Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Costs”

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 OSTI2024

Low-Cost, High-Performance Carbon Fiber for Compressed Natural Gas Storage Tanks (Final Technical Report – Down Select Report)

The aim of this project is to reduce the cost of Type IV, carbon fiber (CF) composite overwrap compressed gas storage tanks by reducing the cost of CF and CF composites. The project team worked to reduce the cost of CF by exploring and testing opportunities for a low-cost alternative precursor material for CF production to supplant market-dominant and costly polyacrylonitrile (PAN). Concurrently, the team aimed to reduce the cost of the tanks at the composite level by improving the interfacial adhesion between the fibers and the matrix resin through the incorporation of low-cost nanoparticles recycled from waste materials, which would reduce the volume of costly CF required to achieve the same tank performance. At the end of the first year, the project team selected mesophase pitch as the primary precursor candidate from a field of materials based on the superior mechanical performance and cost-saving potential. During the second year, the team produced CFs derived from mesophase pitch achieving an average tensile strength of 365.6 ksi and average tensile modulus of 40.74 Msi. Facility availability for spinning and converting these fibers at greater scale has hindered scale-up demonstration, but the team has identified opportunities to conduct this work in the near term. Cost modeling shows that these mesophase pitch-derived CFs can be up to 40% less expensive than PAN-derived CFs due to the lower cost of the feedstock material, higher throughput, greater conversion yield, and lower cost spinning method and compared to PAN. Additionally, the team has demonstrated at lab-scale that nanoparticle coating CFs can significantly increase the interfacial shear strength and load transfer efficiency of CFs in a matrix. Single filament pull-out testing showed a 27% average increase in max interfacial shear strength due to this coating. A continuous method of applying these coatings to a tow of CF has been developed for scale-up. 26 m tows of coated CFs were produced using this system and formed into composite ring samples for ASTM ring burst testing. Issues with the testing protocol have limited assessment of these results. A prototype Type IV tank was designed to meet ANSI HGV2 standards, and the design criteria set out by DOE, using the CF properties developed by the team paired with a proprietary resin matrix, a polyamide liner, and aluminum end bosses. The tank weighs 153.1 kg and with a total capacity of 5.8 kg H2 (5.6 kg usable), which yields a gravimetric capacity of 1.17 kWh/kg. Cost modeling predicts that the tank will have a projected cost of $15.73/kWh. Tank performance modeling does not include considerations for fiber-matrix load transfer efficiency improvements offered by nanoparticle coating method.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

Nature of innovations affecting photovoltaic system costs

Innovations improve technology costs through various kinds of engineering advancements, including changes to materials choices and device or process designs. Understanding how these innovations relate to cost change can reveal aspects of the process of technology evolution, yet developing such understanding is often not possible with a strictly quantitative approach due to data limitations. In this paper we develop a hybrid quantitative-qualitative framework for relating specific innovations to cost change by using the variables in a quantitative technology cost change model as an organizing principle. We demonstrate this framework by applying it to the cost decline in photovoltaic (PV) systems over the last five decades. This framework generates new understanding of a set of innovations that contributed to PV modules’ sustained cost decline and the more modest trends observed in balance-of-system (BOS) costs. The results show the great diversity of innovations that affected PV costs, drawing on wide-ranging fields of expertise within scientific research and practice. We find that there are differences in the characteristics of innovations that reduced the cost of PV modules compared to innovations influencing BOS costs. Numerous module innovations reduced costs by advancing manufacturing tools and processes that improved material quality. Many BOS innovations reduced costs through a combination of component design changes, integration, automation, digitalization, and standardization. Overall, most innovations in our sample affected PV hardware. However, some also target ‘soft technologies’ such as task durations through innovations like fast-track permitting, which require improved collaboration and process streamlining. This framework also provides insight into the nature of knowledge spillovers between technologies. Both module and BOS hardware innovations show the benefits of PV’s position within an ‘ecosystem’ of continuously advancing technologies in many industries, in particular semiconductors and electronics, and also point to the importance of public institutions for accelerating testing, permitting, and training.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Pumped Storage Hydropower Operation & Maintenance Cost Estimation

