Assessing the potential of battery storage as a peaking capacity resource in the United States
Not Available
Frazier, A. Will↗
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.
Levelized Cost of CO 2 Captured Using Five Physical Solvents in Pre-combustion Applications
Aspen Plus v8.8 was used to perform techno-economic analysis (TEA) of a CO 2 capture process from a typical fuel gas stream in a 543-MW pre-combustion power plant using five different physical solvents (Selexol, PEGPDMS-1, NMP, [aPy][Tf 2 N] and [hmim][Tf 2 N]). The process included a countercurrent packed-bed absorber operating under high-pressure over a wide range of temperatures and three pressure-swing flash drums for solvent regeneration. Furthermore, two packings, Mellapak 250Y and IMTP50, were used and the Levelized costs of CO 2 captured (LCOC) were calculated. The simulation results indicated that using Mellapak 250Y exhibited lower LCOC values than those when using IMTP50 for the five solvents under all conditions used as it offered better mass transfer. The CO 2 capture process carried out at low temperatures showed lower LCOC values than those at higher temperatures due to the increased CO 2 solubility in the solvents at lower temperatures, requiring smaller absorber diameter and lower solvent circulation rates, which offset the cooling requirements. Comparing the lowest LCOC values for the five solvents, the hydrophobic PEGPDMS-1 solvent was the most promising one compared to the other four solvents, due to its lowest capital and operating costs and noncorrosive, which enabled using less expensive materials for the process equipment.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Renewable Energy Potential Model: Geothermal Supply Curves
The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model is a geospatial platform for estimating technical potential and developing renewable energy supply curves, initially developed for wind and solar technologies. The model evaluates deployment constraints, considering land use, environmental, and cultural factors, and estimates the distance to existing grid features to connect future plants (Maclaurin et al., 2021). A pressing deficiency in the reV model, however, is representation of geothermal electricity generation technologies. To address this gap, we developed a novel geothermal generation module for reV that allows for representation and analysis at the same level of detail as other renewable technologies. The included paper describes our process for evaluating data sources for the modeling, and presents five preliminary reV geothermal results. More specifically, we present two sets of resource data that represent upper and lower bounds for geothermal potential. We then present several sensitivity runs using the upper bound resource data; the results are encouraging that levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) can be reduced by optimizing the location and estimated capacity of the spatially diverse geothermal resource while considering the distance to existing grid infrastructure. Our preliminary supply curves and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) results provided here should be considered with care due to the high uncertainty in geothermal resource potential data. We present median LCOE values for the conterminous U.S. for three scenarios: two hydrothermal (3.5km depth, USGS heat flow & SMU temperatures respectively) and one EGS (4.5km depth, SMU temperatures). The capital and operating costs for each respective technology are modeled. We also compare results using two different resource data sources.
15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
Pilgrim Hot Springs: GEOPHIRES Inputs and Outputs for Direct-Use Geothermal District Heating and Cooling
This dataset includes files for a techno-economic analysis conducted using the GEOPHIRES simulator to examine the feasibility of expanding a larger district heating site in a remote location: Pilgrim Hot Springs, Alaska. Files included here are GEOPHIRES inputs and outputs for five different scenarios with varying demand, cycle, and system design characteristics to analyze. Also included is the link to the GEOPHIRES GitHub, as well as a link to the dataset that contains the energy modelling used to determine the heating demand for the district. For a list of the differences between scenarios, see the included "Input Overview.txt" file. Fields included in the input files are: subsurface technical parameters, surface technical parameters, financial parameters, capital and O&M parameters, as well as simulation parameters. The output files are case reports that summarize all equipment, reservoir characteristics, costs, and heating profiles.
