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 487 records · Page 27

Hydrogen Production Cost with Alkaline Electrolysis

Rigorous stakeholder-vetted techno-economic analysis was performed to assess the cost of hydrogen (H 2 ) produced using state-of-the-art Liquid Alkaline (LA) electrolysis. Projected high-volume, untaxed levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH) range from 2020US $\$ 1.84$ to $\$ 2.88$/kg-H 2 depending on technology year, process design, and electrolyzer project scale, assuming an electricity price of $\$ 0.03$/kWh. The total installed capital cost for a LA electrolysis plant was estimated from bottom-up stack and installed cost models that account for purchased equipment, installation costs, site preparation, and general overhead costs. For this study, the LA electrolysis plant is assumed to be a stick-built, greenfield project developed by an 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 (H 2 A) production model, a peer-reviewed national laboratory-developed discounted cash flow model, were used to calculate the LCOH production 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↗

High Throughput Laser Processing for Enhanced Battery Performance and Manufacturing

For widespread adoption of electric vehicles, lithium-ion batteries (LiBs) need to achieve energy densities of >275 Wh/kg, cell costs less than $100/kWh, and charge to more than 80% capacity within 15 minutes. Recently, it has been shown that introducing a secondary pore network in thick battery electrodes enables higher extracted capacity without a severe reduction in charge/discharge rate performance. Secondary pore networks consisting of ordered arrays of microstructures reduce tortuosity of Li+-ion transport deep into the thick electrodes, diminishing detrimental concentration gradients within the cell. Ultrafast (femtosecond)-pulsed laser ablation is a promising method to introduce such micro pores or channels in thick battery electrodes as it allows for precise control of pattern geometries, results in minimal damage to the electrode, and can be introduced into existing roll-to-roll electrode manufacturing lines. We have explored laser patterning to create secondary pore networks in a variety of battery electrode materials for both anode and cathode applications and characterized the laser-material interaction parameters. In addition, advanced materials characterization techniques (SEM-EDS, XRD) were used to explore whether ultrafast laser ablation affects the remaining electrode materials' morphology and structure. Furthermore, we have translated lab-scale laser ablation to high-throughput roll-to-roll processing at industrially relevant scales. Finally, we worked with Argonne National Laboratory, developers of the battery cost-analysis package BatPac, to estimate the additional manufacturing costs (CapEx and OpEx) for incorporation of laser-ablation processing to current battery electrode manufacturing. We estimate that ultrafast laser processing will add only -$1kWh, which for considerable improvements in cell performance, creates a compelling case for industry adoption.

battery↗

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↗

Universal Solvent Viscosity Reduction via Hydrogen Bonding Disruptors

Liquid Ion Solutions LLC (DBA RoCo Global) in partnership with Carnegie Mellon University and Carbon Capture Scientific LLC, has performed lab-scale development and evaluation of novel additives that lower the viscosity of water-lean amine solvents for post-combustion carbon dioxide capture. This project focuses on developing additives that minimize the formation of long-range electrostatic and hydrogen bonding (HB) networks, decreasing the solvent viscosity, improving diffusion, and improving the process economics. The project objectives included: 1) performing computer simulation to understand the molecular interactions of the additive molecules in water-lean CO 2 capture solvents, 2) design and synthesis of HB disruptors additives, 3) performance testing with additive molecules on model amine solvents, and 4) demonstration of the effectiveness of the optimized additives in the presence of synthetic flue gas. To meet the abovementioned objectives, the project team utilized a holistic approach that combines molecular simulation, experimental testing, and economic analysis studies. The project team developed ab initio molecular model and then perform computer simulation to develop relationship between hydrogen bonding, viscosity, and performed quantitative analysis of additive on the viscosity of the solvent. The team completed computational comparative study on a range of organic functional groups such as ethers, esters, cyclic carbonates, alkanes, and ammonium salts for their effect on viscosity gaining key insights into molecular interactions and the impact of various functional groups and molecular shapes on viscosity. Assisted with molecular simulation insights, the project team conducted additive synthesis and testing, including a proof-of-concept study, additive screening, optimization, and synthetic flue gas testing. The experimental proof-of-concept study proved that the hydrogen bonding acceptors result in significant decrease of viscosities. Detailed additive screening (exploring various functionalities and molecular structures) has been performed. Several promising additives showed excellent reduction in viscosity (30-41%) at 5% additive loading, and over 50% viscosity reduction at 10% additive loading for the model solvents. The team also performed complex screening studies on additive loadings and mixing effect among additives using the design of experiments. Based on multiple screening experiments, one additive-solvent candidate was down-selected for synthetic flue gas testing. A 100-hour continuous absorption/desorption study was conducted under simulated flue gas using a lab-scale continuous capture and separation system. No degradation (for both solvent and additive) was observed based on the GC results of the solvent samples collected from the continuous study. The team conducted preliminary engineering analyses and cost-benefit analyses to quantify the potential economic benefits of the additive approach for solvent viscosity reduction. Based on the experimental data, CO 2 capture cost savings from the capital and operating cost savings are estimated at $\$$4.7/tonne and $\$$0.3/tonne CO 2 captured, respectively. Considering the additive cost, the net benefit is estimated to be between $\$$4.32~$\$$4.86/tonne CO 2 captured.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

