SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Investments”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 307 records · Page 17

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

A deep learning-based battery sizing optimization tool for hybridizing generation plants

Hybrid generation and energy storage systems offer the ability to increase flexibility of the combined asset. This flexibility can be used to increase provision of services already provided by the generation asset, such as timing sale of electricity to the energy market during high price periods, and also enable provision of additional services, such as ancillary services or contribute to resource adequacy. From a generation asset owner perspective, the decision to hybridize includes selecting an energy storage system that, among other factors, maximizes financial performance of the energy storage investment. Yet, existing tools to optimize energy storage sizing are either too rudimentary (i.e., based on “rules of thumb”) or too complex to implement (i.e., require specialized engineering and software knowledge and a high-performance computer to run). This work presents a novel deep learning-based battery sizing optimization tool that is designed to help generation asset owners easily assess preliminary sizing considerations for potential battery investments to hybridize their generation facility. The tool uses deep learning to predict revenue over a broad search space of potential battery sizes, estimates capital and operating costs (including accounting for battery degradation), and computes financial performance of each potential battery system investment, recommending a system with maximum financial performance. The tool is tested and validated for hydropower assets. Finally, this tool will help a greater cross-section of industry consider investments in battery systems, increasing their revenue and helping them compete in rapidly evolving electrify markets.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Utility Regulation Through Legislation: A Cautionary Tale for Legislators, Regulators, Stakeholders, and Utilities

State legislatures in the U.S. are becoming increasingly involved in utility regulation. While state utility legislation can expand regulator authority, for example in the case of renewable energy or energy efficiency standard administration, it can also reduce it. Given the challenging nature of for-profit monopoly regulation, state utility legislation often reduces regulator authority unintentionally. This editorial begins with an examination of the outcomes of state legislation related to baseload generation in the U.S. and the resulting impacts to customers, shareholders, and state economies. The record indicates that utility regulation through state legislation has caused significant economic harm, generally by encouraging for-profit utilities to make riskier investments. A description of more recent state legislation involving distribution grids is presented, along with evidence that increases in grid investment encouraged by state legislation has not improved the reliability of U.S. for-profit utilities. The authors claim that features common to state utility legislation, particularly the requirement that utilities provide investment plans to regulators in advance, practically eliminates cost disallowance risk. This, in turn, reduces regulator authority despite legislative provisions intended to protect consumers. The authors hypothesize that the practical elimination of cost disallowance risk, combined with information and expertise asymmetry among regulators and stakeholders, encourages for-profit monopoly utilities to make grid investments that are not cost effective. The editorial concludes that legislators should avoid utility regulation through legislation, thereby preserving regulator authority, whenever possible. The authors also present their fifth annual Customer Value Ranking of U.S. investor-owned electric utilities. The ranking represents a comparison of the benefits utilities deliver to customers (measured by reliability performance and customer satisfaction) to the costs customers pay (measured by O&M and capital spending per customer).

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY,POWER TRANSMI↗

DOE OSTI2022

Alternative Ratemaking in the US: A Prerequisite for Grid Modernization or an Unwarranted Shift of Risk to Customers?

With increasing frequency, investor-owned electric utilities are requesting preferred cost recovery for "grid modernization" in multiple forms, from multi-year rate plans to riders. Utilities' claims that massive grid investment is necessary, and that exceptional investment requires exceptional cost recovery, are typically accepted by policymakers with little challenge. It is difficult for policymakers to resist the siren call of grid modernization's perceived outcomes, from improved reliability and resilience to reduced risks to safety and new customer technology adoption (electric vehicles, distributed energy resources, and more). This paper provides a contrarian viewpoint that is virtually absent as policymakers consider alternative ratemaking practices. It introduces the possibility that excess grid investment in the name of modernization is not only possible, and economically harmful, but has already occurred, encouraged by alternative ratemaking. It provides examples of common grid modernization expenditures the authors have identified as cost-ineffective in the course of their work. It also describes traditional grid planning practices with proven ability to address changing requirements over time, calling into question the need for exceptional grid modernization investment plans. Most important, the paper explains the moral hazard inherent in alternative ratemaking, and the fundamental shift in ratemaking risks and responsibilities from utilities to customers that results. The perspectives this paper presents are critical for policymakers to understand before adopting, extending, or expanding alternative ratemaking practices in their respective jurisdictions.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY,POWER TRANSMI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Refueling infrastructure planning in intercity networks considering route choice and travel time delay for mixed fleet of electric and conventional vehicles