15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) Study for a Carbon Capture Plant Retrofit to a Natural Gas-Fired Gas Turbine Combined Cycle Power Plant (2x2x1 Duct-Fired 758-MWe Facility with F Class Turbines)
A comprehensive front-end engineering design (FEED) study has been undertaken by Bechtel National Inc. (Bechtel) for locating a post-combustion capture and compression (PCC) unit at Panda’s Sherman natural gas–combined cycle (NGCC) power plant in Sherman, Texas. This is described in the unredacted FEED Study report (Attachment 1) with all supporting documents, numbering over 150. The Study Report is publicly available. Sizing of the PCC plant is based on treating an amount of flue gas equivalent to that produced when generating 420 MW, which is approximately 68% of the total flue gas emitted by the NGCC power plant operating at guarantee condition with duct burners off. A reduced power plant capacity factor was used for sizing the PCC plant because the gas turbines at the site often operate at reduced load due to the high penetration of renewable power in the ERCOT region. The cost of carbon capture is primarily driven by capital cost (and therefore is highly sensitive to capacity factor). Sizing the capture unit so that when used it is nearly always operating at full capacity is critical to the economic viability of the proposed investment.
03 NATURAL GAS↗
Meta-Analysis of Advanced Nuclear Reactor Cost Estimations
Supporting Data can be downloaded at: https://gain.inl.gov/content/uploads/4/2024/06/INL-RPT-24-77048-R1.xlsx Nuclear energy is a critical cornerstone of the current United States clean energy supply and may play a larger role in the future in support of a transition to a net-zero economy. The current fleet of nuclear reactors predominantly consists of large light-water reactors (LWRs), while many of the reactor designs under consideration are smaller and/or different technologies. Because these new designs have not yet been built, there is a high degree of uncertainty associated with their cost. This complicates energy-planning efforts because cost projections are not always standardized, consistent, and centralized in an easily accessible location. To help support energy planning in the US, this report provides advanced nuclear cost ranges using a transparent methodology along with other relevant information that can be used to help support decision making and energy planning. The purpose of this work was to conduct a methodical process for cost evaluation using only public information that was vetted with the end-goal to provide reference cost projections for nuclear energy. To provide a solid basis for these values, the approach and assumptions are explicitly laid out throughout the report allowing any user of the data to challenge or reconsider them. Because future US nuclear-reactor costs are still unknown due to little recent observed data, the report opted to compile a comprehensive list of bottom-up estimates and evaluate averages/trends within the data to identify reference ranges. This was deemed preferable to opining on the robustness or validity of one cost estimation versus another. To that end, the work evaluated thousands of lines of cost subaccounts from several bottom-up cost estimates. A wide variety of different reactor types captured in the data are of various sizes and technologies. Some of these reactors will be representative of advanced reactors under development while others will not. Thus, the results here are dependent on the data that are available and the accuracy of the estimates that are used. Each bottom-up estimate was reviewed to determine whether it was complete. Incomplete data sets were corrected to ensure an adequate basis of cross-comparison. The report is not without limitations and should be interpreted as an initial step to develop cost ranges for nuclear technology. Ultimately, future work can build upon the methodology with refined cost estimates to reduce uncertainty. US-based overnight capital cost (OCC) estimates were compiled from extensive data sets into ranges for both large and small reactor sizes for 2030. To project the cost declines over time, learning rates were sampled from literature sources. No SMRs were previously built; hence, learning rates based on bottom-up approaches (e.g., by quantifying the impact stemming from fabrication of different components, modular work, site construction, commissioning) were prioritized. For larger reactors, actual learning rates from deployments were used to project future costs (adjusted to account for standardization or lack thereof between designs). Other costs included are fixed and variable operations and maintenance costs. The final variables were capacity factors and ramp rates to support energy planning.
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
Community Solar Program Design Considerations & Modeling Inputs
Designing and modeling a community solar (CS) program is a complex process with numerous variable inputs that are interconnected. Modeling a CS program can be useful to inform the programs design itself while also providing stakeholders of all types with information. Accurate data inputs and assumptions are key to ensuring that a model is informative and as representative of real market conditions as possible. This report is an exploration of community solar program modeling considerations, especially as it relates to data inputs such as capital costs, administrative fees, and subscription size, using a CS program in North Carolina as a case study.
14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition
Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2021 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2020, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.