The National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) develops and hosts a pumped storage hydropower (PSH) cost model that is the most detailed bottom-up PSH cost model available to the public. It is available both as a spreadsheet and an interactive web tool, enabling users with a variety of PSH interests to transparently characterize costs of alternative PSH sites and designs. The NLR PSH cost model was designed originally to consider only upfront capital costs only. This slide deck describes methodology to expand the cost model to include operations and maintenance (OM) costs. OM costs are characterized as five distinct components with unique sources and methods for cost estimation. By combining methods for each of these components into a cumulative OM cost estimate, these methods allow a more complete estimation of total OM costs that agrees with existing literature values. The methods are scalable and transparent, allowing them to be readily to applied to any prospective PSH facility for a representative preliminary OM cost estimate in advance of detailed site-specific engineering and other studies.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Open Architecture for Cost Savings in Advanced Nuclear Reactors

Recently, nuclear power plant build projects in the West have run over budget due to high capital costs and schedule overruns. Compared to other sources of energy, nuclear power plants have higher capital costs. Reactors are often different at every site, resulting in a lack of standardization. Nuclear is expected to compete with other low carbon sources of energy which have lower capital costs making it essential for nuclear to develop ways of reducing costs. Strategies such as standardization, learning rates, modularization, and schedule reduction in advanced reactors can reduce nuclear costs by about 40%. Standardization as a way of cutting capital costs has been explored even in large nuclear power plants. Standardization of certain plant components can result in lower component and installation costs and higher learning from experience. Standardization can be achieved by adopting a criterion of key performance indicators and general design principles for a specific system or component such as the balance of plant. Modularization allows the construction of certain components of SMRs in a factory, which saves time, increases productivity, and encourages higher learning rates. Production learning decreases the time and the cost related to an activity. The potential for modularized components of advanced reactors to be manufactured in factories makes it conducive to achieving higher learning rates. Developing large-capacity nuclear programs through sequential builds cultivates a higher learning rate, which in effect may reduce schedule overruns. Open architecture has been identified as a way to drive standardization among advanced reactor designs and result in cost savings. Open architecture (OA) is defined as a design enabling a diverse supply chain by defining and publishing requirements of systems or equipment in functional and/or interface terms, utilizing technical standards in widespread use. Currently, the nuclear industry’s approach is to use closed architecture, making most designs proprietary. However, collaboration between various advanced reactor vendors and suppliers utilizing the concept of open architecture can result in modular and standardized architecture of subsystems or subcomponents of a nuclear power plant. Completely standardizing nuclear power plants may be impossible, however, certain common subsystems amongst the various reactor designs could be standardized and/or access a wider supply chain and leverage existing learning from other sectors. Open architecture will save time and allocate resources to the parts of the plants that have the most unique features. A key advantage of open architecture is its ability to improve production learning across advanced reactors (AR) types in the industry, by providing and utilizing the same kind of component. Sodium fast reactor (SFR), High Temperature Gas Reactor (HTGR) and Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) are the advanced reactors considered for this project. This paper aims to determine the cost savings in advanced reactor programs due to open architecture learning rate. This work is an extension of work done on light water reactor small modular reactors; the cost methodology was utilized to investigate the impact of open architecture on advanced reactors with a particular focus on sodium fast reactors. The cost data on sodium fast reactors used in the model presented the most adequate information required for the analysis.