The range anxiety has been a major factor that affects the market acceptance of electric vehicles. Even with the recent development of battery technologies, a lack of charging stations and range anxiety are still significant concerns, specifically for intercity trips. This calls for more investments in building charging stations and advancing battery technologies to increase the market share of electric vehicles and improve sustainability. This study suggests a configuration for plug-in electric vehicle charging infrastructure to support long-distance intercity trips of electric vehicles at the network level. A model is proposed to minimize the total system cost including infrastructure investment (building charging stations/spots) and travel time delays (charging time, waiting time in the queue, and detour time to access charging stations). This study fills existing gaps in the literature by capturing realistic patterns of travel demand and considering flow-dependent charging delays at charging stations. Furthermore, the proposed model, which is formulated as a mixed-integer program with nonlinear constraints, solves the optimization problem at the network level. At the network level, impacts of charging station locations on the traffic assignment problem with a mixed fleet of electric and conventional vehicles need to be considered. To this end, a traffic assignment module is integrated with a simulated annealing algorithm. The numerical experiments show a satisfactory application of the model for a full-scale case study (intercity network in Michigan). The solution quality and efficiency of the proposed solution algorithm are evaluated against those of an enumeration approach for a small case study. The results suggest that even for the current market share and charging stations’ setting, a significant investment is needed to support intercity trips without range anxiety issues and with acceptable delays. Additionally, through sensitivity analyses, the required infrastructure and battery investments to support intercity trips with acceptable delays are established for hypothetical increased market shares and battery size in the future.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Impact of truck electrification on air pollution disparities in the United States

Electrifying heavy-duty trucks reduces on-road diesel emissions but shifts the burden of supplying energy to power-generation facilities. The combined effect of Inflation Reduction Act investments in grid decarbonization and truck electrification will alter the magnitude and distribution of air pollution burdens across the United States. These investments are intended to facilitate a just energy transition, with 40% of the benefits flowing to disadvantaged communities per the Justice40 Initiative. Here we evaluate the combined effects of Inflation Reduction Act grid decarbonization and truck electrification investments on a national scale to determine whether the air pollution benefits would meet this 40% goal for both disadvantaged communities and the most exposed racial–ethnic groups. We find that truck electrification and decarbonization reduce air-pollution-related premature mortality in disadvantaged communities. However, the relative disparity between disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged communities increases, suggesting that a disproportionate share of benefits accrue to non-disadvantaged communities. Whereas absolute disparity in grid emissions decreases over time for all racial–ethnic groups, relative disparity remains largely unchanged, with Black populations being the most exposed. Electrifying drayage corridors would result in comparatively large health benefits for disadvantaged communities, suggesting that increasing targeted electrification investments in short-haul routes near urban areas (for example, ports) could be promising.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

Optimal Sizing of PV and Energy Storage in an Electric Vehicle Extreme Fast Charging Station

This paper proposes an optimization model for the optimal sizing of photovoltaic (PV) and energy storage in an electric vehicle extreme fast charging station considering the coordinated charging strategy of the electric vehicles. The proposed model minimizes the annualized cost of the extreme fast charging station, including investment and maintenance cost of PV and energy storage, cost of purchasing energy from utility and demand charge. The decision variables are capacity of invested PV and the power and energy ratings of invested energy storage. To further reduce the annualized cost of the extreme fast charging station, the charging strategy of electric vehicles are integrated into the optimization model and coordinated with the power output of PV and charging/discharging of energy storage. Results of numerical simulations indicate that investment of PV and energy storage could help reduce the annualized cost of the extreme fast charging station significantly. Meanwhile, the impacts of various parameters on the optimal solution are investigated by sensitivity analysis.

