Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CAPITAL”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2017

Report on the Economic Optimization of a Demonstration Case for a Static N-R HES Configuration using RAVEN

The synthetic time history generation algorithm in RAVEN has been extensively tested and used to perform qualitative assessments of the statistical characteristics of the net demand vs. demand for different values of the penetration of wind generation. Reported results highlight the need to consider the impact of variable renewable on the electricity net demand profile, due to the increase in its volatility with increased wind penetration. This analysis provides a strong foundation for the modeling and simulation needs expressed under the "Nuclear-Renewable Hybrid Energy Systems" (NRHES) project. Following this confirmative analysis the entire stochastic optimization framework has been tested in a demo case. The case chosen is an optimization driven by profitability for a system composed by a nuclear plant and a hydrogen production industrial process. This type of economical analysis is aimed to assess the capability of a hybrid system to penetrate the current energy market. In this sense it differs from the approach suggested under NRHES, where a cost minimization approach is suggested. This analysis is instead aimed to show the flexibility of the developed framework, e.g. for the evaluation of retrofitting projects of already existing plants. The system considered is subject to variable prices of electricity, which are simulated using the algorithm for the production of synthetic time histories. The physical system is considered without inertia so that it can be replaced by dispatching rules based on the highest marginal profit. Two optimization problems have been considered, for the first the size of the nuclear power plant is fixed and the optimization variable is the capacity of the hydrogen production plant. For the second, both plant sizes are optimization parameters while the overall capital expenditure is caped. The economical figures of merits considered are the Internal Rate of Return (IRR) and/or Profitability Index (PI) for the first one (since no cap is placed on the investment size) and Net Present Value (NPV) and/or IRR for the second one where the capital expenditure is constrained. Economic input data concerning capital costs, size-scaling factors, and operational costs for both plants have been collected from literature in order to achieve a simulation as realistic as possible. More work will be needed to obtain even more realistic numbers, possibly from industrial partners, and considering market elasticity for the hydrogen market. In order to perform the optimization of the cases described above, the economical external RAVEN module (CashFlow) for financial analysis has been improved in flexibility and generality. Some improvements have also been made to the optimization algorithm for a more efficient treatment of the boundary constrains. In conclusion three major results have been obtained: a) collection of the economical parameters characterizing the nuclear power plants and hydrogen production plants, b) extension of the financial analysis module (CashFlow) to drive the calculation of all needed cash flow streams and c) the testing of the full framework in a nearly final configuration.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2018

Pilot Scale Operation and Testing of Syngas Chemical Looping For Hydrogen Production

The Syngas Chemical looping (SCL) process provides efficient and economic means to utilize the abundant fossil reserve of coal. The main problem associated with coal utilization is the CO 2 emissions resulting from its combustion. Even though CO 2 regulation or carbon tax is currently not in place, its enforcement is expected in the near future. Such a greenhouse gas emission control, if adopted in current power plant systems, will drive the efficiency down and increase the cost of electricity, due to the energy and capital-intensive nature of current CO 2 separation techniques. This highlights the need to develop technologies that present a solution to the rising cost of electricity in the future. The integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) presents an improvement to the above predicament, but it is capital intensive due to the extensive unit operations involved. The efficiency for a CO 2 capture incorporated IGCC system is around ~32%, resulting in approximately 45% increase in cost of electricity. This is definitely a better path to traverse than the conventional pulverized coal (PC) power plants as it has improved economics and efficiencies accompanied by product flexibility. The SCL process advances the benefits even further when integrated with the IGCC process. The SCL process removes the expensive WGS system and CO 2 separation columns, thereby saving on capital and operational expenses. This integration results in a 12 – 21% increase in efficiency accompanied by a reduction in cost of electricity by 15 – 28%, over conventional IGCC systems. Therefore, SCL process provides the best route to harness the energy from coal. The overall project objective was to construct and operate a syngas chemical looping pilot scale test unit at the NCCC. The project scope of work was divided into 3 phases. In Phase I, cold flow model studies using a 1:1 scale acrylic test unit constructed at Particulate Solids Research, Inc. (PSRI) was successfully completed confirming robust solid flow control is achievable in the non-mechanical system design. In Phase II, the high pressure, high temperature, chemical looping reactor was successfully designed with all necessary equipment and safety instrumentation/controls specified to allow for fabrication, site construction, and assembly to commence in Phase III. In Phase III, the SCL pilot plant was successfully assembled and all necessary functional checks and pre-startup safety reviews completed. During unit commission over the course of 200 hours of testing, operational issues were observed with premix burner used for system startup. With the grants awarded by the National Energy Laboratory (NETL) and the Ohio Development Services Agency (ODSA) under awards DE-FE0023915 and D-14-18, the SCL pilot unit underwent three auxiliary equipment modifications to resolve all of the startup operational issues encountered. The unit was successfully demonstrated with 300+hr continuous operation. Key results obtained include high syngas conversion of 97.95% with 16.03% oxygen carrier conversion in the moving bed reducer and >99% purity H 2 produced from the moving bed oxidizer.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2019

Enabling Staged Pressurized Oxy-Combustion: Improving Flexibility and Performance at Reduced Cost

