Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “COST ESTIMATION”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

High Temperature Steam Electrolysis Process Performance and Cost Estimates

Technology readiness levels (TRLs) of electrolysis systems have dramatically increased in recent years as the interest in clean hydrogen production and decarbonization of transportation, industrial and other sectors increases across the globe. This is especially true of high temperature steam electrolysis (HTSE) / solid oxide electrolysis cell (SOEC) systems which show promise of much higher system efficiencies than other more developed electrolysis technologies. This possibility of higher efficiencies of HTSE / SOEC systems has been previously assumed to be theoretically possible but in recent years it has become less theoretical and more realistic as an increasing amount of suppliers complete lab and pilot tests showing very promising results. Research in the areas of manufacturing techniques, material selection, electrode and electrolyte compositions, and balance of plant size and integration continues at a fast pace as an increasing number of suppliers both internationally and domestically become involved. The advantages of HTSE become more pronounced when HTSE is coupled with nuclear power plants (NPPs). This is because thermal energy produced by the nuclear reactor can be used in a series of heat transfer loops and heat exchangers to vaporize HTSE feedwater, which drastically improves the economics of the process. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has been very involved in the research and modeling of HTSE systems for a number of years, in collaboration with other national laboratories, academia, and industry stakeholders both on the hydrogen production as well as the hydrogen demand side. The modeling completed over the years on a large variety of projects has led to a wealth of knowledge at INL including in the area of the technoeconomic assessment (TEA) of HTSE systems. TEAs include process modeling of the HTSE systems to calculate system energy requirements and equipment sizing, followed by estimation of capital and operating costs to enable calculation of the levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH). The TEA work performed has produced incremental improvements and tuning of the methods, assumptions, models, and results of the analyses as well as providing some opportunities for validating these results. The purpose of this document is to record the current baseline HTSE analyses led by INL to show the current status of assumptions and costs of these systems. Given the rapid development of this technology, the variety of suppliers entering the space, and the increasing attention government and industry are giving to such systems, this document may be updated on a periodic basis with updated analysis and assumptions. This document compiles various analyses results and approaches completed over a period of years into a single document to be used as a baseline going forward. It represents what the INL HTSE analysis group assumes to be the internal best estimate of the current operation, costs, and landscape of the HTSE industry state of the art capability for current SOEC technology in an Nth-of-a-Kind (NOAK) plant, which in this study is defined as existence of the manufacturing capacity to support previous deployment of N = 100 count of 25 MWe modular HTSE blocks (with modular equipment component cost reductions specified as following a 95% learning curve). That said, This is a public document and as such so no proprietary data was used or included in this report. There may be HTSE suppliers that have performance specifications, and cost estimates, and test data that differ from the analysis presented in this document. This document is meant to be a best conservative estimate of the technology and not an absolute reference.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2026

ICE Calculator 2: Final Report for Phase 1 and 2 of the National Initiative to Update the Interruption Cost Estimate (ICE) Calculator

ICE 2.0 Phase 2 Final Report In 2021, Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations, Inc. launched the “ICE Calculator 2 Initiative” – a national study to refresh the underlying data and enhance the functionality of the ICE Calculator. The Initiative involves Berkeley Lab contracting with sponsoring utilities to administer identical, updated and comprehensive interruption cost surveys to statistically representative samples of each utility’s customers. Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations then pool the survey results across the utilities and use them to update the analytical engines that drive the ICE Calculator. The ICE Calculator 2 Initiative is being conducted in phases. Each phase involves the administration of interruption cost surveys to the customers of sponsoring utilities, followed by an update to the ICE Calculator based on analysis of the pooled survey results. This report describes the activities and findings from Phase 1 and 2 of the ICE Calculator 2 Initiative. Phase 1 was sponsored by eight utilities: American Electric Power, Commonwealth Edison, Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, DTE Electric, Exelon, National Grid, and Puget Sound Energy. Phase 2 was sponsored by six utilities: Empire District Electric Company, Evergy Missouri, Pacific Gas & Electric, San Diego Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and Union Electric. Phase 1 and 2 involved 15 customer interruption cost survey activities representing a total of 30 electricity distribution service territories. ICE Calculator Version 2.0 and 2.2 Comparison This memorandum describes–at a high-level–the improvements in interruption cost estimates for the version 2.2 of the ICE Calculator (released February 2026) compared to version 2.0 (released in April 2025). Version 2.2 of the ICE Calculator corresponds to Phase 2 of the initiative, while version 2.0 corresponds to Phase 1. The improvements in version 2.2 result from both a significant increase in the number of customer responses that have been collected and the identification of seven additional factors that help estimate customer interruption costs.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Area-A Options Cost Estimate Report