Advanced Nuclear Reactors↗
DOE OSTI2024

Quantifying the economic costs of power outages owing to extreme events: A systematic review

Quantifying the economic cost of long-duration power outages is crucial to justifying investments in resiliency and reliability improvements. However, extensive study on the subject complicates the identification of power outage costs and determining the most suitable approach to quantify them for an individual, specific facility, particularly in the context of extreme events. Here, this research provides a systematic review of economic studies estimating the impact of environmental disasters at the microeconomic and macroeconomic levels. Of 326 articles, evaluating the costs of power outages in extreme events, this work identified 22 studies that attempted to quantify the economic costs. These findings indicate that quantifying power outage costs lacks standardization, posing challenges for comparing different studies. Most analyses aiming to quantify these costs for utilities, sectors, and the overall economy rely on outdated survey data, which offer generalized rather than specific cost estimations. The costs of power outages exhibit a significant dependence on factors such as the sector involved, the type of customer affected, and the outage duration. To quantify industry costs, the research in this study suggests that using the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's online, open-access Customer Damage Function Calculator is the best option for individual-level assessments of industries, hospitals, offices, education centers, and similar facilities. However, the Interruption Cost Estimate Calculator can estimate outage costs across industrial, commercial, and residential sectors for macroeconomic outcomes. Finally, this article discusses the relative strengths of these methods and tools and the potential directions for future research.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Quantifying Capital Cost Reduction Pathways for Advanced Nuclear Reactors

The framework developed in this study is provided both as an excel sheet (https://inl.gov/content/uploads/2023/11/Nuclear-Reactor-Cost-Reduction-Pathway-Spreadsheet-Tool.xlsx) and a Python (Jupyter) Notebook (link: https://github.com/accert-dev/ACCERT/tree/main/Cost%20Reduction). Capital cost considerations are one of the primary inhibitors to the large-scale deployment of nuclear power plants. While it is widely accepted that first units will likely be expensive and relatively uncompetitive, it is reasonable to expect that subsequent units, built in relative quick succession, will be cheaper as they benefit from the so-called “learning effects”. However, the large degree of uncertainty associated with this parameter renders it challenging for first movers to invest in the first few expensive units. To resolve this impasse, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Nuclear Liftoff study advocated for the formation of large, committed order books of plants of the same technology to spread the costs across several units and kickstart the nuclear supply chain. The study also advocated best practices for avoiding overruns and keeping reactors on budget. This report builds on these key recommendations by attempting to quantify specific pathways toward cost reduction for nuclear energy. A capital cost estimation framework was built to untangle the effect of learning into a subset of key cost drivers, referred to as “levers”. Collectively, the choice of these levers is intended to reflect the decision-making of high-level stakeholders like plant owners and the government. In addition to the size of the firm orderbook, these levers included (a) cost drivers that are most often attributed to cost overruns such as architect/engineering (A/E) proficiency, construction proficiency, procurement service proficiency, design completion prior to the start of construction, and design maturity, and (b) cost reduction strategies such as modular construction, cross-site standardization, safety classification of the reactor building, and of the balance of plant. Two advanced reactor designs were leveraged as use cases and bottom-up cost estimates made with assumptions consistent with a well-executed first-of-a-kind project (WE-FOAK, i.e., almost no overruns) were used as baselines for the models. Cost correlations were surveyed from the literature to determine the impact of important variables on projected timelines and costs.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydrogen Production Cost with Anion Exchange Membrane Electrolysis

Rigorous stakeholder-vetted techno-economic analysis was performed to assess the cost of hydrogen (H 2 ) produced using state-of-the-art Anion Exchange Membrane (AEM) electrolysis. Projected high-volume, untaxed and unsubsidized levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH)1 range from 2020 $\$$1.78 to $\$$3.68/kg H 2 depending on technology year, process design, and electrolyzer project scale, assuming an electricity price of $\$$0.03/kWh and a capacity factor of 97%. The total installed capital cost for an AEM electrolysis plant was estimated from bottom-up stack and process plant cost models. The stack cost model accounts for manufacturing equipment, equipment maintenance, material, tooling, cycle time, yield, labor, utilities and general overhead. The process plant cost model accounts for purchased equipment, installation costs, site preparation, and general overhead costs. For this study, the AEM electrolysis plant is assumed to be a stick-built, greenfield project developed by an engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) firm with electrolysis stacks purchased directly from an electrolysis stack manufacturer. The price of the electrolysis stacks is based on a bottom-up cost assessment with business markup for the electrolysis company fabricator. Methods from the Hydrogen Analysis (H2A) production model, a peer-reviewed national laboratory-developed discounted cash flow (DCF) model, were used to calculate the production LCOH in 2020 $\$$/kg H 2 . The baseline electricity price case ($\$$0.03/kWh) corresponds to average wholesale electricity prices currently possible in U.S. markets with plentiful wind. Similar low-cost electricity pricing is possible from solar Power Purchase Agreements (PPA) although these prices are typically limited by renewable energy capacity factors.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