Introduction: The staged pressurized oxy-combustion (SPOC) process, developed by Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL), is an oxy-combustion carbon capture technology that employs a steam power cycle to generate electricity. As with atmospheric-pressure oxy-combustion processes, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) capture rates of 90% or higher can be achieved. The staged-combustion approach of the SPOC process, when operated at elevated gas pressure, allows for near elimination of flue gas recycle (FGR) and leads to significant improvements in efficiency and reduced costs. The primary goal of this project was to investigate the potential for SPOC for flexible operation beyond the capabilities of conventional coal-fired power plants, particularly those employing carbon capture and storage (CCS). Oxy-combustion differs from conventional coal combustion in that the combustion of coal is carried out using oxygen as opposed to air. The resultant flue gas is a mixture of primarily CO 2 and water, greatly simplifying CO 2 capture. As SPOC does the oxy-combustion process under pressure, it is higher efficiency and lower cost than atmospheric oxy-combustion. The project was led by the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc., with the assistance of WUSTL, Doosan Babcock (DBL – boiler plant original equipment manufacturer), and Air Liquide (AL – air separation experts). The specific objectives of the project were to: (1) Evaluate the SPOC concept and develop a risk-based approach to the heating surface layout ensuring that performance (gas and steam side), manufacturing, transportation, and plant erection considerations were fully accounted for in the system design. (2) Improve the technology to ensure its performance and cost potential are substantially better than today’s baseline pulverized coal power plant with post-combustion capture (PCC) or atmospheric oxy-combustion, and show progress toward performance commensurate with projected commercial operation, including 90% or more CO 2 capture. (3) Address critical technology gaps and improving overall system performance for the technology. (4) Perform combustion tests at scale under commensurate pressure to the commercial operating system validate combustor and advance the SPOC combustion modeling tools that will facilitate full-scale design. Combustion Testing: Testing was initially carried out at atmospheric pressure with methane to ensure that all systems were correctly operating. Following this, the testing then proceeded to moderate pressure operation at 4 bara, where different stoichiometric conditions were used across an extended heat input range, showing that a stable flame could be maintained. Testing then proceeded at 10 and 15 bara where it was shown that the ignition system needed to be replaced at these operating conditions. When testing recommenced, a similar stable flame shape was achieved, without any methane support, and the full 100 kWth coal oxy-combustion was demonstrated. Heat flux measurements showed 400 kW/m 2 (0.126 MMBtu/hr-ft 2 ) from the flame, within the 450 kW/m 2 (0.142 MMBtu/hr-ft 2 ) preferred limit defined by DBL for the full-scale design case. Carbon monoxide and carbon-in-ash measurements showed that complete combustion was possible with ultra-low excess oxygen at 1 vol % in the product flue gas. This allowed the full-scale models to be calculated based on this level of excess oxygen, improving the performance of the system as lower feed oxygen is produced in the air separation unit (ASU), saving auxiliary power. Full-Scale Design: The full-scale design is sized to deliver 550 MWe net electrical power output to allow direct comparison with the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) baseline cases using the same Montana Powder River Basin (PRB) fuel. The cases used for direct comparison are: Case S12A (supercritical [SC] coal without CO 2 capture), Case S12B (SC coal with PCC at 90% CO 2 capture, and Case S12F (atmospheric oxy-combustion SC coal with 90% CO 2 capture). The SPOC stages were configured to be identical arrangements, allowing for a more straightforward design, construction, and control strategy. Each stage consists of two PVs, the first being the combustor PV module and the second being the convective PV module. The combustor module is the tallest vessel, with local coal feeding equipment and the burner FGR and oxygen plenums at the top and ash management at the bottom. The combustor module is effectively an open cross section with membrane tubes around the circumference – this unobstructed slender profile ensures that the relatively slower burnout mechanism needed for the low-speed turbulent mixing burner can proceed unimpeded and that molten ash will not attach to any surfaces at an angle to the predominant flue gas flow. The steam turbine used in the SPOC design is essentially the same unit utilized in the atmospheric oxy-combustion case except the degree of heat recovery possible allows the low-pressure (LP) feedwater heater train to be eliminated. This is a result of being able to capture the latent heat of evaporation of the moisture produced in the combustion (normally lost to the stack). The SPOC system outperforms the NETL atmospheric oxy-combustion baseline case by 3.3% points and the PCC case by 7.5% points. This performance increase is mainly a result of the improved heat recovery possible from the product flue gas and from the reduced auxiliary power consumption from the ASU and the CO 2 compression and purification unit over the atmospheric equivalent. The combined improvement in boiler efficiency and reduction in the steam turbine heat rate resulted in a net improvement in the overall plant efficiency by 0.61%, to 35.6% on a HHV basis. This relatively small improvement in plant efficiency between sub-bituminous and bituminous coals shows the value of useful moisture latent heat recovery offered by the SPOC system when using low rank fuels. Flexibility and Turndown: The SPOC system has inherent high turndown capabilities because of a demonstrated high range of combustion stability and the ability to bypass stages, thereby reducing steam generation rates proportionally without altering firing rates in operating stages. ASU units do not generally offer significant turndown opportunities as they are limited by the performance of the compression plant. The baseline SPOC design has a 2-train ASU configuration, needed to be able to meet the 10,500 tonnes per day duty, that can deliver efficient turndown points between 85–100% load with both trains operating, and at 45–50% load with a single train operating. Outside these operating points, the flexibility and efficiency are limited and may be uncompetitive at loads below 45% as the ASU systems are unable to turndown beyond 85% for the base case and 70% for the flexible case. The ASU cold box for the flexible case was designed to operate at loads between 40-100%, below this operating range the purity of the produced oxygen cannot be guaranteed, resulting in additional load for the CPU equipment. The additional power consumption of these cases yields an uneconomic operating condition with poor efficiency when operating at low loads such as 25% and 12%. To address this flexibility constraint, AL evaluated how the ASU configuration could be altered to deliver efficient oxygen supply over the load range. This involved integrating the compressor duties across both ASU trains into a shared duty arrangement with multiple compressors, strategically sized to deliver the duty required across all load ranges between 40–100% by enabling different combinations of the main air compressors and the booster air compressors. The oxygen purity cannot be guaranteed below 40% load for each train – the power consumption at 25% and 12% loads were estimated based on the multi-compressor configuration at maximum turndown as these load cases were not considered in the flexible ASU design. With a different cold box configuration, i.e. number of trains, the entire load range could be delivered within oxygen purity specifications. Although there is a small efficiency reduction at full load, there are significant improvements in overall plant performance during low-load operation. The exact ASU configuration needed will therefore be dependent on the expected operating profile of the unit. Economic Analysis: Cost estimates for the baseline and the flexible cases were developed using NETL baseline case data for common BOP items and an Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering International Class 5 (conceptual/screening study) assessment of key components unique to the SPOC system. The capital, operating, and maintenance costs were assessed along with the first-year power cost, levelized cost of electricity, and CO 2 captured and avoided cost for the SPOC cases were compared against the relevant NETL baseline cases in January 2019 dollars. Both SPOC cases achieve a lower cost that the alternative NETL baseline cases (with the flexible SPOC case being slightly higher than the baseline SPOC case due to the compounded impact of higher capital costs and lower efficiency at full load). The SPOC cases deliver a lower cost of CO 2 avoided than the NETL baseline cases due to greater efficiency in generating low-carbon power. However, the cost of CO 2 captured is higher because the higher efficiency of the SPOC process generates less CO 2 , hence less needs to be captured, resulting in a high capital cost being shared over a reduced CO 2 quantity. The flexible ASU adds 1.6% overall to the plant cost in comparison to the baseline case, but the efficiency improvements at loads below 50% are significant. Subsequently, depending on the plant load-profile expectation, the flexible ASU would be beneficial if the plant spends a significant portion of its operating life below 50% load. This kind of operating profile is likely to be required for all fossil plants when more renewable electricity generators are installed on the local grid, particularly solar power that can be predicted ahead of time, allowing for appropriate pricing signals to be incorporated into the diurnal cycle. R&D Recommendations: SPOC, while a promising technology, is a relatively recent concept and, as such, operability issues of combustor design and steam-side integration for such systems at a scale relevant to commercial deployment have not been evaluated. WUSTL has conducted extensive small pilot-scale (100 kWth) research to understand and advance pressurized oxy-combustion processes, including investigation of combustion and flame characteristics, radiative heat flux, burner operability, turn down, char burnout, ash characteristics, water-wash column operation, etc. for pressurized oxy-combustion systems. Nonetheless, at this stage in the development of the SPOC process, what is needed is a large-scale pilot plant that can serve to study pressurized oxy-combustion systems and components at a scale commensurate with the maturity of the technology. A scale of 10 MWth, which includes steam-side integration and two stages would yield essential information with respect to heat transfer characteristics both in the radiative and convective sections of the pressure vessels, and the ability to operate the fuel staging process. In addition, while modeling results indicate that combustion and flame characteristics improve with scale, direct studies of the combustor at this scale will ensure that the models can be relied upon for scale up to commercial scale. Furthermore, a detailed analysis must be performed to understand the scaling aspects of key components and systems.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Evaluation of Hydrogen Production Feasibility for a Light Water Reactor in the Midwest