Five options for re-establishing various configurations of beam to LANSCE Area A were considered. Bottoms up cost estimates to implement three of the options were developed. The two options not costed were considered too complex and too expensive compared with the other options based on their relative benefits to experimental programs at LANSCE.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Updating Nuclear Energy Cost Estimates for Net Zero World Initiative

Energy modeling of decarbonized scenarios in integrated energy systems requires nuclear energy parameters that are critical for forecasting, modeling and cost structure analysis. Using updated real-world data has always been a challenge to estimate current nuclear reactors costs and deployment scenarios. Given this, an updated set of parameters for overnight capital costs and operation and maintenance costs are estimated for the Net Zero World initiative using recent reports that provided a vast set of open sources data inputs. This paper follows the methodology developed in the Net Zero World report and applies the new ranges estimated in the Gateway for Accelerated Innovation in Nuclear report that address many of the current challenges in obtaining accurate cost data for advanced nuclear concepts. The final goal is to provide new estimates of the overnight capital costs and operational costs for different countries. The present paper improves the earlier capital cost estimations, building on recent literature that aims to obtain accurate data for modeling and simulation to enhance energy system evaluations and support decision-making in areas like de-carbonization and capacity expansion. Finally, the paper compares the new cost estimates with the old cost results.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

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↗
DOE OSTI2021

Preliminary Component Design and Cost Estimation of a Novel Electric-Thermal Energy Storage System Using Solid Particles

Energy storage will become indispensable to complement the uncertainty of intermittent renewable resources and to firm the electricity supply as renewable power generation becomes the mainstream new-built energy source and fossil fuel power plants are phased out to meet carbon-neutral utility targets. Current energy storage methods based on pumped storage hydropower or batteries have many limitations. Thermal energy storage (TES) has unique advantages in scale and siting flexibility to provide grid-scale storage capacity. A particle-based TES system is projected to have promising cost and performance characteristics to meet the future growing energy storage needs. This paper introduces the system and components required for particle TES to become technically and economically competitive. The system integrates electric particle heaters, particle TES within insulated concrete silos, and an efficient air-Brayton combined-cycle power system to provide power for storage durations up to several days via low-cost, high-performance storage cycles. Design specifications and cost estimation of major components in a commercial-scale system are presented in this paper. A techno-economic analysis based on preliminary component designs and performance indicates that particle TES integrated with an air-Brayton combined-cycle power system has a path to achieve the targeted levelized cost of storage of 5 ¢/kWh-cycle at a round-trip efficiency of 50% when taking low-cost energy-specific components and leveraging basic assets from existing thermal power plants. The cost model provides insights for further development and economic potentials for long-duration energy storage.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Cost estimation of balance of plant equipment scale up for proton exchange membrane water electrolyzer systems

Water electrolyzers that use electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen could be a key technology for increasing hydrogen supply to meet expanded and emerging market applications, although currently the capital costs of these electrolyzers are high. Here we examine cost reductions that might be achieved by scaling up proton exchange membrane (PEM) electrolyzer systems and leveraging economies of scale through balance of plant (BOP) components for system sizes between 1 MW and 1 GW. We estimate BOP equipment capital costs of about $\$$848/kW at 1 MW, potentially decreasing to $\$$87/kW at 1 GW (2022-dollar year basis) with most of the cost reduction happening as systems scale from 1 MW to 100 MW. We find that BOP subsystems hydrogen drying and water knockout benefited the most from economies-of-scale cost reductions, and piping, instrumentation, and housing and power electronics were less impacted. These cost reductions from economies of scale could be more significant than estimated cost reductions from manufacturing scale-up reported in literature. These results add to the knowledge base that could guide optimal system designs that balance process scale-up with plant modularization and numbering-up. We also estimate that scaling up BOP could potentially lower the levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) by $\$$1.7-$\$$4.6/kg, depending on the scale-up magnitude and the plant capacity factor.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2023