Primary material supply configurations and domestic recycling for cost-effective battery material production in the US

Battery cathode active material costs hinge on regionally concentrated, price-volatile metal supply. Here. we construct a regional facility-level cost model based on over 80 global lithium, cobalt, and nickel mines, refineries, and battery-grade material plants. Our model yields aggregated lithium, nickel, manganese, and cobalt production material costs from 392 region-based supply configurations for five different cathode active materials. Focusing on the United States, all-domestic supply is 9–34% costlier than global average, increasing by cobalt content, while these shortfalls can be overcome by selective low-cost material imports. Furthermore, we analyze costs of two U.S.-based recycling facilities from primary data and techno-economic modelling and compare resulting cathode active material-level costs to primary supply. Although it is still significantly higher on cathode active material cost-level, rising end-of-life flows and lowered black-mass prices will, however, make secondary supply cost-competitive to domestic and foreign primary supply cost floors. Facility-level benchmarks reveal targeted import, scaling, and production cost optimization as levers for a resilient, cost-effective U.S. battery-material supply chain.

Energy↗
DOE OSTI2025

Assessing the levelized cost of energy in South Korea

This study evaluates the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for various energy technologies in the Republic of Korea (Korea) from 2023 to 2050, highlighting cost trajectories and potential crossovers among competing technologies. The analysis projects that, based on our set of assumptions, utility-scale photovoltaic systems achieve lower LCOEs than nuclear by 2030, while fixed offshore wind is expected to become cost-competitive with coal-fired generation around the same time. Floating offshore wind is projected to reach cost parity with coal in the late 2030s. Co-firing with natural gas and green hydrogen is identified as the highest-cost generation option due to high natural gas and green fuel costs and declining capacity utilization. This study further examines the potential for hybrid systems that integrate renewable energy with energy storage to serve as flexible, cost-effective, zero-emission alternatives to green hydrogen-based generation. Spatial LCOE assessments indicate that near-shore offshore wind sites may achieve lower costs despite modest capacity factors, contingent on site-specific factors such as grid integration and social acceptance. The findings indicate that renewable energy technologies are expected to experience continued cost declines, with solar photovoltaic becoming the most competitive energy source in Korea by 2030–2035. Incorporating social costs accelerates this shift from conventional alternatives.

Green hydrogen↗
DOE OSTI2025

2025 Geothermal Drilling Cost Curves Update: Preprint

Drilling activities account for 30% to 57% of the cost to develop and install a geothermal plant. Therefore, an accurate representation of the cost to drill a well is paramount in techno-economic analysis to determine the feasibility of a geothermal power project. In 2022, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) endeavored to revise the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) GeoVision baseline drilling cost curves due to extensive improvement in drilling rates at the Utah Frontier Observatory Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) demonstration site. That effort did not culminate in the recommendation of new curves because the actual project costs did not match the reported performance improvements and were at or above the GeoVision baseline. The need for another iteration of this analysis has arisen from industry record drilling performance reported by recent commercial field-scale and demonstration projects, including Fervo Energy’s Cape Station, the Utah FORGE 16B(78)-32 demonstration and the Geysers Power Company’s GDC-36 demonstration. Therefore, in this work, we have estimated the resulting industry average rate of penetration (ROP) and bit life and applied these parameters as inputs to the Well Cost Simplified model used in the GeoVision analysis. The resulting revised cost curves show a significant decline from the GeoVision baseline. For vertical wells, the magnitude of cost decline ranges between 12% and 24% while for deviated wells, cost reductions between 18% and 26% are estimated. The revised cost curves are in good agreement with actual cost data and therefore, quantify the economic impact of the utilization of (and advances in) polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) bit technology and the application of physics-based methodologies that optimize mechanical specific energy.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
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 OSTI2025