Increased electricity production from renewable energy resources coupled with low natural gas prices has caused existing light-water reactor (LWRs) to experience ever diminishing returns from the electricity market. Via partnership among Idaho National Laboratory (INL), The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), Exelon, and Fuel Cell Energy a techno-economic analysis on the viability of retrofitting existing pressurized water reactors (PWRs) to produce hydrogen (H2) via high temperature steam electrolysis (HTSE) has been conducted. Such integration would allow nuclear facilities to expand into additional markets that may be more profitable in the long-term. To accommodate such an integration, a detailed analysis of HTSE process operation, requirements, and flexibility was conducted. Technical analysis includes proposed nuclear system control scheme modifications to allow dynamic operation of the HTSE via both thermal and electrical connection to the nuclear plant. High fidelity Modelica simulations showcase the viability of such control schemes. However, due to limited knowledge of solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC) stack degradation due to thermal gradients; thermal cycling of the HTSE was not included. Therefore, the control schemes proposed are only utilized to re-distribute steam at startup and only the portion of electricity utilized in the electrolyzers is cycled. From the detailed analysis of the nuclear integration and the HTSE process design, a comprehensive cost estimation was conducted in the APEA and H2A models to elucidate capital and operational costs associated with the production, compression, and distribution of hydrogen from a nuclear facility. Alongside this costing analysis, market analyses were conducted by NREL and ANL on the electric and hydrogen markets respectively in the PJM interconnect. Utilizing the electricity data market projections in the PJM interconnect from NREL and hydrogen demand/pricing projections from ANL a five variable sweep over component capacities, discount rates, and hydrogen pricing was completed using the stochastic framework RAVEN (Risk Analysis Virtual ENVironment) through its resource dispatch plugin HERON (Heuristic Energy Resource Optimization Network). Each combination of variables was evaluated stochastically four times over a seventeen year timespan from 2026-2042 (inclusive) to determine the most economically advantageous solution. Following the five variable sweep an optimization was conducted about the best sweep point to determine optimal component sizing and setpoints. Results suggest positive gain is achievable at all projected hydrogen market pricing levels and at all discount rates. However, exact component sizing and net returns vary based on these values and if incorrect sizing is selected; major net losses can occur. The optimal result occurred with set points as follows: high hydrogen prices, the largest possible HTSE unit in the sweep set at 7.47 kg/sec [645.4 tpd], a contractual hydrogen market agreement 7.29 kg/sec [629.8 tpd], and a hydrogen storage size 115,188 kg. The analysis suggested that with a discount rate of 8%, a ΔNPV = 1.2 billion over the seventeen year span can be achieved. The results illuminate that by operating in multiple markets the nuclear facility is capable of avoiding sale of electricity during times of low electricity market pricing, while maintaining the ability to capitalize on the high electricity market pricing. It should be noted that the analysis conducted in this report is a differential cash flow analysis and as such does not present profit levels. Instead it highlights the net benefit between building and competing in the hydrogen market utilizing nuclear facilities and conducting business as usual in the electricity markets. Additionally, results presented in this report exhibit conservatism due to four key assumptions: Given the limited knowledge on SOFC stack degradation due to thermal gradients the high temperature steam electrolysis plant is not allowed to thermally cycle. This limitation decreases electricity generation capacity in the nuclear plant, reducing capacity payments and the maximum output to the electrical grid. This analysis considers building a separate hydrogen pipeline for use in the nuclear facility. Research is currently being conducted to determine if existing natural gas pipelines can accommodate direct hydrogen injection. If hydrogen can be integrated into existing natural gas pipelines then a capital savings of ~$19,000,000 per kg/sec [1 kg/sec = 86.4 tpd] of installed HTSE capacity could be realized. Fast transients in the electric grid are typically served by flywheels and electric batteries. With electrolysis only operation the nuclear plant can flex its electricity just as quickly. However, for this analysis, the ancillary services market has been neglected. Should the nuclear plant have the ability to operate in the ancillary services market during periods when it is producing hydrogen, an additional substantial income stream that would increase overall system profitability could be considered. Subsidies for non-emitting generation technologies are not introduced in the cash flow analysis, but instead are completed assuming zero subsidies. Profitability is based solely on electricity pricing. Electric pricing is assumed to never go negative. Instead, it is assumed overall system curtailment by the Independent System Operator (ISO) will occur in such a manner that pricing remains at or above zero. This assumption inflates the “business as usual” scenario, thus decreasing the ΔNPV calculated. If negative pricing scenarios continue to occur as they do today, one would expect a further increase in ΔNPV. Overall, results advocate that, through market diversification, nuclear power plants have the potential to substantially increase current profit margins, increase market penetration, and ultimately solidify their place as a mainstay in energy production.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Optimizing an Integrated Renewable-Electrolysis System

