Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “High Renewable Penetration”

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.

363 records · Page 21

Leveraging Existing Assets for Long Duration Energy Storage

Increased renewables penetration to electrical grid is necessary to reduce overall emissions from the electrical power generation sector. Nonetheless, its integration creates challenges to grid operators who must match the power being generated by intermittent renewables and other traditional energy sources with the demand from consumers, while ensuring the reliability and power quality for the entire system. Energy storage has been proposed as an alternative to natural gas peaking plants and a form to deliver excess renewable energy generation at times of peak demand. For energy storage to provide benefits to end customers (energy consumers), it must be reliable, efficient, and cost effective. The Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), one of the surveys that integrate the Prairie Research Institute (PRI), aims to develop a Center for Energy Storage at Existing Assets (CESEA) at UIUC with the participation of Waste Pressure Corp and Ecotek Engineering USA LLC. CESEA will focus on LDES systems that can integrate to existing infrastructure in a manner that reduces the initial capital expenditure and demonstrates the ability to repurpose fossil assets that would otherwise become stranded, to serve the energy transition. CESEA aims to leverage UIUC’s unique facilities to validate LDES systems performance at a relevant operating environment. UIUC’s facilities include a 85-MW combined heat and power (CHP) power plant, two (2) solar PV plants totaling over 18 MWdc of installed capacity, an electrical grid along with a substation at transmission and distribution voltages, a 22-mile gas pipeline network operating at two pressure levels, along with steam and chilled water distribution networks. The new LDES systems will connect to the existing UIUC grid through a new test electrical station, which will have the capacity to accommodate additional connections to test new devices and technologies as part of future CESEA R&D activities. The test electrical station will contain meters, instrumentation, and controls to accurately capture data and allow optimization of control algorithms. CESEA will initially focus on technologies that: i) utilize existing equipment or facilities to perform at least one of the process steps in LDES (charging, storage, or discharging), ii) leverage mature or commercially available components or controls, iii) show potential for cost-leadership in 10+ hour storage at a commercial scale. Initial technologies that were identified to meet these criteria include Compressed Gas Energy Storage (CGES), and TES. CGES stores electricity by raising the pressure of a compressible gas inside a control volume and converting the stored energy to electricity via expansion-generation. CGES is a generalization of CAES that covers any working gas (not just air). A successful CGES demo will help to circumvent many challenges faced by CAES (long development times due to site prospecting, high cost of compression and storage, heat recovery management, etc.) by: 1) utilizing existing infrastructure (compressors, pipelines, underground storage or pressure vessels) used in the transportation and storage of industrial gases for LDES charging and storage; 2) deploying over sites already-developed for industrial applications with minor additional work; 3) leveraging the price structure of commercial industrial gas to cover the costs of electricity used during charging. A previous DOE-sponsored conceptual study (DE-FE-0032018) estimated the levelized cost of energy of a 1.1 MW / 17 MWh CGES system at $0.08/kWh, with a commercial 10x scale system cost estimated at <$0.04/kWh (Giardinella, 2022). The pilot-sized system was estimated to avoid up to 2693 tons of CO2/year.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Austin Sustainable and Holistic Integration of Energy Storage and Solar PV [Austin SHINES]. Final Report, Version 2