Cost analysis of alternative large-scale high-temperature solid oxide electrolysis hydrogen production facilities

We extend our past cost analysis of gigawatt-scale solid oxide electrolysis (SOE) facilities that produce high purity hydrogen gas from water by estimating construction and operating costs for three new alternative design cases: (1) offsite feed steam generation; (2) near-atmospheric pressure (NAP) stack; and (3) onsite electric boiler feed steam generation. Pressure effects on hydrogen electrode-(cathode-)supported SOE cell (SOEC) stack performance are estimated for the same assumed cell and stack construction and used to determine facility-wide stack capital costs for achieving a fixed H2 production at different pressures. Modular balance of plant (BOP) process equipment capital costs are estimated for each new alternative design case using our past equipment sizing, design, and cost data and scaling relationships. Furthermore, we update BOP equipment sizing and design for the NAP case using Aspen®. Vendor quotes for electric boilers are used to estimate costs for the electric boiler design case. Factory and onsite assembly and installation costs for SOEC stacks and BOP equipment are calculated using our past simplified first-principles approach. First-of-a-kind (FOAK) and N th -of-a-kind (NOAK) production maturity cost estimates are included for all results. The case with NAP stacks offers the lowest facility total capital cost (TCC, ~23% lower than base) while use of small electric boilers requires the highest TCC (~3% higher than base). H 2 production prices decrease from the base of ~$\$2.17$ /kgH 2 to ~$\$1.92$/kgH 2 for 1 GW e DC SIP facilities utilizing NAP stacks supplied by offsites steam situated in large modules and blocks for $\$0.030$/kWh e and $0.009/kWh t prices for electricity and thermal energy, respectively. We report all costs in 2021 US dollars.

Balance of plant (BOP) process equipment↗
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 OSTI2024

Component innovations for lower cost mechanical vapor compression

Despite significant capital and operating costs, mechanical vapor compression (MVC) remains the preferred technology for challenging brine concentration applications. Here, this work seeks to assess the dependence of MVC costs on feedwater salinity and desired water recovery and to quantify the value of improved component performance or reduced component costs for reducing the levelized cost of water (LCOW) of MVC. We built a cost optimization model coupling thermophysical, heat and mass transfer, and technoeconomic models to optimize and identify low cost MVC system designs as a function of feedwater salinity and water recovery. The LCOW ranges over 3.6 to 6.1 $\$$/m 3 for seawater feed salinities of 25–150 g/kg and water recoveries of 40–80 %. We then perform sensitivity analysis on parameter inputs to isolate irreducible costs and determine high value component innovation targets. The LCOW was most sensitive to evaporator material costs and performance, including the overall heat transfer coefficient in the evaporator. Process and material innovations such as polymer-composite evaporator tubes that reduce evaporator costs by 25 % without reducing heat transfer performance by more than 10 % would result in MVC cost reductions of 8 %.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Impacts of PV Module Connector Failures on Cost and Performance of Utility Scale Photovoltaic Systems