Hydrogen is a versatile energy carrier that is used in a wide variety of chemical and industrial processes. Producing hydrogen using electrolysis can enable integration of multiple sectors including electricity, heating, and industrial sectors; however, the cost of producing hydrogen from electrolysis remains a challenge for encouraging greater adoption. With growing amounts of renewable generation on the California grid, there is downward pressure on wholesale electricity prices, particularly during the afternoon from photovoltaics (PV). These lower, or even potentially negative prices, challenge the business cases for new and existing PV plants. In addition, as the grid transitions to less flexible generation, there is greater need for system flexibility. To help improve the economics for both solar PV and hydrogen production using electrolyzers, we explore the benefit of combining PV and electrolysis systems. The optimal breakeven hydrogen production cost for six unique market participation configurations is calculated at six candidate locations where PV is already installed. The six market configurations include islanded, separated, retail, net energy metering (NEM), hybrid retail/wholesale and wholesale. Using the Revenue Operation and Device Optimization Model (RODeO) model, the optimal breakeven hydrogen price over the lifetime of the equipment is calculated. The cost includes production, storage, and compression in preparation for gaseous delivery trucks. Revenue streams include the sale of hydrogen, low carbon fuel standard (LCFS) credits, renewable electricity sold to the grid, and Renewable Energy Credits (REC). The costs included are the electricity costs, capital and fixed operation and maintenance cost (FOM) for the electrolyzer, PV, and storage and compression systems as well as taxes and financing costs. In addition, cost reductions are achieved through retail and wholesale rate optimization, by which electricity is purchased at the lowest price and sold, if possible, at the highest price. For all locations, the breakeven hydrogen production cost results show that, in the order of decreasing cost, the system configurations are islanded (highest), separated, NEM, retail, hybrid retail/wholesale, and wholesale (lowest). The resulting system design balances between the capital and maintenance cost components, the operation costs (i.e., electricity costs) and the additional market revenues. The integration of solar PV and electrolysis is shown to provide a mutually beneficial relationship. For PV, integration with electrolysis offers the potential to hedge against wholesale market price volatility, and integration with electrolysis may offer the potential to defer or avoid transmission investment to deliver power to the point-of-use and instead use it on-site. When compared with SMR without considering any renewable hydrogen premiums, this study finds that PV + Electrolysis systems with current costs are likely not competitive; however, with cost reductions for electrolysis equipment consistent with DOE projections, it was found that systems with wholesale market access would be competitive, largely on account of both low capital costs and low-cost electricity. The electrolysis units can provide greater flexibility than is required based on retail rate optimization, so there is an opportunity for a utility or CAISO to increase system flexibility with PV + Electrolysis systems in return for commensurate compensation. In this way, there are potentially several solutions that fall between the hybrid configuration and the wholesale configuration that could provide sufficient compensation for a PV + Electrolysis unit to compete with SMR while also providing greater flexibility to the grid.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

ION Engineering Commercial Carbon Capture Design & Costing (C3DC) (Final Report)

ION Engineering LLC (ION) has coupled its proven, solvent-based CO 2 capture technology with an exceptionally qualified design and engineering team to complete a pre FEED for a 300-megawatt equivalent commercial-scale CO 2 capture plant for Gerald Gentleman Station’s (GGS) Generation Unit 2 (GGS2). The remarkable team was comprised of ION, Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD), Sargent & Lundy (S&L) with continued support from Koch Modular Process Systems (KMPS), and Siemens. The overall objective of the project was to provide the engineering design and cost estimate at an American Association of Cost Engineers (AACE) Class 3 estimate, resulting in accuracy ranges of -20 to +30% for the capital cost estimate. The project team was successful in completing this objective and was able to overcome the challenges that were presented during the process. A conservative interest rate of 7.0% with a financing term of 20 years was used based on interest rates utilized by S&L for this level of study. The resulting annualization factor is multiplied by the total EPC cost to calculate an annualized capital expenditure. It is estimated that the carbon capture facility treating a 300 MWe slipstream will capture 1.9 million tonnes per year of CO 2 at a capacity factor of 85%. The resulting cost of capture for the CO 2 island was determined to be $\$$36.55/tonne. Utilizing an interest rate of 4.5%, supported by historical rates for previous large capital projects in the power industry, reduces the cost of capture to $32.52/tonne. These cost of capture numbers continue to further ION’s case for commercial deployment of ION’s solvent technology.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hydropower Geotechnical Foundations: Current Practice and Innovation Opportunities for Low-Head Applications

Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to challenges frequently encountered with traditional approaches. With this understanding, it is critically important to understand and document the current state of practice for hydropower geotechnical foundations, identify key challenges, and define opportunities for innovative solutions. To this end, this report documents the current state of practice across the three main phases of geotechnical foundation development: (1) geotechnical site assessment, (2) design, and (3) construction for hydropower systems. It also describes the major challenges with conventional approaches and identifies opportunities for innovation to reduce hydropower foundations costs, timelines, and risks. Key takeaways from this report include the following: Approximately 80% of available low-head sites are expected to have foundations on soil beds rather than rock beds, suggesting that rockfill and earthfill dams may be the most cost-effective conventional dam type for new projects.; Geotechnical and geologic investigation activities are time-consuming and expensive but are essential to define the parameters and criteria needed for foundation design.; Certain riverbed soil and bedrock types present significant technical challenges or require expensive foundation construction, which can prove financially prohibitive for low-head project development.; Modular hydropower design and prefabricated modular foundations represent a promising but unproven paradigm for new hydropower development. Design and construction approaches using optimized and highly repeatable, reliable components would benefit project cost, time, and risk but require additional research and development.; Temporary construction features for foundations, including cofferdams, water diversion, and water control systems, can prove costly and have inherent construction risk.; For economically viable development, hydropower geotechnical foundations should be limited to 4 to 15% of the project’s total initial capital costs. Many proposed projects have experienced cost overruns attributable to foundation difficulties or surprises during construction. These overruns may have been due to inadequate investigations, lack of adequate engineering effort to tailor the structures to site geology and topography, and/or contractual terms, among other considerations.; Challenges for hydropower foundations and opportunities for innovative technology solutions are identified in the following areas (consistent with the three main phases of foundation development): Geotechnical site assessment, Foundation design and materials, Construction methods and technology. Ultimately, this report aims to provide information about geotechnical foundations for low-head hydropower and to motivate transformative technologies to support hydropower growth.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Least-Cost Pathways for India's Electric Power Sector