Technoeconomic and life cycle energy analysis of carbon fiber manufactured from coal via a novel solvent extraction process

Coal is a versatile energy resource and was a driver of the industrial revolution that transformed the economies of Europe and North America and the trajectory of civilization. In this work, a technoeconomic analysis was performed for a coal-to-carbon-fiber manufacture process developed at the University of Kentucky’s Center for Applied Energy Research. According to this process, coal, with decant oil as the solvent, was converted to mesophase pitch via solvent extraction, and the mesophase pitch was subsequently converted to carbon fiber. The total cost to produce carbon fibers from coal and decant oil via the solvent extraction process was estimated to be $\$$11.50/kg for 50,000-tow pitch carbon fiber with a production volume of 3750 MT/year. The estimated carbon fiber cost was significantly lower than the current commercially available PAN-based carbon fiber price ($\$$20–$\$$30/kg). With decant oil recycling rates of 50% and 70% in the solvent extraction process, the manufacturing cost of carbon fiber was estimated to be $\$$9.90/kg and $\$$9.50/kg of carbon fiber, respectively. A cradle-to-gate energy assessment revealed that carbon fiber derived from coal exhibited an embodied energy of 510 MJ/kg, significantly lower than that of conventionally produced carbon fiber from PAN. This notable difference is primarily attributed to the substantially higher conversion rate of coal-based mesophase pitch fibers into carbon fiber, surpassing PAN fibers by 1.6 times. These findings indicate that using coal for carbon fiber production through solvent extraction methods could offer a more energy-efficient and cost-competitive alternative to the traditional PAN based approach.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Technoeconomic Cost Analysis of NREL Concentrating Solar Power Gen3 Liquid Pathway

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory is leading the liquid (molten salt) power tower pathway for the U.S. Department of Energy's concentrating solar power Gen3 initiative. The Gen3 liquid pathway required updated designs to three major components: the tower and receiver, the thermal energy storage tanks, and the power cycle. We assume a 100 MWe net system output and used the System Advisor Model (SAM) to complete a technoeconomic cost analysis of the Gen3 liquid pathway design and estimate its levelized cost of electricity. This paper summarizes the methodology and results of that analysis.

chloride salt↗

The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) Model: A Geospatial Platform for Technical Potential and Supply Curve Modeling

The Renewable Energy Potential (reV) model is a platform for detailed assessment of renewable energy (RE) resources and their geospatial intersection with grid infrastructure and land use characteristics. The reV model currently supports photovoltaic (PV), concentrating solar power (CSP) and land-based wind turbine technologies. Modules in the reV framework function at different spatial and temporal resolutions, allowing for assessment of resource potential, technical potential and supply curves at varying levels of detail. The platform runs on NREL's High Performance Computing system, providing scalable and efficient performance from a single location all the way up to continental scales, for a single year or decades of time series resource data. Coupled with NREL's System Advisor Model (SAM), reV supports resource assessment from 5-minute to hourly temporal resolution and provides for analysis of long-term (i.e., year-on-year) variability of RE generation (e.g., interannual variability and exceedance probabilities). Technical potential is measured as a function of resource potential and limitations put on developable land area defined by the user. For example, the user can limit development by land ownership, terrain, land use/cover, and urban areas, as well as custom inputs. Technology, grid interconnection and operation costs, based on the latest market data and future projections, are also embedded in the model. The supply curve module is a spatial sorting algorithm based on plant siting, grid interconnection cost, and regional competition, which provides a geographically discrete estimate of levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) and supply (i.e., capacity) for specific renewable technologies. The reV model currently provides broad coverage across North America, South and Central Asia, South America and South Africa to inform national- and international-scale analyses as well as regional infrastructure and deployment planning.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

National Cost-Effectiveness of the Residential Provisions of the 2018 IECC

As part of the U.S. Department of Energy Building Energy Codes Program's support for the development and implementation of model building energy codes and standards for new residential buildings, DOE analyzes each new edition of the International Energy Conservation Code to assess its cost effectiveness relative to the prior edition. This report estimates the incremental cost to comply with the 2018 IECC relative to the 2015 IECC, the associated energy savings, and the life-cycle cost savings.