Liu, Guodong↗

DOE OSTI2024

Mycorrhizal associations of temperate forest seedlings mediate rhizodeposition, but not soil carbon storage, under elevated nitrogen availability

Abstract Tree‐mycorrhizal associations are associated with patterns in nitrogen (N) availability and soil organic matter storage; however, we still lack a mechanistic understanding of what tree and fungal traits drive these patterns and how they will respond to global changes in soil N availability. To address this knowledge gap, we investigated how arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM)‐ and ectomycorrhizal (EcM)‐associated seedlings alter rhizodeposition in response to increased seedling inorganic N acquisition. We grew four species each of EcM and AM seedlings from forests of the eastern United States in a continuously 13 C‐labeled atmosphere within an environmentally controlled chamber and subjected to three levels of 15 N‐labeled fertilizer. We traced seedling 15 N uptake from, and 13 C‐labeled inputs (net rhizodeposition) into, root‐excluded or ‐included soil over a 5‐month growing season. N uptake by seedlings was positively related to rhizodeposition for EcM‐ but not AM‐associated seedlings in root‐included soils. Despite this contrast in rhizodeposition, there was no difference in soil C storage between mycorrhizal types over the course of the experiment. Instead root‐inclusive soils lost C, while root‐exclusive soils gained C. Our findings suggest that mycorrhizal associations mediate tree belowground C investment in response to inorganic N availability, but these differences do not affect C storage. Continued soil warming and N deposition under global change will increase soil inorganic N availability and our seedling results indicate this could lead to greater belowground C investment by EcM‐associated trees. This potential for less efficient N uptake by EcM‐trees could contribute to AM‐tree success and a shift toward more AM‐dominated temperate forests.

Fitch, Amelia A.↗

DOE OSTI2020

EMISApproximateEquilibrium.jl [SWR-19-56]

The Electricity Markets Investment Suite Approximate Equilibrium (EMIS-AE) package is developed at NREL and provides a solution capability to solve generation expansion equilibrium problems in the electricity markets. EMIS-AE is designed to capture the evolution of the electricity generation portfolio resulting from the interactions of heterogeneous investors under different policy and market designs. The investment problem for each generation company (GENCO) is a bi-level problem with the investment decision made in the upper level and market clearing condition in the lower level, which traditionally is represented as a Mathematical Program with Equilibrium Constraint (MPEC). EMIS-AE provides a predictive model to be trained for estimating the system-wide revenues for each technology type across energy, ancillary services and capacity markets given the amount of installed capacity on the grid. The profit maximization investment problem for each GENCO is solved using a global search algorithm, which uses the predictive model to evaluate the objective function. To solve for the strategic equilibrium, each GENCO’s problem is plugged into a diagonalization algorithm that is generally used in multi-leader, single-follower bi-level problems.

Dalvi, Sourabh↗

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

Gasification of Coal and Biomass: The Route to Net-Negative-Carbon Power and Hydrogen