The Government of India has a target of deploying 175 GW from renewable energy by 2022 and 40% of electricity capacity from renewable energy by 2030 and has indicated that ambitions for 2030 could be higher. Rapid changes in technology costs and performance could drive further deployment of wind and solar capacity beyond these policy targets. Increased deployment of variable renewable energy (VRE) raises new questions for power system planning regarding the optimal siting of generation capacity, trade-offs between generation and transmission infrastructure, and system flexibility needs. This study aims to evaluate least-cost pathways for India's electric power system over the period 2017-2047. Uniquely, this work considers an expanded planning horizon and range of scenarios not previously analyzed in national planning studies in India. The data collection and model design processes undertaken for this study provides a framework for recurring planning studies. This study finds anticipated changes in electricity demand and component costs can drive a significant shift in India's future electricity supply and how this system will be operated. In the Base scenario, the share of generation from VRE reaches 54% by 2047. Reducing the capital cost of wind has a larger impact on VRE penetration than reducing the capital cost of solar PV or battery storage. In the lowest wind cost scenario (40% capital cost decline by 2047 relative to the Base scenario), the penetration of VRE in the generation mix reaches 722%, exceeding the penetration levels achieved when the cost of battery storage or solar PV are reduced by an even greater 50%. In a future system with high penetrations of RE, capacity additions are driven by the coincidence of demand and RE generation rather than peak demand alone. This study finds the system could have surplus capacity during the peak demand months of July–September because this period corresponds to periods with high wind speeds and more wind generation available to meet peak demand. By contrast, new capacity is needed to meet demand during moderate demand months of October–November when output from wind plants falls more than 75% nationally compared to the previous two months. Finally, the success for gas for electricity production may depend on cost competitiveness rather than fuel availability. Increasing the amount of gas available for electricity production had no significant impact on the capacity or generation mix by 2047, as determined from a scenario that significantly increases fuel availability throughout the planning horizon. In fact, over 80% of new gas fuel available for the power sector remains unused. This suggests the high cost of gas plant operations relative to other technologies may constrain the expansion of gas generation in India more than fuel availability.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Europe's Evolving Deterrence Discourse

Over the last decade, a deteriorating security environment has brought into sharp focus the atrophy of strategic thought that occurred after the Cold War. At a time of intensifying major power rivalry, renewed urgency about the effectiveness of deterrence and the reliability of strategic stability, and mounting threats by nuclear armed and -arming “rogue states,” the need for new intellectual capital has become more pressing. But the U.S. analytical community shed a great deal of capability and capacity in the 1990s and after the 9/11 attacks was long focused on other problems. In recent years, the United States has slowly begun to rebuild institutional capacity and to reinvest in the development of the necessary human capital and analytical tools. One symptom of past atrophy was the near-complete collapse of transatlantic dialogue on these matters. One indicator of the nascent renewal is the reemergence of transatlantic collaboration, especially among early career professionals. In recent years it has also become clear that European institutions too are beginning to rebuild capacity and reinvest in human capital. This small volume is the result of a collective effort by four institutions to take stock of the state of strategic thought in Europe as it relates to deterrence and to advance transatlantic dialogue on deterrence. As a co-organizer of this process, CGSR is pleased to produce this edited collection of papers on behalf of the group. I am especially grateful to Amelia Morgan and Anna Péczeli for their role as coeditors. Please note that the views expressed here are the personal views of the authors and should not be attributed to the Laboratory, its sponsors, or any of the institutions with which the authors are or have been affiliated. Please also note that the Laboratory assumes no responsibility for the validity of the information used by the authors, who have drawn on information in common usage in Europe to inform their thinking.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2021

A Technical and Economic Assessment of LWR Flexible Operation for Generation and Demand Balancing to Optimize Plant Revenue

With increased penetration of subsidized variable renewable energy (VRE) resources and competition from low natural gas prices, existing light water reactor (LWR) nuclear power plants (NPPs) are struggling to remain economically competitive. This work examines the potential economic competitiveness of various thermal energy storage (TES) technologies when coupled directly or indirectly with a NPP. To highlight their relative economic competitiveness, we contrast several energy storage solutions in stochastic dispatch optimization. We leverage data from recent work analyzing a range of TES technologies with varying capital costs, performance, and technology readiness level (TRL) to establish our case. We explore inserting these technologies into an electricity market with existing nuclear generation and large projected variable renewable energy (VRE) penetration. Although these technologies' projected capital costs may make them unlikely candidates in their current state, this analysis demonstrates a high-fidelity techno-economic analysis of energy storage. Furthermore, as the projected cost of energy storage technologies evolves, this analysis sets a precedent for similar future investigations. One region with projected trends that may be unfavorable for existing nuclear capacity is the New York Independent System Operator (NYISO) market. New York state’s baseload generation has been historically provided by fossil-fired and nuclear assets. However, amid economic pressures from subsidized VREs and low natural gas prices, the state has recently deactivated Indian Point nuclear power plant units 2 and 3. Furthermore, the state plans to meet its zero-emission generation target by 2040 by replacing fossil-fired capacity with significant investments in VRE resources like wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery storage. Increased intermittent resource penetration lowers the baseload power requirement, adding further economic pressure to the state’s three remaining NPPs still in operation. With three NPPs still in operation in New York, this work analyzes potential economic benefits to NPPs on the New York grid when directly or indirectly coupled with various TES technologies. This work requires two modeling steps to analyze the potential economic benefits of various system configurations of the TES directly or indirectly coupled with nuclear. First, this analysis leverages capacity expansion modeling by experts at the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Using their deterministic capacity expansion model, U.S. Regional Economy, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy (US-REGEN), EPRI analysts evaluated the capacity and generation evolution of the New York state energy market under four projection scenarios. These four projection scenarios were developed to represent the potential evolution of the capacity and generation in NYISO from 2015 to 2050 under various economic, technology, and policy constraints. The results from these capacity expansion models are then used as boundary conditions in the second modeling step. The second modeling step uses the Holistic Energy Resource Optimization Network (HERON) for a set of stochastic techno-economic analyses (STEAs) to investigate the potential increase in the economic viability of various configurations of the TES. With no current capacity expansion capabilities, HERON takes the data generated from US-REGEN for 2050 to generate synthetic load, solar, and wind data. Then HERON economically optimizes the capacity and dispatch of the various TES configurations. The potential economic benefit is the differential net present value (NPV) of the TES configurations from the no-TES baseline. As a stochastic techno-economic analysis package, HERON introduces uncertainty into the economic metrics, while US-REGEN trades resolution for reduced computational complexity. Using HERON also allows the modeling of direct thermal coupling, a feature not common in capacity and dispatch models. As expected, with high capital costs, the costs of introducing energy storage for all the technologies considered outweighed the potential economic benefit of this strategy for flexible plant operation. The benefit of this analysis is primarily in demonstrating a workflow that examines innovative solutions to increase NPP revenue via TES coupling. HERON’s stochastic capacity and dispatch optimization process used in this work has proven an effective tool in observing and evaluating the impact of introducing storage technologies in a grid energy system.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Request for Information on Establishing a New Manufacturing Institute (DE-FOA-0002564)

