Engineering Papers⌕ Search
Home/Archive/DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI · 2503973

NetlOlca

Davis, Tyler W [National Energy Technology Laboratory]·Naiman, Daniel·Chou, Joseph·Jamieson, Matthew·Whiston, Michael
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This Python module provides a public API (via the class and function definitions) for interacting with GreenDelta's openLCA (version 2) either directly (via the IPC server) or indirectly (via an exported JSON-LD zip file). It is a key piece in NETL's new life cycle assessment unit process library reporting template.

Explore related subjects

APILife Cycle

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Davis, Tyler W [National Energy Technology Laboratory], Naiman, Daniel, Chou, Joseph, Jamieson, Matthew, Whiston, Michael. 2025-01-21. NetlOlca. https://doi.org/10.18141/2503973

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

DOE OSTI2022

2022 GETEM Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update: Preprint

The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is an essential tool for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technology Office (GTO) to understand the performance and cost of technologies it is seeking to improve. This detailed model is used for supply curve analyses, assessing the current economic feasibility and Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) of hydrothermal geothermal systems and EGS, and evaluating the potential impact of advanced geothermal technologies. GETEM can be used to estimate the performance and costs of currently available U.S. geothermal power systems. It is also used to estimate the costs of technologies 5 to 20 years in the future, given the direction of potential research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects. The model is intended to help GTO determine which proposed RD&D programs and projects might offer the most efficient improvement when using taxpayer funding. The model requires annual updates as well as revisions to reflect the current state of the art. Drilling costs are a significant portion of total geothermal development costs. The current GETEM drilling cost inputs rely on drilling data from 2009 and require an updated analysis of more recent data to ensure they remain representative of current technologies. An updated, more accurate understanding of costs could help the geothermal industry secure project development financing and investment funding and better allow the oil and gas (O&G) industry (both operators and service companies) weigh potential geothermal market participation and customization. This report details recent drilling improvements from the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and O&G, comparing drilling performance and costs with values in GETEM, particularly the baseline drilling cost curves. Though drilling performance at FORGE has improved significantly, we did not find associated cost decreases that would justify lowering the GETEM baseline cost curves as of now.

API↗
DOE OSTI2022

2022 GETEM Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update

The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is an essential tool for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) to understand the performance and cost of technologies it is seeking to improve. This detailed model is used for supply curve analyses, assessing the current economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of hydrothermal geothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), and evaluating the potential impact of advanced geothermal technologies. GETEM can be used to estimate the performance and costs of currently available U.S. geothermal power systems. It is also used to estimate the costs of technologies 5 to 20 years in the future, given the direction of potential research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects. The model is intended to help GTO determine which proposed RD&D programs and projects might offer the most efficient improvement when using taxpayer funding. The model requires annual updates as well as revisions to reflect the current state of the art. Drilling costs are a significant portion of total geothermal development costs. The current GETEM drilling cost inputs rely on drilling data from 2009 and require an updated analysis of more recent data to ensure they remain representative of current technologies. An updated, more accurate understanding of costs could help the geothermal industry secure project development financing and investment funding and better allow the oil and gas (O&G) industry (both operators and service companies) to weigh potential geothermal market participation and customization. This report details recent drilling improvements from the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and the O&G sector, comparing drilling performance and costs with values in GETEM, particularly the baseline drilling cost curves. Although drilling performance at FORGE has improved significantly, we did not find associated cost decreases that would justify lowering the GETEM baseline cost curves at this time.

API↗
DOE OSTI2014

Wind Integration National Dataset (WIND) Toolkit

Wind resource data for North America was produced using the Weather Research and Forecasting Model (WRF). The WRF model was initialized with the European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecasts Interim Reanalysis (ERA-Interm) data set with an initial grid spacing of 54 km. Three internal nested domains were used to refine the spatial resolution to 18, 6, and finally 2 km. The WRF model was run for years 2007 to 2014. While outputs were extracted from WRF at 5 minute time-steps, due to storage limitations instantaneous hourly time-step are provided for all variables while full 5 min resolution data is provided for wind speed and wind direction only. The following variables were extracted from the WRF model data: - Wind Speed at 10, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160, 200 m - Wind Direction at 10, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160, 200 m - Temperature at 2, 10, 40, 60, 80, 100, 120, 140, 160, 200 m - Pressure at 0, 100, 200 m - Surface Precipitation Rate - Surface Relative Humidity - Inverse Monin Obukhov Length

API↗