One promising process that is a candidate for meeting the goals of the US Department of Energy’s 21st Century Power Plant initiative is to gasify a mixture of coal and biomass to yield a syngas, which can have CO2 removed and then be used to produce hydrogen as well as an off-gas that can be used to flexibly produce power. This concept would overall be carbon net-negative and readily meet the 21st Century Power Plant initiative targets of smaller scale MW generation, high ramp rates and turndown, feedstock flexibility, and high efficiency—at a reasonable cost. Moreover, adding the large-scale production of “ultra-green” hydrogen yields a system tailored for the coming hydrogen economy, providing long-term energy storage and an attractive co-product for sale. The objective of the work being led by the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. (EPRI), with support by Bechtel Corporation (Bechtel), Gas Technology Institute (GTI), Hamilton Mauer International, Inc. (HMI), Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD), NexantECA, Inc. (Nexant), and Wärtsilä, is to perform a front-end design and engineering (FEED) study on an oxygen-blown gasification system coupled with water-gas shift, pre-combustion CO2 capture, and pressure-swing adsorption working off a coal/biomass mix to yield high-purity hydrogen and a fuel off-gas that can generate power. Several designs are being considered that will be capable of producing 50 MW net from a flexible generator, over 8500 kg/hr of hydrogen, and net-negative CO2 emissions, at an efficiency of 50% net HHV. The plant would be hosted at an NPPD site, where opportunities for enhanced oil recovery and sequestration have been investigated and the need for low-carbon power and hydrogen is imminent. The principal biomass to be used is corn stover—prevalent in Nebraska where the plant will be located—mixed with Powder River Basin (PRB) coal, necessitating a gasifier that can use this feedstock and be flexible to allow other types. Waste plastics will also be reviewed for use. Two oxygen-blown gasifiers have been identified as candidates that have done testing with biomass including corn stover: the GTI gasifier—a high-pressure, fluidized-bed type—and HMI’s, a lower pressure moving-bed type. Both have relative advantages that are being investigated in the Phase I design study, with a resultant down select of one system for which the FEED will be performed in Phase II. The technical tasks for the proposed project are: • Design Development: Completion of design activities necessary to provide inputs for the FEED study. Multiple design cases will be assessed with the selection of the optimal one for the FEED. • Investment Case Preparation: Development of the draft investment case for the proposed process with business cases performed for the proposed host site and two other locations. • Host Site Selection: Evaluation of the two potential host sites within NPPD’s portfolio to select the preferred candidate based on technical, economic, and environmental considerations. • Environmental Information Volume (EIV) Development: Completion of the EIV for the host site. • FEED Study: Completion of a FEED study based on the design selected in Phase I. A Greenhouse Gas Life Cycle Analysis will also be performed for the process. • Update Investment Case: Finalization of the investment case based on findings from the FEED. The advantages of the proposed project are significant. Having an engaged U.S. power utility willing to provide a host site that will produce energy from coal plus a deep and experienced team is critical; the process meets all the goals of DOE’s 21st Century Power Plant initiative at an estimated total plant cost of ~$880M and a production cost of hydrogen of ~$2/kg-H2 while producing net-negative carbon power. If developed, this process has real commercial potential in the United States—supported by EPRI’s initial review of the considerable interest from selected U.S. utilities—and elsewhere around the globe. The process has fewer environmental hurdles compared to other concepts, lowering regulatory and protest risks—providing a pathway to preserving the viability of a critical indigenous energy source by transforming its use to match a changing world. This presentation will outline the motivation for the effort, summarize project plans, work completed to date, results of the Design Development task, and detailed work scope for the remainder of the project.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2023

Quantifying the Financial Impacts of Electric Vehicles on Utility Ratepayers and Shareholders [Slides]

Widespread electric vehicle (EV) adoption is critical for meeting economy-wide decarbonization goals and, as a result, states are considering enabling policies and rate designs to accelerate EV deployment. EVs can provide possible financial upside to electric utilities and ratepayers in several ways. For example, from the utility perspective, EVs could drive increased electricity sales and new earnings opportunities through increased capital investments. From the ratepayer perspective, increased electric loads from EVs could reduce average all-in retail rates. The degree to which there are net benefits or costs to shareholders and/or ratepayers depends on how EVs are integrated and managed through enabling grid investments and charging strategies. Using Berkeley Lab’s Financial Impacts of Distributed Energy Resources (FINDER) model that mimics the electric utility investment planning and ratemaking processes, we estimate the utility earnings and customer rate impacts of EVs using a bookend approach of “managed” (i.e., best case) and “mismanaged” (i.e., worst case) charging strategies for a generic summer-peaking, investor-owned, and vertically integrated utility. The analysis also examines the sensitivity of results to different assumptions of EV deployment characteristics, EV impacts on retail electricity sales, incremental distribution system costs, EV charging location, and utility EV enablement costs (i.e., utility costs to invest in EV charging, controls, and communication to deliver and administer EV programs). The results are intended to inform EV policies and deployment strategies that maximize utility system benefits and minimize ratepayer costs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Evaluating Impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law on the U.S. Power System

