markets, manufactured homes are the first step toward home ownership. They now make up 10% of all new homes constructed in the United States, with higher percentages in the south and in rural communities. To help encourage the production of homes that are more durable, healthy, efficient, and disaster resistant, the U.S. Department of Energy is bringing its building science research to the manufactured housing industry through DOE’s Zero Energy Ready Manufactured Home (ZER-MH) program, which provides technical assistance and voluntary guidelines to manufactured home builders. Homes built to these guidelines are better able to handle power outages and less likely to experience moisture issues, offering a better product option for American families. This higher quality is evidenced by energy modeling which shows homes manufactured to these voluntary guidelines will typically use half the energy of manufactured homes built to the current minimum requirements of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)’s Manufactured Housing and Construction Safety Standard (MHCSS). These homes can also reduce critical energy demand during the busiest hours of the day, typically late afternoon and early evening in the summer when air conditioning demand is highest and mornings in the winter when furnaces and heaters are heating up. Reducing electricity demand during these peak periods when electricity rates are at their highest reduces costs for American families while freeing up capacity on overburdened energy distribution networks. Builders participating in the DOE ZER-MH program are eligible for a tax incentive via the 45L tax credit, which helps to offset the costs of ZER-MH upgrades, enabling builders to offer these certified homes at no additional cost. Together these factors enable manufactured homes to offer home buyers a housing option that is both affordable to finance and affordable to operate, with lower monthly mortgage payments and lower monthly energy bills.
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.
Recent analyses indicated that solar heating and cooling systems for residential buildings are nearly economically competitive with conventional fossil fuel or electric systems, the former having higher initial cost but a lower operating cost than the latter. The paper examines obstacles to the widespread acceptance and use of solar space conditioning systems and explores some general policies which could help to overcome them. The discussion covers such institutional barriers limiting the adoption of solar technologies as existing building codes, financing constraints, and organizational structure of the building industry. The potential impact of financial incentives is analyzed. It is noted that a tax incentive of 25% could speed the use of solar energy by 7 to 8 years and produce an 8% reduction in fossil fuel use by 1990. A preliminary incentive package which could be helpful in promoting solar energy both at federal and state levels is proposed, and the necessary incentive level is analysed.
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.
Hydrogen potentially has a crucial role in the U.S. transition to a net-zero emissions economy. Learning from large-scale hydrogen projects will boost technological evolution and innovation toward the U.S. Hydrogen Energy Earthshot. We apply experience curves to estimate the evolving costs of blue hydrogen production and to further examine the economic effect on technological evolution of the Inflation Reduction Act’s tax credits for carbon sequestration and clean hydrogen. Learning-by-doing alone can decrease the production cost of blue hydrogen. Without tax incentives, however, it is hard for blue hydrogen production to reach the cost target of $\$1$/kg H 2 . Here we show that the breakeven cumulative production capacity required for gas-based blue hydrogen to reach the $\$1$/kg H 2 target highly depends on tax credit, natural gas price, inflation rate, and learning rates. We make recommendations for hydrogen hub development and for accelerating technological progress toward the Hydrogen Energy Earthshot.
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.
Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO 2 -EOR) projects not only extract residual oil but also sequestrate CO 2 in the depleted reservoirs. Here, this study develops a machine-learning-based workflow to co-optimize the hydrocarbon recovery, CO 2 sequestration volume and project net present value (NPV) simultaneously. Considering the trade-off relationships among the objective functions, support vector regression with Gaussian kernel (Gaussian- SVR) proxies are coupled with multi-objective particle swarm optimization (PSO) protocol and generate Pareto optimal solutions. Taking advantage of the high computational efficacy of the proxy model, economic uncertainties introduced by tax credits, capital costs and oil price are investigated by this study. The results indicate that the tax incentive policy (Section 45Q) plays a vital role in enhancing the economic returns of CO 2 -EOR projects, especially under the depression of crude oil market. The proposed workflow has been successfully implemented to optimize a water alternative CO 2 (CO 2 -WAG) injection project in a depleted oil sand in the US. The optimization results yield an incremental oil production of 15.8 MM STB and 1.37 MM metric tons of CO 2 storage in a 20-year development strategy, with the highest project NPV to be 205.6 MM US dollars.
This study analyzes the primary drivers of recent state-level trends in U.S. retail electricity prices. We summarize pricing trends, explore descriptive relationships, and employ regression models to quantify the influence of various factors. Although the recent national rise in retail prices has largely tracked inflation, state-level trends vary widely. We identify a number of factors that explain trends in subsets of states. States with the greatest price increases typically exhibited shrinking customer loads—partially linked to growth in net metered behind-the-meter solar—and had renewables portfolio standards (RPS) in concert with relatively costly incremental renewable energy supplies. By contrast, recent utility-scale wind and solar deployment that occurred outside RPS programs (but that benefited from tax incentives) had no discernible impact on increased retail prices. Hurricanes, storms and wildfires also contributed to sizable price increases in some states, most notably in California, where wildfire risk mitigation and liability insurance were major cost drivers. Fluctuations in natural gas prices—particularly following the onset of the Ukraine-Russia war—further contributed to sharp price increases through 2022–2023 in many states, with moderation in 2024. The relative influence of these factors varies across states and over time, and relationships may change in the future. Nonetheless, the findings underscore the diverse set of price determinants and highlight the need for continued research to inform effective policy and ensure customer affordability.