Machine learning models for maintenance cost estimation in delivery trucks using diesel and natural gas fuels

The maintenance costs can represent about 15%–60% of the cost of produced goods depending on the type of goods transported. To comply with stringent emissions regulations, diesel engines are incorporated with complex after-treatment systems that demand increased maintenance. The availability of alternative fuels such as natural gas and propane has fostered the natural gas and propane powertrain systems as well as electrification options for heavy- and medium-duty vehicles. A critical barrier to adopting alternative fuel vehicles has been the lack of knowledge on comparative vehicle maintenance/repair costs with conventional diesel. Moreover, the region of operation, the type of vehicle operation, and seasonal temperature changes also affect the duty cycle which impacts the maintenance and repair costs. This study focuses on estimating the cost-per-mile for heavy-duty vehicles using machine learning models such as random forest, xgboost, neural networks, and a super-learner model. The super-learner model achieved an error as low as 0.0068 $/mile for mean absolute error and 0.0086 $/mile for root mean square error with a coefficient of determination/R-Squared of 97.28%. Specifically, the paper investigates the data collected from the maintenance and repair costs associated with delivery trucks using diesel and natural gas fuels. Since the availability of data is the major constraint, we leveraged the data collected by West Virginia University and the partnership with fleet companies. This allows for additional information related to maintenance costs and fleet-specific maintenance practices of alternative fuel vehicles. This study promotes clean fuel technologies and enables fleet management companies to adopt alternative fuel vehicles in case of similar or lower cost of maintenance compared to diesel vehicles resulting in reduced emissions and total cost of ownership.

Katreddi, Sasanka↗
DOE OSTI2021

Mass Production Cost Estimation of Direct H 2 PEM Fuel Cell Systems for Transportation Applications (2017 - 2021) (Final Report)

This report summarizes project activities for an assessment of transportation fuel cell system cost from 2017 to 2021. The project defined and projected the mass production costs of direct hydrogen PEM fuel cell power systems for LDVs (automobiles), MDVs, and HDVs for current and future technologies. In each year of the project, the fuel cell power system designs and cost projections were updated to reflect technological advances. Systems were defined corresponding to direct H2 PEM FC power systems for ~80 kWnet LDVs, 70-170 kWnet MDVs, and 275-330 kWnet HDVs. A selection of systems was analyzed in each year. Major components, their functionality, and relevant parameters were defined in system diagrams. The system definitions were supported by system performance modeling calculations. A BOM for each system analyzed was created that tabulated all system components and subsystems contained in the power systems. Several annual manufacturing rates were considered for each system analyzed.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nuclear Energy Cost Estimates for Net Zero World Initiative

This report provides recommended parameters for incorporating nuclear energy systems into decarbonization modeling scenarios. The values are primarily intended for the Net Zero World (NZW) Initiative but are expected to prove useful to other related efforts. Both costs and operational metrics are provided in the study. Several cost factors, namely overnight capital costs (OCC) and operational costs are taken to be country specific. OCC is defined as the value of building the reactor in one night considering all costs prior to the start of operations including fuel for the initial core load. The value assumes the build is neither a first nor a ‘Nth’ of a kind, but somewhere in between. All costs are escalated to 2022 USD values.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Cost estimates of production scale semitransparent organic photovoltaic modules for building integrated photovoltaics