The reliability, cost and performance of electrical connectors are a concern in all types of electrical systems, and demands on connectors used on photovoltaic (PV) systems include that connectors maintain electrical conductivity and physical strength, endure ultraviolet sunlight and high ambient temperature, and resist moisture and chemical intrusion over a very long (>25 year) performance period. Connector failures increase operation and maintenance (O&M) costs and reduce plant production, but connector failure can also cause safety and liability problems, which are of greater concern. This work results from a three-year collaboration between Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Solar Energy Technology Office (SETO) under Agreements #39035 and #38531 "Connector Reliability Across the US Solar Sector." a multi-pronged investigation of PV connector health across the US (see https://energy.sandia.gov/pvconnectors/). This report presents derivation of a Techno-Economic Analysis (TEA) that models failure modes and frequencies (how often failure occurs), estimates O&M costs and lost production associated with connector failures, and then calculates the effect that PV module connectors can have on Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE). The model is informed with initial data from quantitative assessment of failure rates, root causes and mechanisms, in-situ diagnostics and data collection, lab-based forensics, and interviews with PV connector manufacturers and plant operators. SNL conducted site inspections at multiple utility-scale sites in different climates and subjected field samples of new, used, and degraded connectors to visual and electrical characterization. EPRI conducted metallurgical analysis of the pin and sleeve conductors to study failure-induced morphological and compositional changes. There is in general a shortage of statistically valid data, but data from PVROM database maintained by SNL was sufficient to ascertain failure rates and lost production as well as provide qualitative insight in its curated maintenance records. This report details the structure of the mathematical model but the sources of data to inform the model will continue to evolve. Analysis of a 100 MW PV plant is provided as an example of the use of the model, with results indicating that connectors are responsible for Annualized O&M Costs of $\$$71,933/year; Annualized Unit O&M Costs of $\$$0.72/kW/year; that a Reserve Account of $\$$187,220 should be available to fund repairs related to connectors; that connectors add $\$$1,494,004 to the Net Present Value of the O&M Costs (project life); and that O&M related to connectors adds about $\$$0.00088/kWh to the Levelized Cost of Energy. The impact of this model is to provide a tool to make the US solar sector more robust by quantifying and monetizing the reliability risks to utility-scale PV systems posed by poorly installed, mismatched and/or poorly designed and manufactured connectors. The TEA provides a model incorporating failure statistics, O&M cost data, and lost production into a single figure of merit, informing decisions and enabling practitioners to optimize cost and performance trade-offs. Stakeholders include connector manufacturers, system designers and equipment specifiers, standards bodies, installers and O&M providers, investors and insurance underwriters. This report supports continued growth of PV predicated on assurances that properly installed and maintained PV system connectors are safe and reliable. The project team is proposing future work including accelerated testing of connectors and expanding the approach taken here to other PV system components, such as TEA for rapid shut-down devices.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

The Levelized Cost of Exergy Framework

Exergy is the amount of energy within a substance or within a transfer of energy that can be used to produce work or some other useful output when interacting with some reference environment. Two different energy systems that produce the same output with the same exergetic efficiency must necessarily have the same amount of exergy input, even if the amount of energy input to the two systems is vastly different. For example, a low-grade heat-driven desalination would require far more energy input than a reverse osmosis (RO) plant producing the same amount of water, but if their exergetic efficiencies were the same, they would require the same amount of exergy input. Thus, comparisons between different energy sources on the basis of energy is not always appropriate. Instead, a comparison on a per unit exergy basis provides more insight on the cost-effectiveness of different energy sources and systems. In this presentation, we describe a framework for analyzing the levelized cost of exergy (LCOEx) for both inputs and outputs of various energy systems. Our framework illustrates how the cost per unit exergy of a system's energy source, as well as the exergetic efficiency of the system, greatly affect the cost of the system output. We use the levelized cost of electricity as a benchmark value for LCOEx, due to electricity's ubiquity as an energy source, and because it is relatively inexpensive on a per unit exergy basis. The LCOEx of various heat sources are then compared to the LCOEx of electricity. Medium- and high-grade industrial heat (> 150 degrees C) produced by natural gas tends to have an LCOEx on par with electricity. This is due to the low cost of natural gas, as well as the high exergy content of heat at higher temperatures. Meanwhile, low-grade heat tends to be an expensive exergy source, owing to the low exergy content of the low-grade heat. We first apply our framework to desalination, where RO has come to dominate, due to the low LCOEx of the energy source (electricity) and relatively high exergetic efficiency of RO compared to thermal desalination systems. We then use this framework to highlight an opportunity for dehumidification systems to experience a similar cost improvement as desalination has. If an electrically-driven, high exergetic efficiency dehumidification system were developed (such as the membrane-based dehumidification systems proposed in literature), it would use a low cost exergy source with a high exergetic efficiency and could potentially lower the cost of dehumidification in the way that RO has done for desalination. Finally, we apply our framework to various fuels (natural gas, hydrogen, gasoline, etc.) and energy systems across different sectors (desalination, dehumidification, vehicles, etc.) to understand the variation in the cost of exergy input and exergetic efficiency of different systems and technologies.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Advancing Pumped Thermal Energy Storage Performance and Cost Using Silica Storage Media