2021↗
Utility-Scale Solar, 2023 Edition: Analysis of Empirical Plant-level Data from U.S. Ground-mounted PV, PV+battery, and CSP Plants (exceeding 5 MWAC)
Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2023 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2022, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.
analysis↗
Utility-Scale Solar, 2024 Edition: Analysis of Empirical Plant-level Data from U.S. Ground-mounted PV, PV+battery, and CSP Plants (exceeding 5 MWAC)
Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2024 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2023, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, net value, and interconnection queue data.
analysis↗
U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmarks: Q1 2021
NREL has been modeling U.S. solar photovoltaic (PV) system costs since 2009. This year, our report benchmarks costs of U.S. PV for residential, commercial, and utility-scale systems, with and without storage, built in the first quarter of 2021 (Q1 2021). The methodology includes bottom-up accounting for all system and project-development costs incurred when installing residential, commercial, and utility-scale systems and it models the capital costs and levelized cost of energy for such systems.
14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
Potential Advantages to Employing an Onsite Laboratory at FUSRAP Sites Contaminated with Radionuclides and Metals - 20353
Various factors that support an evaluation of the relative costs, advantages and disadvantages of utilizing an onsite laboratory or an offsite laboratory for remediation of Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) sites contaminated with radionuclides and metals are presented. In terms of how much more quickly an onsite laboratory provides results versus an offsite laboratory, the results of this study provide tools for calculating the amount of cost savings per day for excavation of contaminated soils for various scenarios including: - State, municipal or local property remediation where the remediation schedule becomes time-critical due to the extra cost and inconvenience to the town or municipality caused by the need for increased security and safety personnel, possible road closures and detours, and the inconvenience to the public due to modified or decreased services of State or municipal facilities; - Residential property where the remediation schedule becomes time-critical due to the inconvenience to the homeowner as well as the importance of maintaining good community relations; - Commercial property where the remediation schedule becomes time-critical due to the hardship and potential loss of revenue endured by the property owner; - Open area where treatment of excavation water is required, and - Open area where treatment of excavation water is not required. For every scenario, the number of matrices, radionuclide and metal contaminants of concern and the project duration are important factors. The costs for the onsite laboratory included the capital costs associated with setting up the lab such as trailer(s) or building(s), power and water hookup, analytical testing equipment, balances, computers, desks and bookcases; support equipment such as hot plates, filtration assemblies, safety equipment, ovens, etc.; and supplies such as glassware, pipettes, filters, etc. and ongoing costs such as labor, chemicals and reagents, standards, cost of the laboratory obtaining certification and maintenance. Offsite laboratory sample testing costs are generally very competitive and typically substantially lower than onsite laboratory costs if only the sample testing costs are considered. The great disadvantage of using an offsite laboratory is that they often cannot guarantee rapid turnaround times for results which creates project delays associated with the remediation process including delays determining the completeness of the characterization and remediation processes, delays in backfilling a property and additional costs for treating wastewater (excavation water, stormwater or both). These costs will vary greatly depending upon the area of the country in which the project is located due to the wide range of labor costs for the onsite laboratory and field workers, as well as the contaminants of interest, matrices and most importantly the size of the impacted area and the number of properties located in that area. This paper provides guidelines for calculating the cost savings that may be realized if an onsite laboratory can generate results more quickly than an offsite laboratory by estimating the costs associated with the remediation process for the various scenarios noted above such as work crew labor costs, excavator and dump truck equipment rentals, wastewater treatment costs (if applicable) and the additional costs incurred by homeowners, commercial property owners and towns/municipalities that are reimbursed by the potentially responsible parties. Key assumptions involve the typical quickest turnaround time provided by the onsite and offsite laboratories. Costs for the operation of a wastewater treatment system and the remediation of a site area or property were provided by personnel who have been involved in the operation of a large FUSRAP site in New Jersey for many years. This study provides valuable information for determining the most cost-effective approach for analysis of project samples and therefore may be used on upcoming FUSRAP projects. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Conventional and Next Generation Treatment Technologies for PFAS - 20067