Building integrated photovoltaics (BIPVs) are attached to commercial and residential structures to enable solar energy harvesting. While conventional Si photovoltaics (PVs) are dominant in the current market, second and third generation thin film solar cells based on amorphous Si, CdTe, CIGS, perovskites or organic photovoltaics (OPVs) are often considered as an alternative for BIPV applications since they may offer reduced costs compared to Si PVs. Indeed, recent advances in performance suggest that lightweight, flexible and visibly transparent OPVs can potentially be integrated into windows or other applications to which Si PVs are less well suited. Here, we estimate the cost of high efficiency, semitransparent OPVs (ST-OPVs) based on solution processing in a roll-to-roll (R2R) manufacturing line. Assuming modules with 10% power conversion efficiency (PCE), a 70% geometric fill factor (GFF), and 95% inverter efficiency, we anticipate a %1.6 per Wp module manufacturing cost that includes the cost of the microinverter to condition the OPV dc output to be compatible with the ac line voltage of the building. The materials and inverter cost comprise ~90% of the total module cost. Hence, with simplified material synthesis and a lower inverter cost, including marginally improved PCE and GFF, we expect the cost can be as low as $0.47 per Wp. Here, while the module costs ~60% of the average (uninstalled) double-pane window, we expect the payback period can be as short as 2 to 6 years, suggesting that OPVs can be an economic and attractive candidate for BIPV applications.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

A quality-agnostic combinatoric cost estimation model for large-format directed energy deposition metal additive manufacturing

Directed energy deposition (DED) additive manufacturing (AM) processes are amenable to synergistic combination into multi-process AM systems due to similar requirements for automation and energy sources. This work analyzes the economic performance of such DED AM systems from a quality-agnostic combinatoric standpoint with a model that calculates lowest-cost system combinations based on part geometry and process performance metrics. Common DED AM systems research focuses on a single process and does not consider the process, system, and application in the context of all possible system combinations (e.g., the combined set of process selection(s), motion system(s), and process hardware), leading to limited applicability of the resulting DED AM systems to cost-sensitive components such as those found in energy generation applications. The model developed herein incorporates the capital, material, and energy costs associated with DED AM system combinations into a predictive tool for estimating part and system cost, the output of which is intended to guide deployment of finite research and development resources towards DED AM system combinations with the lowest costs and greatest likelihood of economic impact. The DED AM systems identified by this framework may enable domestic production of the large conventionally cast and forged components necessary for energy generation.

Shanafield, Alexandra [ORNL]↗
DOE OSTI2024

Shared mooring system designs and cost estimates for wave energy arrays

For floating renewable energy devices to become more cost-efficient and commercially scalable, their mooring system designs must be low-cost and suited for large-scale installations. Large arrays of floating devices, such as wave energy converters (WECs), will likely be designed with an individual mooring system for each device in the array. However, new mooring technology advancements provide options to use shared mooring lines to connect adjacent devices to one another, reducing the total number of anchors in the array, thereby reducing material use and cost. Here, this paper explores the design, modeling, and cost analysis of shared mooring systems for various sizes of arrays consisting of heaving oscillating water column (OWC) WECs. Shared mooring systems for WEC arrays sized in 2 x N and N x N grid layouts are designed to meet the relevant design standards, checking their performance with a nonlinear time-domain dynamic simulation, and the costs of each are calculated and compared. Several assumptions are taken in the design process to produce efficient results, providing a preliminary optimization for guidance on design decisions rather than a full, detailed design analysis. Mooring system costs per WEC were found to decrease as the number of WECs in the array increase, up to certain array sizes. The 2 x 3 array had the lowest mooring system cost per WEC out of all arrays considered, with a 60% cost reduction relative to using individual mooring systems. The 3 x 3 and 4 x 4 arrays achieved a 50% cost per WEC reduction. In addition to these significant cost reductions, the shared mooring system designs can provide advantages through smaller mooring system footprints, lower installation times, and less seabed disturbance.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2025

Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies: Cost Estimation Methodology for NETL Techno-economic Assessments

This Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies (QGESS) summarizes the methodology employed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in calculating plant costs in its techno-economic studies, such as the Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Systems series of reports. It also outlines the approach used to calculate the cost of electricity (COE) or cost of product (COP) metrics by which NETL estimates the impact of technology options. These metrics and a clear understanding of the methodology used are essential in allowing different plant technologies to be compared on a similar basis. These guidelines were initially developed for power producing plants, although they can be applied to a variety of different revenue generating plants (e.g., coal to liquids, syngas generation, hydrogen) by substituting the industrial product quantity for the electrical quantity in the equations. The tables contained in this QGESS have been expanded upon relative to previous versions to include values to assume for several industries.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Calibrating Constant Elasticity of Substitution Technologies to Bottom-up Cost Estimates