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, commonly referred to as the 'Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL),' collectively represent the largest commitment of the U.S. Federal Government to invest in the modernization and decarbonization of the U.S. energy system. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that total support for the broad range of climate and clean energy programs, tax credits, and other incentives authorized through the two laws will exceed $430 billion from 2022 through 2031 (CRS 2022; CBO 2021, 2022). While the climate and clean energy provisions are numerous and have the potential to impact all aspects of the U.S. energy system from fuel and electricity production to final consumption in industry, transportation, and buildings, the provisions relevant to the electricity sector - in particular the suite of tax credits for clean generation, storage, and carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) capture and storage - are expected to be some of the most consequential in terms of emissions reduction and clean energy deployment (Larsen et al. 2022; Jenkins, Mayfield, et al. 2022; Mahajan et al. 2022; Zhao et al. 2022). In this report, we detail the methods and results of a study estimating the potential impacts of key provisions of IRA and BIL on the contiguous U.S. power sector from present day through 2030. The analysis employs an advanced power system planning model, the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS), to evaluate how major provisions from both laws impact investment in and operation of utility-scale generation, storage, and transmission, and, in turn, how those changes impact power system costs, emissions, and climate and health damages. While not exhaustive in capturing every provision, the analysis estimates the possible scale of power-sector impacts that could result from the modeled provisions in IRA and BIL. The study is structured around two scenarios to evaluate the potential impacts of both laws on the power sector: 1) No New Policy: A counter-factual scenario that reflects all Federal and state policies enacted as of September 2022, with exception to IRA and BIL, and assumes load growth consistent with the Energy Information Administration's Annual Energy Outlook 2022 (AEO22) Reference case (EIA 2022a); 2) IRA-BIL: A scenario reflecting all Federal and state policies enacted as of September 2022, including key IRA and BIL provisions, most notably the investment and production tax credits for zero-carbon emitting electricity generation and storage (ITC and PTC), the tax credit for CO 2 capture and storage (45Q), and the tax credit for existing nuclear plants (described further in Section 2.3). To account for the impacts of IRA and BIL on electrification, assumes increased load growth consistent with a scaled version of the Medium Electrification scenario from the Electrification Futures Study (Mai et al. 2018). These scenarios are simulated across seven sets of assumptions with varying projected future electricity market conditions, including technology costs and performance, natural gas prices, and the degree of availability, feasibility, and cost of development of renewable resources, electricity transmission, and CO 2 pipeline, injection, and storage infrastructure. In addition, we simulate two sensitivities on the 'policy' treatment in which we vary key assumptions pertaining to the realized value of the clean electricity ITC and PTC: 1) the cost of monetization of tax credits, and 2) the level of bonus crediting realized by project developers. We demonstrate that IRA and BIL have the collective potential to drive substantial growth in clean electricity by 2030, while reducing costs for consumers, mitigating climate change, and decreasing the human health impacts of power sector emissions. However, we also demonstrate that if expected cost improvements of clean technologies are not realized and/or constraints on deployment driven by factors such as supply-chain challenges, regulatory hurdles, and the social acceptability of energy infrastructure development limit the rate of clean energy and associated infrastructure deployment (such as transmission), then the share of clean generation achieved and the associated emissions benefits realized may be substantively reduced.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Gasification of Coal and Biomass: The Route to Net-Negative-Carbon Power and Hydrogen