In 2016, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) established a Health Advisory Limit (HAL) for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) (individually and the summation) of 70 nanograms per liter (ng/L) based on developing toxicological information. These two compounds are among several thousand per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Due to a multitude of commercially beneficial physical and chemical properties, the availability of PFAS-relevant and practical water treatment technologies is limited. The use of conventional adsorbents, such as activated carbon (AC) and anion exchange (AIX) resins, have become a 'de facto' interim measure to immediately address drinking water above this criterion. However, these adsorbents can have marginal long-term efficiency and are relatively unproven against the diversity of polyfluorinated compounds. Additionally, geochemical and/or co-contaminant competition can significantly impede adsorption based PFAS removal. These challenges may be addressed using engineered filtration, such as reverse osmosis or nanofiltration (RO/NF); however, for larger flow systems RO/NF may have unacceptable reject ratios as high as 35% and the capital cost may preclude these technologies. Extending these technologies to natural waters, which have various degrees of geochemical and co-contaminant competition, often requires a treatment train, combining conventional adsorbents or engineered filtration with pretreatment and more innovative and emerging remediation solutions for PFAS. Conventional and Next Generation water treatment technologies for PFAS generally employ one of three mechanisms (adsorption, separation, or destruction). These mechanisms include many types of technologies for both municipal drinking water and extracted natural water applications. The previously mentioned AC, AIX, and RO/NF are commercially available technologies that are actively being deployed for PFAS treatment. Research and development around these technologies is focused on optimization, and ultimate destruction of PFAS is achieved through incineration. Next Generation water treatment technologies include PFAS-specific flocculants, foam fractionation, novel AIX resins, new engineered adsorptive media, electrochemical treatment, sonolysis, and photolysis, radiation, and plasma (forms of advanced reductive processes [ARP]). Research and development around these technologies is focused on proof of concept and assimilation to real world applications. As the PFAS-relevant destructive technologies (such as incineration, electrochemical treatment, sonolysis, and ARP) are energy intensive, the state of the practice for PFAS water treatment is to focus adsorption/separation based technologies on reducing and concentrating the volume of water requiring destructive treatment. This enables more flexibility with respect to circulation frequency, residence time, and more control over energy usage. Water treatment for PFAS presently requires multiple technologies (i.e. a treatment train) to protect human health in a cost-conscious manner. An investment in research and development to explore new technologies is part of a key initiative for efficient protection of human health. This presentation attempts to review PFAS-relevant water treatment technologies and provide perspective as to their status with respect to applicability and commercial relevance. (authors)
38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
Using Resin to Reduce Silica in Borated Fluid - 20072
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) strongly recommends the concentration of silica in the reactor coolant be limited, potential ingress be carefully controlled, and frequently monitored to assess potential silica deposits on fuel cladding surfaces. Boraflex is a product with silicone rubber encasing a neutron absorber for criticality control, and it was installed in the majority of nuclear power plant spent fuel pools. Over time and in the presence of radiation, the silicone rubber lining degrades into silica (SiO{sub 2}) and hydrogen gas. Silica is somewhat soluble in water and spent fuel pool water communicates with other plant systems during refueling outages, leading to a buildup of silica in the reactor coolant and connected systems. Due to the prevalence of Boraflex racks in spent fuel pools, the presence of silica is a chronic nuclear industry concern. To address this concern, many nuclear plants have installed reverse osmosis skid systems to remove the silica from their spent fuel pools and, by extension, from reactor coolant. These skids are expensive to install and maintain. Arcadis personnel demonstrated that an iron-impregnated resin could be used to remove silica from borated systems without impacting the water quality. The resin was readily available, inexpensive, and easy to install in existing plant equipment. During a nuclear power plant's refueling outage the iron-impregnated resin proved to be effective in reducing the need for feed and bleed operations, with concurrent cost savings and reduction in required outage water management activities. Thus, the following savings were realized: - Eliminated the need to purchase, install, and maintain a reverse osmosis system avoiding more than $10 million in up-front capital cost and ongoing operating and maintenance costs. - Removed 9.57 kilograms (21 pounds) of silica dioxide from the primary system fluid. - Reduced the volume of feed and bleed from 70,000 gallons (2.65 E+05 liters) to 35,000 gallons (1.32 E+05 liters). - Saved $380,000 in water production and disposal costs. (author)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Progresses and Perspectives of All‐Iron Aqueous Redox Flow Batteries
Abstract Redox flow batteries (RFBs) are a promising option for long‐duration energy storage (LDES) due to their stability, scalability, and potential reversibility. However, solid‐state and non‐aqueous flow batteries have low safety and low conductivity, while aqueous systems using vanadium and zinc are expensive and have low power and energy densities, limiting their industrial application. An approach to lower capital cost and improve scalability is to utilize cheap Earth‐abundant metals such as iron (Fe). Nevertheless, all‐iron RFBs have many complications, involving voltage loss from ohmic resistance, side reactions such as hydrogen evolution, oxidation, and most significantly electrode plating, and dendrite growth. To address these issues, researchers have begun to examine the effects of various alterations to all‐iron RFBs, such as adding organic ligands to form Fe complexes and using a slurry electrode instead of common materials such as graphite or platinum rods. Overall, progress in improving aqueous all‐iron RFBs is at its infant stage, and new strategies must be introduced, such as the utilization of nanoparticles, which can limit dendrite growth while increasing storage capacity. This review provides an in‐depth overview of current research and offers perspectives on how to design the next generation of all‐iron aqueous RFBs.