Achieving aerospace industry net-zero emissions by 2050 requires rapid scaling of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) production. Leveraging existing infrastructure, proven technologies like Alcohol-to-Jet (ATJ), and low carbon intensity (CI) feedstocks (e.g., switchgrass and miscanthus) can support this transition and help achieve near-term emissions reduction targets. This study evaluates the implications of lignocellulosic ethanol biorefinery siting and integration with petroleum refineries to produce SAF across 1000 sites randomly sampled from areas suitable for perennial grasses in the U.S. rainfed region. To better understand the logistics of material transport and handoffs, we integrated models of biomass harvest, transport, ethanol, and ATJ production in a stochastic framework based on Monte Carlo simulations to characterize SAF minimum selling price (MSP) and carbon intensity (CI), considering site-specific parameters (e.g., feedstock production, transportation, taxes, incentives). The results indicate trade-offs between MSP and CI across locations, with median MSP ranging from 7.9 to 12.8 USD·gal −1 and CI from −9.7 to 39.4 gCO 2 e·MJ −1 . Despite high estimated decarbonization costs (580 USD·tonCO 2 e −1 ), our results indicate that site-specific deployment of ATJ with low-CI feedstocks can improve sustainability outcomes. The framework provides a systematic approach to assess cost and sustainability trade-offs across locations, considering the end-to-end supply chain and supporting an informed investment in SAF production.
BioSTEAM Location-Specific Evaluation. This module allows BioSTEAM users to consider the impacts of economic and environmental parameters that vary by location. Current location-specific data includes income, property, fuel producer, and sales tax rates; feedstock prices (corn, corn stover, and sugarcane); electricity prices; natural gas prices; location capital cost factors (LCCFs), and tax incentives (available as of February 2020) for all 50 states in the US. Stewart et al. is the first paper to utilize BLocS to explore the influence of policy incentives and location-specific economic parameters on the financial viability of three different biorefineries.
The U.S. Department of Energy's 2021 edition of its land-based wind market report provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. wind power market, with a focus on 2020. You can find a report, data file and presentation on the Files tab, below. Additionally, several data visualizations are available on the Visualizations tab. Highlights of this year’s update include: -Wind comprises a growing share of electricity supply: U.S. wind power capacity grew at a record pace in 2020, with 25 billion dollars invested in 16.8 GW of capacity. Wind energy output rose to account for more than 8% of the entire nation’s electricity supply, and is more than 20% in 10 states. At least 209 GW of wind are seeking transmission interconnection; 61 GW of this capacity are offshore wind and 13 GW are hybrid plants that pair wind with storage or PV. -Wind project performance has increased over time: The average capacity factor among recently built projects was over 40%, considerably higher than projects built earlier. The highest capacity factors are seen in the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country. -Turbines continue to get larger: Improved plant performance has been driven by larger turbines mounted on taller towers and featuring longer blades. In 2010, no turbines employed blades that were 115 meters in diameter or larger, but in 2020, 91% of newly installed turbines featured such rotors. Proposed projects indicate that total turbine height will continue to rise. -Low wind turbine pricing has pushed down installed project costs over the last decade: Wind turbine prices are averaging 775–850 dollars/kW. The average installed cost of wind projects in 2020 was 1,460 dollars/kW, down more than 40% since the peak in 2010, though stable for the last three years. The lowest costs were found in Texas and the (non-ISO) West. -Wind energy prices remain low, around 20 dollars/MWh in the interior of the country: After topping out at 70 dollars/MWh for power purchase agreements (PPAs) executed in 2009, the national average price of wind PPAs has dropped. In the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country, recent pricing is around 20 dollars/MWh. In the West and East, prices tend to average 30 dollars/MWh or more. These prices, which are possible in part due to federal tax support, fall below the projected future fuel costs of gas-fired generation. -Wind PPA prices are often attractive compared to wind’s grid-system market value: The value of wind in wholesale power markets is affected by the location of wind plants, their hourly output profiles, and how those characteristics correlate with real-time electricity prices and capacity markets. The market value of wind declined in 2020, following natural gas prices lower and averaging under 15 dolalrs/MWh in ERCOT, MISO, NYISO and SPP; higher values were seen in CAISO, ISO-NE and PJM. -The average levelized cost of wind energy is down to 33 dollars/MWh: Levelized costs, which exclude the impacts of federal tax incentives, vary across time and geography, but the national average stood at 33 dollars/MWh in 2020—down substantially historically, though consistent with the previous two years. Levelized costs were lowest in ERCOT, SPP, and the (non-ISO) West. -The health and climate benefits of wind in 2020 were larger than its grid-system value, and the combination of all three far exceeds the current levelized cost of wind: Wind generation reduces power-sector emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. These reductions, in turn, provide public health and climate benefits that vary regionally, but together are economically valued at an average of 76 dollars/MWh-wind nationwide in 2020. -The domestic supply chain for wind equipment is diverse: For wind projects recently installed in the U.S., domestically manufactured content is highest for nacelle assembly (>85%), towers (60-75%), and blades and hubs (30-50%), but is much lower for most components internal to the nacelle.
The paper will help state utility regulators understand the economics of CCS and their role in the process. It will introduce the concepts of offsets, tax incentives, and federal and state cooperation as a means of improving the economic benefits of CCS.