The Austin SHINES project and solution is a software management platform, for an electric grid with a high penetration of dispersed photovoltaic (PV) solar generation sites, which maintains the traditional power quality and reliability associated with grid service. This project developed and deployed the platform as a Distributed Energy Resource Management System (DERMS), engaging multiple advanced controls, to evaluate operation and optimization of a fleet of diverse DER assets, installed at several locations among Austin Energy’s customers and distribution system. The project also produced a methodology to create a replicable DERMS template, adaptable to other regions and market structures. Last, Austin SHINES aimed to demonstrate the solution’s methodology would enable the DER grid ecosystem to serve load at a technical cost (System Levelized Cost of Electricity, or System LCOE) of less than the U.S. Department of Energy SHINES program metric of $0.14/kWh, in a defined boundary, while enabling a high penetration of distributed PV. Research was categorized in 6 reports (Final Deliverables = FD) listed below, with titles and descriptions indicating which area of understanding was investigated: FD-1: System Levelized Cost of Electricity (System LCOE) Methodology The creation and use of the System LCOE to Serve Load metric that encompasses the holistic, system-level costs and benefits of all resources, and enables them to be evaluated based on their ability to support an efficient and low-cost integrated grid ecosystem. FD-2: Software Platform Product Description The creation of new DER control methodologies deployable within a utility-grade software platform that enable DER's to maximize their benefit within a grid, that is capable of serving load enabling a high penetration of distributed PV generation. FD-3: Optimal Design Methodology Optimal design methodologies for individual DER installations that enable utilities to determine the optimal combinations and sizing for individual DER sites. FD-4: Austin SHINES Ownership and Operation Models for DER System Performance A comparison of multiple DER aggregation and ownership methodologies including direct utility control, third-party aggregator, and autonomous. FD-5: Economic Modeling & Optimization A comparison of multiple DER technology mixes and configurations within the distribution system, providing insight into an optimal blend of technologies that best enable the distribution system to serve load at the lowest cost at high penetrations of solar. FD-6: Fielded Assets Deployed DER assets within the Austin Energy SHINES circuits. Austin SHINES provided an opening for state-of-the-art technology products to be deployed, providing a rich opportunity for improving how each of the products perform as stand-alone products, and in concert with other complementary products. The Austin SHINES project comprised of two key metrics for System LCOE: SystemLCOE_SHINES<$0.14/kWh Modeled ΔSystemLCOE_SHINES/ΔSystemLCOE_Base≥20% at same solar penetration The System LCOE calculation uses the costs of the utility-owned infrastructure as it exists today, the cost of the DERs that exist in the system today, and the cost of the purchase of energy from ERCOT wholesale markets over the course of the calendar year. All costs are on an annualized basis. The capital and operating costs are derived from the rate case, which produces a yearly cost. The net cost of energy and services imported to the system is integrated over the test year, as is the load served and solar penetration. The first metric was easily achieved by every scenario considered. The goal was set when the Department of Energy’s SHINES Funding Opportunity Announcement was written in 2015 and was a more difficult target at the time. Due mostly to rapidly declining costs for DERs and the significant decrease in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) energy market prices, which results in lower net cost of energy purchases, the System LCOE is well below this target for all scenarios considered. A fleet of DERs can assume different mixtures, each of which serves the load at a different LCOE. The optimal mixture of DERs serves load at the smallest System LCOE. The second metric (hereinafter %delta metric) asks that the holistic DERMS controls reduce the incremental cost above the baseline of going to a high solar penetration future by at least 20% as compared to the case of a DER deployment with no sophisticated controls (autonomous). Many comparison sets were created throughout this project. Physical technology was installed for informing utility engineering and testing several types of operational control schemes, through the DERMS. The types of operational control which were compared for valuation of the System LCOE Metric were: Holistic control = using the full suite of the DERMS platform to decide and optimize how/why the systems operate depending on weather, market, and reliability signal input. Autonomous control = a local mode at the asset site, wherein a schedule operates the asset, with visibility into performance only No control = the baseline for comparing value against the other two types of control The types of ownership control included: Direct Utility control = the utility dispatches a signal to each asset Third-Party Aggregator = a third party aggregates a fleet of assets and the utility dispatches one signal for all Autonomous = a local mode is set for operation at the asset site, wherein a schedule operates the asset, with visibility into performance only The types of control methodologies deployable within a utility-grade software platform included: Utility Peak Load Reduction = Lower transmission cost obligation Day-Ahead Energy Arbitrage = Realize economic value through price differential Real-Time Price Dispatch = Realize economic value from real-time price spikes Voltage support = Reduce losses and increase solar generation Distribution Congestion Management = Increase local grid reliability Demand Charge Reduction = Lower customer bills and realize system benefit The fielded assets deployed for the project were: Utility Scale Kingsbery Energy Storage System: 1.5 MW / 3 MWh Li-Ion battery storage Mueller Energy Storage System: 1.75 MW / 3.2 MWh Li-Ion battery storage, 7 Energy Storage Units (250 kW each) La Loma Community Solar: 2.6 MW Commercial Scale Aggregated storage installations at 3 sites, with existing solar (300+ kW): One 18 kW / 36 kWh Li-Ion battery storage Two 72 kW / 144 kWh Li-Ion battery storage Residential Scale Aggregated storage installations: -Six stationary battery storage systems (10 kWh each) at homes with existing solar -One Electric Vehicle installed as Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) Utility-Controlled Solar via Smart Inverters at 12 homes Autonomously-Controlled Smart Inverters at 6 homes Over the course of the project, Austin SHINES undertook installing more than 3 MW of distributed battery energy storage, smart PV inverters, a DER control platform, and other enabling technologies utilizing customer and utility locations and aggregation models. All of these resources were to be integrated and optimized at the utility level. DER assets and control methodologies were designed to achieve a credible pathway to a System LCOE for energy delivered to load of $0.14//kWh or less by 2020, while maximizing distributed solar generation and maintaining acceptable standards of power quality. The project also established a template for other regions to follow, to maximize the adoption of distributed solar PV in support of an economic and efficient grid. In total, the Austin SHINES project added value to the DER subject area in each layer of integration. From utility, to commercial to residential scales, the sheer hierarchy of communication and coordination was a significant accomplishment in addition to learnings from what these communications revealed was unique to each. Economically, the most effective method demonstrated was the criticality of planning phases. Contingencies and multiple projection scenarios helped guide the project to deploy optimal design as close as feasible, in real world conditions. The project and reports will serve public benefit by outlining specific areas of DER strategy and installation where many stakeholders and needs can be addressed with improved efficiency. Overall, communities and utilities should use the results to guide the increasing options available for powering the grid with DER, renewables, and carbon considerate energy.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Renewable energy integration and system operation challenge: control and optimization of millions of devices

The electric power infrastructure, originally designed and built on large-scale power plants, is evolving into a more resilient power generation and delivery system in which millions of smaller units of distributed energy generation resources units will be installed in sub-transmission and distribution networks. In order to control, manage and optimize the future grid, a hierarchical design is presented in this chapter which enables the distributed control on grid edge while inheriting the existing centralized control structure. This layered design of large-scale power system operation and control uses the following principle: reactive power control is treated as a primary control for voltage stability, and the real power control is primarily a grid-level control but can also be a supplementary control for voltage support in the case of insufficient reactive power control capacity. For the purpose of active control and operation at the distribution level, a recursive power network model is derived from nodal injection and branch power flow models. Based on the model, the proposed algorithms of hierarchical control, grid-edge inference and dynamic hosting allowance are developed and presented for multi-level controlled operation. And, a co-simulation architecture of integrated T&D system is presented to validate and demonstrate the feasibility and scalability of proposed algorithms.

Xu, Ying↗