SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “system value”
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.
Expert perspectives on the wind plant of the future
Abstract Wind power technology has changed rapidly in recent years. Technology innovation, evolving power markets, and competing land and ocean uses continue to influence the design and operation of wind turbines and plants. Anticipating these trends and their impact on future facilities can inform commercial strategies and research priorities. Drawing from a recent survey of 140 of the world's foremost wind experts, we identify expectations of future wind plant design in 2035, both for onshore and offshore wind. Experts anticipate continued growth in turbine size, to 5.5 (onshore) and 17 MW (offshore), with plants located in increasingly less favorable wind and siting regimes. They expect plant sizes of 1,100 MW for fixed‐bottom and 600 MW for floating offshore wind. Experts forecast enhanced grid‐system value from wind through significant to widespread use of larger rotors, hybrid projects with batteries and hydrogen production, and more. To explain experts' perspectives on future plant design and operation, we identify five mechanisms: economies of unit, plant, and resource scale; grid‐system value economies; and production efficiencies. We characterize learning effects as a moderating influence on the strength of these mechanisms. In combination, experts predict that these design choices support levelized cost of energy reductions of 27% (onshore) and 17%–35% (floating and fixed‐bottom offshore) by 2035 compared to today, while enhancing wind energy's grid service offerings. Our findings provide a much‐needed benchmark for representing future wind technologies in power sector models and address a critical research gap by explaining the economics behind wind energy design choices.
Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making for the Los Alamos Legacy Cleanup Mission - 20501
The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental legacy cleanup program requires decisions to be made for environmental remediation, decommissioning and disposal or management of radioactive waste. This legacy cleanup program was established to address groundwater contamination, material disposal areas (MDAs) that have been used to dispose of radioactive and other waste material, and 'aggregate areas' that might produce radioactive or other chemical waste as a result of remediation activities. The LANL site is regulated for environmental concerns under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). However, some parts of LANL, such as material disposal area G (MDA G), have disposed of radioactive waste under DOE Order 435.1, and are subject to other regulations. For example, decommissioning the remote-handled TRU material stored in 33 shafts at MDA G falls under EPA's 40 CFR 191. Collectively, the regulations are all aimed in the same direction of finding the best solution, either through constructs such as 'as low as reasonably achievable' (ALARA), considering balancing factors as opposed to only cost and human health risk, and, under EPA regulations such as RCRA and NEPA, evaluating impact from all chemicals and both human health and ecological endpoints. Despite the basic goals and objectives of the regulations or their guidance, the main challenge is in their implementation. Arguably perhaps, but really in principle, all of these (and similar) regulations are asking for a decision analysis to be performed. Implementation challenges encountered have included lack of understanding of decision analysis in the industry, lack of effective stakeholder engagement in the decision analysis process, and lack of appreciation of the need to separate value judgments from science, the latter leading to developing conservative, or protective, science-based models. Conservative models lead to poor solutions, lack of effective stakeholder engagement leads to long drawn out protracted approaches to finding a solution (which also might never be found with this approach), and lack of understanding of decision analysis and Bayesian statistics causes poor models to be built, which creates unfortunate situations of 'garbage in, garbage out' becoming the basis for decision making. Stakeholder-engaged structured decision making (SDM) is an approach to solving problems that relies on the theory of decision science to involve stakeholders in the decision-making process. This approach incorporates stakeholder values using a scientifically rigorous methodology that separates value judgments from science in a way that helps avoid the pitfalls of biased, protective, or conservative modeling. This approach has its foundation in Keeney's 1992 treatise on value-focused thinking [1]. Keeney advocated a paradigm shift in decision making based on the idea that the standard way of thinking about decisions is backwards. The standard approach of focusing first on identifying alternatives rather than on articulating values results in a reactive approach with the emphasis on mechanics and fixed choices instead of the core values that have meaning to stakeholders. This paradigm shift effectively engages all stakeholders in the decision-making process while using a values focused thinking approach that can lead to the identification of decision opportunities and the creation of better alternatives. The intent is to be proactive and generate solutions that are related directly to values and objectives as identified by stakeholders. There are, perhaps, two overarching reasons why SDM can be used to benefit LANL's environmental legacy cleanup. Some of LANL's remaining waste management and environmental management problems are challenging and complex (for example, the Cr and RDX plumes, and MDAs) and while the traditional approach has, arguably, worked well for relatively simple risk-based problems, it cannot, or should not, be applied to more complex problems if the most effective and