Pumped Thermal Energy Storage (PTES) is an electricity storage system that is suitable for long-duration energy storage (10-1000 h) due to its low marginal cost of energy capacity. We present a techno-economic model of a PTES system that uses particle thermal energy storage. Particles have low costs and can be operated over a wide temperature range leading to increased efficiency and reduced costs compared to other PTES designs. We show how the round-trip efficiency, specific power output, capital cost, and levelized cost of storage (LCOS) depend on parameters such as the pressure ratio, heat exchanger approach temperature and pressure loss, and maximum temperature. We compare particle-PTES (P-PTES) performance to PTES which uses liquid thermal energy storage - i.e. molten salt hot storage and methanol cold storage (MS-PTES). We find that using silica particles for storage advances PTES technology: P-PTES can be operated at higher maximum temperatures than MS-PTES. Furthermore, P-PTES can achieve lower approach temperatures in the heat exchangers than MS-PTES without increasing capital costs, because P-PTES uses direct-contact heat transfer in fluidized bed heat exchangers. As a result, we find that P-PTES systems achieve higher round-trip efficiency than MS-PTES (66 % versus 57 %) and lower LCOS (e.g. 0.115 +- 0.03 $/kWhe versus 0.171 +- 0.04 $/kWhe for 10 h discharge). The low cost of particles and containment means that P-PTES can provide long-duration energy storage at low capital cost per unit energy capacity. For example, the total capital cost per unit energy reduces from 245 $/kWhe at 10 h to 38 $/kWhe at 100 h. These costs are considerably lower than MS-PTES (72 $/kWhe at 100 h) and also outcompete current and future Li-ion battery system projections (100-265 $/kWhe).

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2026

Carbon dioxide pipeline network transportation cost model: evaluating economic and geographic factors for efficient carbon capture, storage, and utilization

This study presents a comprehensive pipeline network modeling framework to estimate the CO 2 delivery cost for CO 2 utilization and geologic CO 2 storage across the United States. We developed a Python-based CO 2 pipeline transportation cost model leveraging Argonne National Laboratory’s pipeline engineering expertise and detailed natural gas transmission pipeline cost data across U.S. regions. Using existing road corridors as practical routing guides, the model designs pipeline networks that aggregate CO 2 from one or multiple sources and deliver it to selected destinations. It then minimizes the total transportation cost by optimizing pipeline diameters and incorporating booster pumps. A key contribution is the incorporation of up-to-date, region-specific cost factors with itemized components for materials, labor, miscellaneous construction expenses, and right-of-way acquisition. Results emphasize that regional variation and economies of scale associated with CO 2 pipeline costs are significant and should be explicitly accounted for in screening and planning studies. By combining realistic routing constraints with regionalized cost inputs, the model provides transparent design methodology and location-specific insights into source–destination delivery costs, including the effects of routing complexity along existing road networks. We demonstrate the model with two illustrative case studies – one for CO 2 storage and one for CO 2 utilization – in which the model designs pipeline networks spanning hundreds of miles across the states, collecting CO 2 from multiple sources and delivering it to designated endpoints while minimizing levelized cost of delivery via diameter and compression optimization. The model offers a practical, scalable approach for alternative design option screening and early-stage CO 2 transportation planning.

CCS↗