Belongia, Shawn↗
Charge‐Programmable Photopolymers for 3D Electronics via Additive Manufacturing
Charge‐programmed 3D printing enables the fabrication of 3D electronics with lightweight and high precision via selective patterning of metals. This selective metal deposition is catalyzed by Pd nanoparticles that are specifically immobilized onto the charged surface and promises to fabricate a myriad of complex electronic devices with self‐sensing, actuation, and structural elements assembled in a designed 3D layout. However, the achievable property space and the material‐performance correlation of the charge‐programmed printing remain unexplored. Herein, a series of photo‐curable resins are designed for unveiling how the charge and crosslink densities synergistically impact the nanocatalyst‐guided selective deposition in catalytic efficiency and properties of the 3D printed charge‐programmed architectures, leading to high‐quality 3D patterning of solid and liquid metals. The findings offer a wide tunability of the structural properties of the printed electronics, ranging from stiff to extreme flexibility. Capitalizing on these results, the printing and successful application of an ultralight‐weight and deployable 3D multi‐layer antenna system operating at an ultrahigh‐frequency of 19 GHz are demonstrated.
36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
A Simple Route for Open Fluidic Devices with Particle Walls
Open fluidics, allowing liquid in a flow channel to interact with the external environment, is a revolutionary concept. However, fabricating a highly stable open fluidic device of arbitrary complexity, while maintaining reconfigurability, is still a challenge. This is achieved by the use of a patterned substrate and liquids that are covered with functional, readily available hydrophobic particles, providing great flexibility in the construction and use of open fluidic structures. Decorated with a coating of modified carbon nanotubes (CNTs) to encapsulate the fluids, the study capitalizes on the photothermal characteristics of CNTs to fabricate a device to probe the effects of temperature on tumor chemotherapy. The strategy substantially increases the availability and potential use of open fluidic devices.
Liu, Heng↗
Technoeconomic and Emissions Analysis of the Hybrid Redox Process for the Production of Acetic Acid with CO 2 Utilization
The production of oxygenated hydrocarbons, such as acetic acid, using captured CO 2 is a promising pathway to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the chemical industry. The use of a chemical looping‐based hybrid redox process (HRP) is proposed to convert CO 2 and natural gas into separate CO and syngas streams that can be used to produce various commodity oxygenates, while allowing the beneficial utilization of captured CO 2 . Here, a detailed technoeconomic analysis of HRP applied to the production of acetic acid is presented. Emissions and energy analyses show the ability of HRP to lower the CO 2 emissions for acetic acid synthesis by 74% compared to a conventional steam and autothermal reforming route. HRP also offers a potential 34% reduction in capital costs. Compared to a dry reforming based acetic acid production route, HRP has the potential for significantly lower costs. If integrated with a low carbon energy source, HRP has the potential to achieve a negative emission of greenhouse gas (‐0.50 kg CO 2 per kg acetic acid).
37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