efficient solutions are desired. The second reason is cost. This has perhaps become more critical since publication of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports that DoE's environmental liability is considered a high-risk concern for the nation [2]. The focus of SDM is on structuring solutions to decision risk problems by first addressing stakeholder and decision maker values and subsequently developing decision objectives and ways to measure those objectives, preference weighting across objectives, identifying decision alternatives that best achieve those values, and characterizing uncertainty in predictions of the measures. Because a complete decision model is created using SDM, it can be evaluated to find the main elements of the model that drive, or predict, the best solution. This approach creates complete decision models that are transparent, traceable, reproducible and technically defensible. The science behind SDM, or decision analysis, is well founded, yet it is not unusual to see ad hoc approaches to decision making implemented under various environmental regulations that are pertinent to the LANL site, including NEPA, RCRA and DOE Order 435.1. Such ad hoc approaches are often not transparent or traceable, and lack reproducibility and technical defensibility. The LANL legacy cleanup program has embarked on using SDM to address the complex problems that remain. Stakeholder meetings have been held, and a prototype version of the stakeholder value system has been developed. Further meetings are expected in the future to address specific project needs. This is a long-term endeavor considering the complex environmental problems faced by DOE EM in Los Alamos (EM-LA), and careful planning, consideration of stakeholder value systems, and engagement with stakeholders throughout the SDM process is expected to lead to a successful endpoint. (authors)
Accelerator-Driven System Options: Value Analysis and Practical Implications
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Competitiveness Metrics for Electricity System Technologies
The relative economic competitiveness of power generation technologies is a topic of much interest to diverse electric industry participants. However, assessing competitiveness can be challenging as it requires considering both total costs and total system value of each technology, which are complicated by the (1) numerous and diverse grid services needed to operate a reliable power system; (2) variations in the economic value of the grid services with system state and location, and over multiple timescales, due to the challenges of transporting and storing electricity; and (3) the unique characteristics of different electric system assets. Ideally, metrics designed or used to convey technology competitiveness must consider these complexities, but existing metrics often fall short. For example, the levelized cost of energy does not consider the system economic value of the various technologies nor does it consider services beyond electricity production. Various other metrics have been designed with the purpose of more-accurately communicating the economic viability of electric system technologies. In this report, we summarize the primary sources and components of costs and value and review the known competitiveness metrics by presenting their definitions, applications, advantages, and disadvantages. We also introduce a new set of competitiveness metrics, which we refer to as System Profitability metrics, that more-directly applies the economic principles of return-on-investment to electric system technologies. We use conceptual examples to show how the System Profitability metrics better reflect economic viability and relative technology competitiveness compared with existing metrics. We also describe how competitiveness metrics can be quantified using optimization-based models and demonstrate this capability using a U.S. electric sector capacity expansion model.
A relative value framework: Why do different electricity system technologies have different economic value?
Not Available
Hydropower Value Drivers
This report presents a framework developed to identify system value drivers and quantify their relative impact on several different value streams, with a specific focus on implications for conventional hydropower and pumped storage hydropower (PSH) resources.
Drinking Water System Energy Resilience Value Estimator
Tool for water system owners to estimate the cost of system interruption or loss. Publicly available for download (.zip file) at https://www.pnnl.gov/media/24681
Repowering: The Other Side of the Reliability Coin
Extreme weather, cracked backsheets, severe PID, poorly built modules, and installation flaws - all can compromise a solar plant's health and force repowering long before end of life. With more than 70% of U.S. PV capacity less than seven years old, the fleet is young, but its rapid expansion has introduced new materials and system designs that are still being tested under real-world conditions. As a result, reliability - not economics - is what most often drives repowering decisions. Repowering is frequently assumed to be an economically motivated choice, but our work shows that reliability concerns are the real trigger. Drawing from industry interviews, case studies, and modeling, we highlight the physical, electrical, and policy barriers owners face when deciding whether to repair, repower, or decommission. At the same time, repowering can create opportunities: renewed interconnection periods, improved energy yields, and strategic upgrades to extend system value. We present a quantitative framework using NLR's System Advisor Model (SAM) and PV in Circular Economy (PV ICE) tool to evaluate trade-offs across financial, material, and energy impacts. These findings provide practical guidance for navigating the realities of repowering today and underscore the critical role of reliability in shaping the future performance and sustainability of the PV fleet.