One promising process that is a candidate for meeting the goals of the US Department of Energy’s 21st Century Power Plant initiative is to gasify a mixture of coal and biomass to yield a syngas, which can have CO2 removed and then be used to produce hydrogen as well as an off-gas that can be used to flexibly produce power. This concept would overall be carbon net-negative and readily meet the 21st Century Power Plant initiative targets of smaller scale MW generation, high ramp rates and turndown, feedstock flexibility, and high efficiency—at a reasonable cost. Moreover, adding the large-scale production of “ultra-green” hydrogen yields a system tailored for the coming hydrogen economy, providing long-term energy storage and an attractive co-product for sale. The objective of the work being led by the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. (EPRI), with support by Bechtel Corporation (Bechtel), Gas Technology Institute (GTI), Hamilton Mauer International, Inc. (HMI), Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD), NexantECA, Inc. (Nexant), and Wärtsilä, is to perform a front-end design and engineering (FEED) study on an oxygen-blown gasification system coupled with water-gas shift, pre-combustion CO2 capture, and pressure-swing adsorption working off a coal/biomass mix to yield high-purity hydrogen and a fuel off-gas that can generate power. Several designs are being considered that will be capable of producing 50 MW net from a flexible generator, over 8500 kg/hr of hydrogen, and net-negative CO2 emissions, at an efficiency of 50% net HHV. The plant would be hosted at an NPPD site, where opportunities for enhanced oil recovery and sequestration have been investigated and the need for low-carbon power and hydrogen is imminent. The principal biomass to be used is corn stover—prevalent in Nebraska where the plant will be located—mixed with Powder River Basin (PRB) coal, necessitating a gasifier that can use this feedstock and be flexible to allow other types. Waste plastics will also be reviewed for use. Two oxygen-blown gasifiers have been identified as candidates that have done testing with biomass including corn stover: the GTI gasifier—a high-pressure, fluidized-bed type—and HMI’s, a lower pressure moving-bed type. Both have relative advantages that were investigated in the Phase I design study, with a resultant down select of one system for which the FEED will be performed in Phase II. The technical tasks for the project are: • Design Development: Completion of design activities necessary to provide inputs for the FEED study. Multiple design cases will be assessed with the selection of the optimal one for the FEED. • Investment Case Preparation: Development of the draft investment case for the proposed process with business cases performed for the proposed host site and two other locations. • Host Site Selection: Evaluation of the two potential host sites within NPPD’s portfolio to select the preferred candidate based on technical, economic, and environmental considerations. • Environmental Information Volume (EIV) Development: Completion of the EIV for the host site. • FEED Study: Completion of a FEED study based on the design selected in Phase I. A Greenhouse Gas Life Cycle Analysis will also be performed for the process. • Update Investment Case: Finalization of the investment case based on findings from the FEED. The advantages of the proposed project are significant. Having an engaged U.S. power utility willing to provide a host site that will produce energy from coal plus a deep and experienced team is critical; the process meets all the goals of DOE’s 21st Century Power Plant initiative at an estimated total plant cost of ~$880M and a production cost of hydrogen of ~$2/kg-H2 while producing net-negative carbon power. If developed, this process has real commercial potential in the United States—supported by EPRI’s initial review of the considerable interest from selected U.S. utilities—and elsewhere around the globe. The process has fewer environmental hurdles compared to other concepts, lowering regulatory and protest risks—providing a pathway to preserving the viability of a critical indigenous energy source by transforming its use to match a changing world. This presentation outlines the motivation for the effort, summarizes project plans, work completed to date, results of the Phase I effort and, and detailed work scope for the remainder of the project in the Phase II FEED effort.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2024

Multi-State Transportation Electrification Impact Study: Preparing the Grid for Light-, Medium-, and Heavy-Duty Electric Vehicles

Recent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notices of proposed rulemakings for GHG emissions standards for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty on-road vehicles would accelerate ongoing advancements already happening in the industry because of private investment, consumer demand, state-level policies, and federal incentives. As the EPA finalizes these regulations, questions persist regarding the cost of the requisite charging infrastructure and associated upgrades to the nation's electric grid. With support from the U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, and the EPA, a multidisciplinary team conducted a Multi-State Transportation Electrification Impact Study that quantitatively assesses the incremental investment necessary to enable the levels of vehicle electrification expected to be induced by pending EPA regulations and to estimate the potential value of deferred investments in electric distribution infrastructure stemming from proactive vehicle-grid integration planning and deployment. This study finds the simulated incremental capital cost of charging infrastructure (including grid upgrades) to be at least 2.5 times smaller than the lifetime net benefits of vehicle electrification (including fuel savings but excluding the value of avoided emissions). Additionally, the incremental distribution grid upgrade cost of the EPA Action-Unmanaged scenario was found to be approximately 3% of existing utility distribution system investments (on an annual basis). Finally, the potential for managed charging to defer distribution grid upgrades was found to be significant with costs found to decrease from $2.3 billion to an incremental cost of $1 billion across five states in the Action-Managed scenario (relative to the No Action-Unmanaged scenario).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Bridging the Gap on Data and Analysis for Distribution System Planning: Information That Utilities Can Provide Regulators, State Energy Offices and Other Stakeholders