Deep decarbonization of major industries such as metals manufacturing requires extensive process integration and controls to manage feedstocks, side reactions, heat, water, and waste streams. The scale of the energy and capital investment requires that process integration be validated to a high level of confidence with no bias. Industries such as steel production have very thin profit margins. Therefore, lack of confidence in process integration, product quality, and economics is a major deterrence to changes in manufacturing capital investment. Public sector investment in reconfigurable pilot testbeds and a first-of-a-kind plant would be necessary to de-risk technical and financial barriers prior to industry-wide buildout. DOE should consider a National Lab-led hub for the testbeds. Lab testbeds could be utilized in campaigns and allow multiple industrial partners to evaluate and validate technologies prior to making major capital investments.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2022

Low-Cost Preform and Molding Processes

The entry cost for prototyping a composite component for manufacture using automated, high rate processes is prohibitively expensive in many cases, especially for small business, where tooling costs may be several $100k. Discussions with industry also indicate that many small companies, tier 1 and 2 suppliers, have an interest to mold composite parts but do not want to deal with the capital cost, material handling issues, and labor associated with dry fiber preforming operations. While the molders may locate near the end user for logistics reasons, it may be more cost effective for the performer to remain regional and invest in capital equipment to support preform automation, thus keeping costs to a minimum. This project was designed to explore and demonstrate several options to meet these industry needs. Dry fiber preforming approaches were evaluated which allow for low pressure resin infusion, single sided tooling options such a vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM) or low pressure resin transfer molding (RTM-light). Unlike sheet molding compound, SMC compression molding where typical molding pressures of 1000 psi are required to push material into the desired location; positioning of a dry fiber preform into the desired location on the tool allows for low molding pressures of 10-50 psi. Lower molding pressures allow for use of low cost, additive fabrication of polymeric tooling. Polymeric tooling is suitable for rapid part prototyping and limited production. Dry fiber preforming approaches evaluated included use of commercial chopped strand mat, robotic chopper gun deposition, and continuous fiber preform augmentation using tailored fiber placement (TFP). Use of chopped strand mat does not require a robotic deposition method, however a cutting table is generally required and there is typically 20-30% scrap generation. While various fiber areal weights are available, the preform is not readily optimized for minimal fiber use or weight savings. In contrast, a robotic chopper gun approach allows for localized deposition where fiber is required to meet structural requirements. The robotic method is highly automated and minimizes fiber scrap, however the capital cost of the equipment and engineering labor for programming can result in higher preform cost compared to chopped strand mat in certain cases depending on preform complexity. Dry fiber preforming using the robotic chopper gun method allows for creation of three dimensional forms. This approach may be ideal for molding in-house, or if the preforms stack together densely to allow for efficient shipping. Applications evaluated for this program considered trade-off between fabrication of a fully 3D preform versus production of a flat preform which is designed to readily drape into the final desired shape. Such a preform design greatly simplifies robotic programming and requires no specialized tooling. The flat preforms are easily stacked and shipped to the final molding location. Flat preforms are much easier to augment with TFP continuous fiber to provide local reinforcement. The demonstration and evaluation of these preforming and tooling methods were completed on three component applications. The first application was a battery box cover for an electric vehicle which was highly three dimensional. The second demonstrator article was comprised of complex contours and was used to demonstrate the use of TFP and RTM-light molding process. The third demonstration article was the roof of an operator’s cab for large construction equipment. The roof is relatively flat however it is comprised of complex changes in thickness which clearly demonstrate the advantage of robotic chopper gun approach as compared to using numerous preform layers of chopped strand mat. The cost trades for the various preforming methods are summarized to help guide the reader as to preforming method considerations. Finally, these demonstrations all used glass fiber roving. A fourth, exploratory task was added to evaluate the ability to make preforms using Zoltek’s carbon fiber split tow roving. We were able to adapt the chopper gun to make flat preforms for laminate testing, but further development effort would be required to make suitable preforms.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Earned Value Management Systems for Operations Activities

An earned value management system (EVMS), which monitors contractor performance, is a requirement for program and project management for all major acquisitions by the United States Federal Government with development effort: (i.e., an asset requiring management attention because of its importance to an agency’s mission; high development, operating, or maintenance costs; high risk and/or high return). As an area less explored in earned value management (EVM) practices, this paper will survey the application of an EVMS for operations activities defined as: (1) Non-capital asset activities that are projects (or project - like) with definable start and end dates, with discrete scopes of work, and measurable accomplishments; as well as (2) Routine or recurring facility or environmental operations. This paper will examine the use of an EVMS to evaluate performance of operations and maintenance activities required once construction of a capital asset is complete and being used as intended. Such activities include upgrades and maintenance in order for capital assets to meet their mission function over a life-cycle (through repair, replacement, etc.). This paper will provide background on this topic from the perspective of the Department of Energy (DOE) Environmental Management (EM) Program. In addition, it will provide material from a panel discussion provided by a group of experts from the October 2019 Office of Environmental Management Project Management Workshop, as well as material from subsequent research on this topic.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hydrogen for Maritime Applications