An Observational Understanding of Connected Lighting Systems
As part of the Internet of Things (IoT), connected lighting systems provide additional control capabilities and nonlighting-related services (such as communications and data infrastructure) to reduce energy use while increasing both application efficiency and system value. But the positive or negative energy impact of implementing these systems is still largely unknown due to the variety of human factors associated with installation, maintenance, and use. These complications interfere with adoption and acceptance rates of products that will play a significant role in achieving energy savings long-term. Next Generation Lighting Systems, or NGLS, developed and implemented an observational research methodology for connected lighting systems. The methodology was implemented at an indoor (classroom/office) Living Lab at Parsons School of Design in New York City, and an outdoor (parking lot) Living Lab at Virginia Tech Transportation Institute in Blacksburg, Virginia. Although this report focuses on the approach to indoor installations, observational research in both settings provides insight to the type, scale, and frequency of issues across available products as experienced by installing contractors, end users, and other stakeholders.
Are coupled renewable-battery power plants more valuable than independently sited installations?
Coupled renewable-battery powerplants differ from the traditional concept of independent siting of electricity resources within transmission networks. Prior research on the value proposition and cost savings from coupling did not consider the geographic constraint of co-location. This paper fills the gap by assessing how pricing volatility differences between nodes within electricity markets impact the system value of coupled renewable-battery projects as compared to independent VRE and battery installations. We use wholesale power market prices from 2012–2019 across the seven main U.S. independent system operators (ISOs) with a linear optimization program to compare the electricity market value of coupled projects to the value of the same underlying sub-components, deployed separately. We find that additional value from adding a 4-hour battery sized to 50% of renewable-plant nameplate capacity is $\$$10/MWh across ISOs on average. The highest boost occurs in California ($\$$15/MWh), where the value of adding storage to solar rises over time in tandem with increased solar penetration in the region. If renewables and batteries are deployed independently, we estimate that $\$$12.5/MWh of additional value could be achieved because of more flexibility on battery siting and operation. The $\$$12.5/MWh coupling penalty is reduced to $\$$1.6/MWh when considering alternative approaches to integrating battery storage. This result implies that renewable-battery power plants will play an increasing role in electricity systems if they can be built for $\$$2–$\$$13/MWh less than independent projects of comparable size. However, the wide regional variation in coupling penalties, along with the importance of conditions captured in our sensitivity cases, suggests the tradeoff between coupling penalties and savings will vary by situation. Therefore, roles exist for independent and coupled projects from a system optimization perspective.
Keep it short: Exploring the impacts of configuration choices on the recent economics of solar-plus-battery and wind-plus-battery hybrid energy plants
Coupled renewable-battery powerplants differ from the traditional concept of independent siting of electricity resources within transmission networks. Prior research on the value proposition and cost savings from coupling did not consider the geographic constraint of co-location. This paper fills the gap by assessing how pricing volatility differences between nodes within electricity markets impact the system value of coupled renewable-battery projects as compared to independent VRE and battery installations. We use wholesale power market prices from 2012–2019 across the seven main U.S. independent system operators (ISOs) with a linear optimization program to compare the electricity market value of coupled projects to the value of the same underlying sub-components, deployed separately. We find that additional value from adding a 4-hour battery sized to 50% of renewable-plant nameplate capacity is $\$10$/MWh across ISOs on average. The highest boost occurs in California ($\$15$/MWh), where the value of adding storage to solar rises over time in tandem with increased solar penetration in the region. If renewables and batteries are deployed independently, we estimate that $\$12.5$/MWh of additional value could be achieved because of more flexibility on battery siting and operation. The $\$12.5$/MWh coupling penalty is reduced to $\$1.6$/MWh when considering alternative approaches to integrating battery storage. This result implies that renewable-battery power plants will play an increasing role in electricity systems if they can be built for $\$2$–$\$13$/MWh less than independent projects of comparable size. However, the wide regional variation in coupling penalties, along with the importance of conditions captured in our sensitivity cases, suggests the tradeoff between coupling penalties and savings will vary by situation. Therefore, roles exist for independent and coupled projects from a system optimization perspective.