We propose a method for calibrating an industry-level technology to engineering (bottom-up) estimates with a particular focus on abatement opportunities. As a demonstration, substitution elasticities across inputs are adjusted in the nested cost function for the electricity sector to best fit a target marginal abatement cost (MAC) curve derived from engineering assessments of available technologies. Elasticities are optimized over an entire relevant range of the MAC, whereas current techniques use local point estimates under little or no abatement. In the context of fitting to a given MAC we evaluate alternative nesting structures and find that, while complexity in nesting improves the fit, even relatively simple nesting structures can reasonably approximate the target MAC. In our example, focused on the electricity sector, we find standard elasticities adopted in top-down models moderately overstate abatement costs relative to the engineering targets. In our preferred specification the most important adjustment is to escalate the substitution elasticity between energy and value-added inputs. This is consistent with an argument that the current set of point estimates fail to properly account for new capital-based technologies. These conclusions, however, are sensitive to our assumption about output-intensity abatement and consumer price responsiveness, both of which are not delineated in engineering estimates.

abatement cost↗
DOE OSTI2022

Mooring System Cost Estimates for Wave Energy Farms in Shared Mooring Arrays

As wave energy converters (WECs) become more advanced and cost-efficient, so too must their mooring systems. A key question in the development plans for WECs is the cost of the mooring system, particularly for large wave farms. WEC devices deployed in a WEC farm array, where each device can be connected by shared mooring lines in various array layouts, have potential to reduce mooring system costs significantly. This paper presents the modeling and designing of mooring systems for large WEC arrays and the calculation of the cost of each mooring system to determine the change in cost as the number of WECs in a farm increases. A baseline mooring system for a single floating oscillating water column (OWC) WEC was developed for this analysis. The mooring system utilizes four anchored mooring lines connected to a square assembly of wire rope mooring lines, supported by four floating buoys, and attached to the floating WEC by four polyester rope mooring lines. This assembly, referred to as a floating cell, can be tiled to form various rectangular WEC arrays. The objective of this analysis is to determine how the mooring system cost changes as more WECs are added to an array layout, each with their own interconnected floating cell. To do this, complete mooring systems need to be designed for each WEC array layout. To narrow down the design space of a WEC array mooring system, a couple assumptions were made. It was assumed that the floating cell parameters of the baseline design were to stay constant across all floating cells in the WEC array. It was also assumed that the anchored mooring lines would be of the baseline configuration, a predominantly chain mooring line with a short section of polyester rope near the fairlead, and a drag-embedment anchor. These anchored lines were assumed to extend from the outer edges of the WEC array, inline with the headings of the wire rope mooring lines of the floating cells, or diagonal if extending from a corner of the WEC array. Full mooring systems were designed for 2xN and NxN WEC array layouts and efficiently simulated in the mooring dynamics simulation tool, MoorDyn, to ensure all dynamic constraints were met. The system costs were calculated and then refined by shortening unnecessary chain line lengths and reducing the chain diameters of the downstream anchored mooring lines. It was found that, in general, mooring system costs per WEC decrease when WECs are installed in an array. Compared to the baseline mooring system for a single WEC, the 2x3 mooring system array had the lowest mooring system cost per WEC, reducing the cost per WEC by 59%. The 3x3 and 4x4 array mooring systems also saw significant reductions in cost per WEC but had negligible cost savings between the two designs, primarily because the larger 4x4 mooring system requires larger chain diameters, which increases cost. These results provide an interesting glimpse into modeling, designing, and calculating the cost of mooring systems for large WEC arrays.

cost↗
DOE OSTI2021

Quality Guidelines for Energy Systems Studies: Cost Estimation Methodology for NETL Assessments of Power Plant Performance

This paper summarizes the methodology employed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) in calculating power plant costs in its techno-economic studies, such as the Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Systems series of reports. It also outlines the approach used to calculate the cost of electricity by which NETL evaluates electric power plants. These metrics and a clear understanding of the methodology used are essential in allowing different power plant technologies to be compared on a similar basis. These guidelines are tailored for power producing plants, although they can be applied to a variety of different revenue generating plants (e.g., coal to liquids, syngas generation, hydrogen).

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