The maritime industry is investigating a number of fuel options for reducing emissions, including liquefied natural gas (LNG), biofuels, and electrical drive systems powered by batteries and/or hydrogen-fueled fuel cells. Hydrogen-fueled ships offer the potential to significantly reduce, if not eliminate, regulated and unregulated pollutants in maritime applications. Argonne National Laboratory conducted preliminary comparisons of the total cost of ownership (TCO) of several classes of ships to determine how fuel cell technology compares to the current diesel technology, what advancements are needed for hydrogen fuel cell technology to be competitive in the future, and what applications may be appropriate for introducing fuel cells into the maritime industry. These studies included feeder container ships, harbor tugboats, river pushboats, and auto/passenger ferries. For this study, TCO was defined to include the cost of fuel, propulsion system, and fuel storage system, the levelized cost of propulsion/auxiliary engines, and the cost of annual maintenance and consumables. It did not include the cost of the vessel frame or other components, aside from the propulsion system, that the fuel cell and diesel ships have in common. A 10% internal rate of return (IRR) was applied to the initial capital investment and an installation cost factor of 20% was applied to the capital cost. The capital cost of each component (e.g., engine, fuel tank, motor, etc.) was amortized over a period of 20 years, except for the fuel cell system, which was amortized over 6 or 10 years depending on ship class. The initial comparisons for container ships indicate that fuel costs are by far the dominant contributor to the TCO. With the current low cost of low-sulfur marine gasoil (LSMGO) and relatively high cost of hydrogen, it is difficult for hydrogen to compete with LSMGO in container ship applications. The large energy demand for container ships also favors the use of the higher volumetric energy density LSMGO fuel, especially for longer voyages. The space required to store enough hydrogen for the same journey is larger than that needed to store diesel fuels and can reduce the available cargo carrying and revenue generating space available on the ship.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2022

Pilot Testing of a Highly Efficient Pre-combustion Sorbent-based Carbon Capture System

TDA developed and demonstrated a highly efficient pre-combustion carbon capture system. The overall objective of this work was to develop a new sorbent-based pre-combustion carbon capture technology for Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plants. In this project our goal was to demonstrate the techno-economic viability of the new technology by 1) demonstrating it in large-scale slipstream tests, and 2) carrying out a high fidelity engineering and cost analysis. TDA’s process used an advanced physical adsorbent that selectively removes CO 2 from coal-derived synthesis gas above the dew point of the gas at temperatures as high as 300°C. The sorbent consists of a mesoporous carbon whose surface was grafted with functional groups that remove CO 2 via a well-known acid-base interaction. As documented in bench-scale experiments and field tests with actual coal gas, the sorbent achieved a very high capacity for CO 2 at temperatures as high as 300°C. The sorbent bound CO 2 more strongly than common physical adsorbents, providing the chemical potential needed for the high temperature operation. However, because CO 2 does not form a true covalent bond with the surface sites (as is the case with chemical absorbents), the sorbent regeneration could be carried out with only a very small energy input. The heat input to regenerate our sorbent was only 4.9 kcal per mol of CO 2 , which is much lower than that for chemical absorbents (e.g., 29.9 kcal/mol CO 2 for sodium carbonate) and was similar to the requirements of physical solvents (e.g., 4 kcal/mol CO 2 for Selexol TM ). Because the sorbent operates above the dew point of the synthesis gas (unlike the Selexol TM process), a higher power cycle efficiency can be achieved. With previous DOE/NETL funding (Contract No. DE-FE-0000469), we demonstrated the techno-economic viability of the technology in bench-scale tests and slipstream demonstrations at the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC), Wilsonville, Alabama and Wabash River IGCC plant in Terra Haute, Indiana. We demonstrated a stable working CO 2 capacity for over 11,650 cycles with simulated synthesis gas. We also evaluated its performance with actual synthesis gas in two test campaigns at the Wabash River IGCC Plant, Terre Haute, IN and the National Carbon Capture Center (NCCC), Wilsonville, AL. The slipstream tests clearly showed that the actual coal gas constituents and potential contaminants (e.g. trace metals, halides, tars) had no effect on the sorbent’s ability to remove CO 2 (the same sorbent beds were used in both field tests with no sign of deactivation for 2,000 cycles with over 26,750 SCF of gas treated). As expected, due to the high temperature CO 2 removal capability and low energy needed to regenerate the sorbent, the power cycle efficiency with our process was greater than 34% on a higher heating value (HHV) basis; in comparison, the same IGCC plant equipped with the Selexol TM solvent for carbon capture can only achieve 31.4% HHV efficiency. The capital cost for an IGCC system with TDA’s process is estimated as $2,417/kW e , which is 12% lower than that of the IGCC/ Selexol TM process. The levelized cost for electricity including the transport, storage and monitoring (TS&M) cost for CO 2 was calculated as $\$ $92.9/MWh (lowest reported to our knowledge), which is much better than the $105.2/MWh estimated for the IGCC/ Selexol TM process. In this project (DE-FE0013105), TDA Research, in collaboration with our partners Gas Technology Institute (GTI), Illinois Clean Coal Institute (ICCI), University of California, Irvine (UCI), University of Alberta (UOA), Siemens, NCCC and Sinopec advanced the technical maturity of the technology; scaling it up by a factor of 100. We optimized the reactor design using computational fluid dynamics (CFD); using adsorption modeling we improved the pressure swing adsorption (PSA) cycle sequence. We carried out two field test campaigns with a fully-equipped 0.1 MW e prototype unit (for a total of 844 hours) using actual synthesis gas to prove the viability of the new technology. A successful 30 day (707 hrs) evaluation was completed at NCCC under air blown gasification conditions. We demonstrated 97.3% carbon capture at 1,500 SLPM, 93% carbon capture at 1,800 SLPM, and 90% carbon capture at 2,100 SLPM in the NCCC tests. We also demonstrated the system for 137 hours at a Sinopec petrochemical plant under oxygen blown gasification, demonstrating 86% carbon capture at 2,660 SLPM. In collaboration with University of California, Irvine (UCI), we completed a techno-economic analysis (TEA) for TDA’s warm gas cleanup technology integrated to IGCC power plant. The net plant efficiencies (on a coal HHV basis) for the warm gas cleanup cases were estimated to be 34.0% for E-GasTM gasifier, 34.4% for GE gasifier, 33.4 for the Shell gasifier and 34.2 for the TRIG TM gasifier (Cases 2, 4, 6 and 8 in this study) with a catalytic combustor for CO 2 purification, which are significantly higher than those for the Cold Gas Case, or an increase of as much as 12% in the heat rate for Case 2, 6% for Case 4, 9% for Case 6, and 9% for Case 8. The 1st year cost of electricity with the transport, storage and monitoring (TS&M) costs for the CO 2 included was $\$ $129.2/MWh for the E-GasTM gasifier Warm Gas Cleanup Case, $\$ $131.9/MWh for the GE gasifier Warm Gas Cleanup Case, $\$ $146.8/MWh for the Shell Gasifier Warm Gas Cleanup Case, and $\$ $129.9/MWh for the TRIG TM gasifier Warm Gas Cleanup Case. For comparison, the costs for the baseline Cold Gas CO 2 removal with Selexol for the different gasifiers were: $\$ $146.6/MWh for the E-Gas TM gasifier, $\$ $142.2/MWh for the GE gasifier, $\$ $159.0/MWh for the Shell gasifier and $\$ $144.3/MWh for the TRIG TM gasifier. In summary, the costs for our system were 7 to 12% lower than the corresponding Cold Gas Cleanup cases. The results of this techno-economic analysis suggested that TDA’s high temperature PSA-based Warm Gas Clean-up Technology can make a substantial improvement in the IGCC plant thermal performance for achieving near zero CO 2 emissions for E-Gas TM , GE, Shell and TRIG TM gasifier based IGCC power plants. The capital expenses were estimated to be lower than that of Selexol’s™. Taken together, the higher net plant efficiency and lower capital and operating costs resulted in substantial reduction in the cost of carbon capture for the IGCC plant equipped with TDA’s high temperature PSA-based carbon capture system. Finally, in collaboration with Gas Technology Institute (GTI) we completed the environmental health and safety assessment for TDA’s warm gas carbon capture technology.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2023