High temporal resolution generation expansion planning for the clean energy transition
As power systems integrate increasing quantities of wind, solar and energy storage resources, it is important to revisit power system capacity expansion modeling methods and assumptions that have been utilized in thermal- dominated systems. We conduct a series of case study analyses using a simplified representation of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) system to demonstrate how least-cost capacity expansion outcomes are impacted by changes in model resolution across two temporal dimensions: 1) the number of considered representative periods, and 2) the system dispatch interval. First, we find that the least-cost generation portfolio can differ significantly for small changes in the number of representative days, but largely converges to the 365-day result once 104 representative days are considered. Furthermore, systems with wind, solar and storage resources were more sensitive to changes in the number of representative days than a thermal-dominated system. Second, we find that considering five-minute dispatch resolution consistently results in least-cost generation portfolios with less solar capacity and more energy storage capacity than corresponding scenarios with hourly dispatch intervals. This suggests that hourly dispatch representation fails to capture the intra-hour volatility of solar generation, and therefore also overlooks opportunities for storage resources to provide system value by balancing this volatility. Collectively these results indicate that capacity expansion modelers should revisit conventional approaches to temporal representation when conducting analyses of deeply decarbonized power systems to ensure that such analyses are robust and actionable. To our knowledge, this is the first study to analyze capacity expansion outcomes with five-minute dispatch resolution in this manner.
Bipolar Membrane Electrodialyzers as Flexible Demand Response Resources: Co-Optimization of Cost Savings and Product Formation
Bipolar membrane electro dialyzers (BPMED) are widely used for chemical production and processing, including in the emerging ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) industry. In this paper, we explore the potential of BPMED devices as flexible electrochemical loads within power system operations. Using a multi-objective optimization framework, we evaluate BPMED operation across 24-hour and monthly horizons to examine how dispatch strategies respond to electricity price and grid conditions. Simulation results show that altering the relative weights of the choices in the objective function strongly shape the operating patterns, with cost-focused strategies that suppress the operation during peak prices. Furthermore, we propose alternative formulations that optimize operations to achieve both cost savings and alignment with periods of lower grid-side carbon intensity (CI), as low grid-side CI is key to maximize OAE efficiency. Additionally, a detailed sensitivity analysis highlights the importance of device properties, where low area-specific resistance (ASR) of membrane and high current efficiency (CE) are observed to jointly unlock cost-effective operation. However, even modest shunt efficiency losses are observed to erode performance and decrease system value. Importantly, the analysis demonstrates that BPMED can serve as a controllable and flexible demand response resource, shifting load to support multiple grid-side objectives, including (but not limited to) renewable integration, alleviate peak demand, and provide co-benefits for system reliability. These findings underscore BPMED’s dual role as a process technology and a grid-supporting asset, pointing to promising pathways for operational optimization of multiple objectives.
Modeling the Interaction Between Energy Efficiency and Demand Response on Regional Grid Scales: Preprint
With increasing penetration of intermittent renewable generation at grid and distributed scales, flexible building loads can provide significant system value and support the evolving needs of the grid. The growing value of load flexibility may complicate the traditional separation between energy efficiency (EE) and demand response (DR). EE measures may compete in some cases with a building’s DR capabilities but complement one another in other cases. EE can also increase or decrease the need for DR at the system level and change the availability of DR to meet system needs. In this study we present a bottom-up approach to modeling interactive effects between EE and DR in buildings within two regions of the US electricity grid. From a library of building simulation models for different buildings and climates, we synthesize system-level demand profiles and the impacts of potential future EE portfolios. Coupling the underlying building models with a database of DR-enabling technologies, we then compute the quantity of DR that can be delivered in each scenario. The results show that EE and DR interactions are largely driven by the timing of EE savings that are measure-specific and the coincidence with system peak demand that is region-specific. We also find that perspective of the impacts matters – for instance that some EE measures reduce the system need for DR but also reduce the DR potential. Our results imply that utility EE and DR programs developed without considering interactive effects may lead to increased grid-management challenges over the long term.