Electric utilities conduct planning annually to ensure their distribution system meets technical standards, policies, and regulations; addresses forecasted grid conditions; satisfies customer needs; and advances utility priorities. The plan identifies grid deficiencies, analyzes potential solutions, and prioritizes capital investments and other expenditures. About 20 U.S. states and jurisdictions require regulated utilities to file some type of distribution system plan with the public utility commission for review. Requirements for sharing distribution system data and analyses vary widely, from few specific requirements to a detailed list of information that must be provided. While utilities conduct extensive analysis to develop distribution system plans, in most jurisdictions regulators and stakeholders do not know what data are available and how the utility uses the data in planning and investing. This report aims to bridge the gap by increasing understanding of the types of data and analyses utilities employ to develop distribution system plans and how the information affects their decision-making. The report describes information that states and stakeholders can ask for related to 11 data categories: -Forecasting loads and distributed energy resources (DERs) -Scenario analysis -Worst-performing circuits -Asset management strategy -Hosting capacity analysis -Value of DERs -Grid needs assessment -Cost-effectiveness framework for investments -Distribution system investment strategy and implementation -Geotargeted programs -Non-wires alternatives procurements.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Framework for Water Efficiency Measures

Life-Cycle Cost Analysis Framework for Water Efficiency Measures: Guidance Designed for Federal Agencies (hereafter referred to as “this report”) provides a technical framework for federal agencies to conduct a life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) for water efficiency projects in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 8253. This report leverages insights from the 2023 report, PNNL-34006, Water and Wastewater Annual Price Escalation Rates for Selected Cities Across the United States: 2023 Edition (Unger et al. 2023). The primary objective of this report is to provide a framework to assist federal agencies with evaluating the full economic impact of water efficiency projects by assessing both initial investments and long-term operational benefits. An LCCA can provide a comprehensive view of all costs associated with a water efficiency project, including initial investment, ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M), and eventual disposal or replacement, ensuring the most cost-effective solution is selected. The LCCA methodology outlined in this report enables users to compare base case scenarios with potential alternatives using a standardized present value approach. It incorporates key cost components such as energy, water and wastewater, installation, O&M, and equipment replacement. Additionally, the framework introduces relevant evaluation metrics, such as the net savings and the savings-to-investment ratio, to ensure that water efficiency measures are economically justified over the lifespan of the project. To support practical application, this report also describes various water efficiency strategies that may be analyzed using an LCCA, including plumbing retrofits, irrigation upgrades, alternative water use, and cooling system improvements. By applying this framework, federal agencies can ensure compliance with regulatory mandates while maximizing the return on investment and contributing to resilient water management practices. The information provided in this report is aligned with the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) life-cycle cost (LCC) methodology, as conveyed in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Handbook 135 (Kneifel and Webb 2022). This report is intended to provide relatively high-level guidance, acting as a complement to, rather than a substitute for, that resource.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

NASA NTRS1982

Retrofit energy conservation in residential buildings in southern California

The common energy conservation techniques (ECTs) that can be retrofit-installed into residential buildings are surveyed. The quantity of saved energy for heating and cooling attributable to each ECT is evaluated for three common modes of heating: natural gas heating at 60/therm; heating via heat pump at $1.20/therm; and electric resistance heating at $2.40/therm. In every case, a life cycle cost comparison is made between the long term revenue due to energy conservation and a safe and conventional alternative investment that might be available to the prudent homeowner. The comparison between investment in an ECT and the alternative investment is brought into perspective using the life cycle payback period and an economic Figure of Merit (FOM). The FOM allows for relative ranking between candidate ECTs. Because the entire spectrum of winter heating climates in California is surveyed, the decision maker can determine whether or not a considered ECT is recommended in a given climate, and under what conditions an ECT investment becomes attractive.

Turner, R. H.↗

NASA NTRS1988

Dissociation of performance and subjective measures of workload

A theory is presented to identify sources that produce dissociations between performance and subjective measures of workload. The theory states that performance is determined by (1) amount of resources invested, (2) resource efficiency, and (3) degree of competition for common resources in a multidimensional space described in the multiple-resources model. Subjective perception of workload, multidimensional in nature, increases with greater amounts of resource investment and with greater demands on working memory. Performance and subjective workload measures dissociate when greater resources are invested to improve performance of a resource-limited task; when demands on working memory are increased by time-sharing between concurrent tasks or between display elements; and when performance is sensitive to resource competition and subjective measures are more sensitive to total investment. These dissociation findings and their implications are discussed and directions for future research are suggested.

Yeh, Yei-Yu↗