Cost of Fish Exclusion and Passage Technologies for Hydropower

Hydropower represents a reliable source of renewable energy and accounts for approximately 7% of the total electrical generation in the United States. Future expansion of hydropower is likely to be in the form of either smaller new stream development projects or powering existing non-powered dams. For these new projects to be successful, careful analysis of risks, costs, and uncertainty to offset reduced power production as well as ensuring the protection and safe passage of migratory fish to gain public support, will be required. Exclusion and passage are two common approaches to protect fish from entrainment and impingement at hydropower facilities. The thresholds for entrainment risk and requirements for exclusion and passage often differ depending on the species involved, the characteristics of the facility, and the goals of stakeholders. While the costs associated with environmental mitigations represent a large proportion of the total costs required for the licensing of hydropower facilities, little quantitative information is present within the literature regarding the specific costs of fish exclusion and passage. Working with FOA awardee Natel Energy, scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory were tasked with assessing the capital construction costs for downstream fish exclusion and passage infrastructure. This report used keyword searches of an existing environmental mitigation cost data set and manual extraction of additional cost data associated with protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures related to positive barrier screening and passage from regulatory licensing documents available in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) eLibrary. This approach yielded a total of 50 PM&E mitigation measures with estimated capital construction costs pertaining to positive barrier screens, 142 pertaining to passage studies, and 26 pertaining to passage-related studies. PM&E measures associated with positive barrier screens represented <10% of the 171 total FERC project dockets available in the data set. These data were highly skewed toward conventional relicensing projects, as <7% were associated with new stream development (NSD) projects. Results from these data indicate highly variable costs associated with fish screening, with flow-normalized costs one to two orders of magnitude higher for screening with the highest exclusion capability (≤0.09 in. spacing) compared with coarser screening (1 to 2 in.). Furthermore, estimated capital costs of passage infrastructure were positively related to the scale of the project based on installed capacity for some, but not all, types of passage. These data provide an initial baseline for estimating exclusion and passage costs for hydropower development and may help developers consider options for more fish-friendly generation technologies, though gaps remain relating to a lack of data, particularly for NSD projects. More data may still be available within the FERC eLibrary, but significant effort will be required to manually identify and extract the data for future analyses.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

ActiveBAS: A Low-cost, Scalable Control Solution for Grid-Interactive Small and Medium Sized Commercial Buildings

This project aims to develop and enhance a low-cost, highly scalable control solution for Small and Medium-Sized Commercial Buildings (SMCB), assess the business potential at multiple sites, and perform commercialization efforts. The technology can be applied to any buildings served by multiple units, with the benefits being greatest for open-spaced buildings, such as banks, retail stores, restaurants, and factories. This project aims to develop an affordable control solution for: 1) SMCB grid responsiveness, 2) reduction of GHG by changing unit operations, 3) greater reduction in utility costs, and 4) rapid adoption in the marketplace. The proposed technology will be built on a previously developed and demonstrated MPC solution. The minimal sensor requirement and less need of control expertise are the unique feature of the algorithm that leads to low capital and maintenance costs, and short installation and implementation time. These attributes contribute to low capital and maintenance costs, as well as a short installation and implementation time. However, these advantages come with a trade-off: increased difficulties and unreliability when applying traditional modeling and MPC control approaches due to limited information. This final report describes the modeling approaches developed and tested to overcome these challenges. It begins by outlining the modeling challenge posed by minimal sensor requirements, then delves into the proposed modeling approaches, which primarily involve system identification. Finally, preliminary test results for a simulation case study are presented.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Leveraging State Clean Water Revolving Funds to Expand Clean Energy Financing

To meet clean energy goals, states will need significant capital. Federal funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will help, including by capitalizing clean energy state revolving loan funds (RLFs). States can leverage state clean water revolving funds to finance even more clean energy improvements. New York and Pennsylvania have used this innovative mechanism to extend the impact of their clean energy loan programs. For states looking to extend the reach of their clean energy financing programs, the brief: -Explains how each state leveraged their state revolving funds, -Identifies critical success factors for doing so, and -Offers key elements for replicating this model In New York, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority structured a sale of bonds secured by the repayments from a portfolio of residential energy efficiency loans from its Green Jobs – Green New York Program, with the additional support of a guarantee from the state’s clean water revolving fund. The Pennsylvania Treasury Department received a direct investment of funds from Pennsylvania’s clean water revolving fund to support the relaunch of the Keystone Home Energy Loan Program (HELP), which had previously been shuttered due to lack of support funding. From our review of these two case studies, when facilitating state clean water revolving fund transactions to support clean energy lending, the following critical success factors emerged: -Reference to preventing atmospheric deposition resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels in the state’s Clean Water Act Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan, which sets out that state’s strategy for reducing pollution into state waterways. -Strong relationships and trust between the clean water revolving fund administrator and the state agency administering the clean energy loan program. -Limited funding exposure for the clean water revolving funds—which are generally large and well capitalized—to ensure that any losses experienced by clean water revolving funds would have a negligible impact on the fund’s ability to support core water and wastewater projects. -Willingness, on the part of the clean water revolving fund administrator, to innovate and engage in careful analysis to support transaction structuring, and support from state energy partner organizations. The brief provides case studies of these states’ experiences, critical success factors, and key elements for replicating the model.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