Evaluating the Grid Impact of Oregon Offshore Wind
This analysis used high resolution offshore wind data and a detailed production cost model of the Western Interconnection to explore the value and operational impact of integrating offshore wind along Oregon's coastline. Leveraging local technical stakeholder expertise and input, we determined a set of scenarios to explore. These scenarios varied offshore wind penetrations and explored the differences of integrating offshore wind in the current grid and a potential future grid. This allowed us to determine how changes to the rest of the system and increasing penetrations of offshore wind affected our findings. We identified a number of key findings from the analysis, including that 2.6 GW of nameplate capacity offshore wind could be integrated into the Oregon power system with minimal curtailment due to transmission congestion or other factors. The range of system value provided by offshore wind ranges between $\$$65/MWh and $\$$85/MWh across the various scenarios considered. We also examined the influence offshore wind had on the trans-Cascade power flow, where we determined a strong correlation between offshore wind generation and reduction in flow across the Cascades. Finally, we also determined that offshore wind could serve between 84 - 93% of Coastal Oregon loads depending on the scenario.
Project Earthrise: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of in VIVO Planetary Health
The “Earthrise” photograph, taken on the 1968 Apollo 8 mission, became one of the most significant images of the 20th Century. It triggered a profound shift in environmental awareness and the potential for human unity—inspiring the first Earth Day in 1970. Taking inspiration from these events 50 years later, we initiated Project Earthrise at our 2020 annual conference of inVIVO Planetary Health. This builds on the emergent concept of planetary health, which provides a shared narrative to integrate rich and diverse approaches from all aspects of society towards shared solutions to global challenges. The acute catastrophe of the COVID-19 pandemic has drawn greater attention to many other interconnected global health, environmental, social, spiritual, and economic problems that have been underappreciated or neglected for decades. This is accelerating opportunities for greater collaborative action, as many groups now focus on the necessity of a “Great Transition”. While ambitious integrative efforts have never been more important, it is imperative to apply these with mutualistic value systems as a compass, as we seek to make wiser choices. Project Earthrise is our contribution to this important process. This underscores the imperative for creative ecological solutions to challenges in all systems, on all scales with advancing global urbanization in the digital age—for personal, environmental, economic and societal health alike. At the same time, our agenda seeks to equally consider our social and spiritual ecology as it does natural ecology. Revisiting the inspiration of “Earthrise”, we welcome diverse perspectives from across all dimensions of the arts and the sciences, to explore novel solutions and new normative values. Building on academic rigor, we seek to place greater value on imagination, kindness and mutualism as we address our greatest challenges, for the health of people, places and planet.
Panel Session 116: Waste Management from Remediation of Legacy Sites or Unplanned Releases
Past experiences have shown that there is often a disconnect between Indigenous societies and Western society. This disconnect can be attributed to different value systems between these two group and is not limited to the USA and Canada but also extends into Australia, New Zealand, and the Central Asia Republics (the 'five Stans'). The intent of this Panel Session to give voice to representatives from Indigenous communities, the challenges presented in remediation processes, and potential solutions. Standard risk assessment assumptions developed for Western societies often do not adequately address the cultural and spiritual values that may be unique to indigenous societies. This panel focused on the perspectives of Indigenous societies (e.g., Indian Tribes (US), First Nations (Canada)) related to risk assessment of environmental remediation challenges, including deep geological disposal of HLW and ILW, near-surface disposal of LLW and in-situ entombment of nuclear reactor components, and environmental remediation of abandoned uranium mines and historic wastes. Standard risk assessment assumptions often do not adequately address the cultural and spiritual values that may be unique to indigenous societies. Factoring those into a risk assessment that still meets regulatory requirements and policies such as reasonably anticipated land use at US EPA CERCLA sites can be challenging but has the potential to lead to a site or facility approach that is more accepted. Panelists with presentations: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Process - A Path for Indigenous Knowledge? (Francis Cameron); Local Community Perceptions and Remediation Projects (Michelle Roberts); Indigenous Perspectives on Risk Assessment (Bob Watts); Navajo Superfund Program: Fundamental Law and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (Dariel Yazzie); Risk Assessment: Two Indigenous Approaches (Whitney Fraser)