2018 iecc↗

Techno-Economic Implications of Electrical Machine Scaling for Wave Energy Converters: Preprint

The sizing of an electrical machine for a Wave Energy Converter (WEC) can have a substantial impact on the overall sizing, cost, and rating of the device. An electrical generator is typically part of the power take-off (PTO) system, which is the mechanism by which the energy absorbed by the prime mover is transformed into useable electrical. For practically all WECs, the rate of change of actuation is predominantly determined by the wave resource (i.e., the wave height and frequency) and devices will see a sinusoidally varying velocity according to the wave conditions. The same can then be said for both directly and indirectly coupled PTOs with electrical generators. This techno-economic study investigates electrical machine scaling and associated cost implications through core machine design theory, manufacturer data, supporting literature, and the DOE sponsored Reference Model Project (RMP). The RMP was a partnered effort to develop open-source marine energy (ME) point designs as reference models (RMs) to benchmark ME technology performance and costs, methods for design and analysis of ME technologies, estimations for capital costs, operational costs, and levelized costs of energy (LCOE). The results from this study show torque is directly related to (1) the physical size of the machine required to increase the airgap sheer stresses, (2) the amount of active material, (3) the support structure, (4) bearing size and rating, and (5) offshore cable rating, all of which have a significant effect on overall system costs in terms of both CAPEX and OPEX. This paper aims to be a critical benchmark in helping determine an “optimal” nameplate rating for wave energy devices and their associated PTO. With an optimized rating and sizing process, WEC costs can be reduced, and overall performance can be improved.

cables↗

Techno-Economic Implications of Electrical Machine Scaling for Wave Energy Converters

The sizing of an electrical machine for a Wave Energy Converter (WEC) can have a substantial impact on the overall sizing, cost, and rating of the device. An electrical generator is typically part of the power take-off (PTO) system, which is the mechanism by which the energy absorbed by the prime mover is transformed into useable electrical. For practically all WECs, the rate of change of actuation is predominantly determined by the wave resource (i.e., the wave height and frequency) and devices will see a sinusoidally varying velocity according to the wave conditions. The same can then be said for both directly and indirectly coupled PTOs with electrical generators. This techno-economic study investigates electrical machine scaling and associated cost implications through core machine design theory, manufacturer data, supporting literature, and the DOE sponsored Reference Model Project (RMP). The RMP was a partnered effort to develop open-source marine energy (ME) point designs as reference models (RMs) to benchmark ME technology performance and costs, methods for design and analysis of ME technologies, estimations for capital costs, operational costs, and levelized costs of energy (LCOE). The results from this study show torque is directly related to (1) the physical size of the machine required to increase the airgap sheer stresses, (2) the amount of active material, (3) the support structure, (4) bearing size and rating, and (5) offshore cable rating, all of which have a significant effect on overall system costs in terms of both CAPEX and OPEX. This paper aims to be a critical benchmark in helping determine an “optimal” nameplate rating for wave energy devices and their associated PTO. With an optimized rating and sizing process, WEC costs can be reduced, and overall performance can be improved.

cables↗

NETL's Carbon Capture Retrofit Databases

This PowerPoint presentation summarizes the recently published Carbon Capture Retrofit Databases and their supporting documents, such as user guides and studies used to inform cost and performance estimates. NETL publications used to develop slide contents include Cost of Capturing CO2 from Industrial Sources, 2022; Industrial CCRD, 2022; Eliminating the Derate of Carbon Capture Retrofits, 2023; PC CCRD, 2023; Cost and Performance of Retrofitting NGCC Units for Carbon Capture, 2023; and NGCC CCRD, 2023.

Hughes, Sydney↗

Geothermal Deep Direct Use for Turbine Inlet Cooling in East Texas

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the Southern Methodist University Geothermal Laboratory (SMU), Eastman Chemical (Longview, TX), and TAS (Houston, TX) evaluated the feasibility of using geothermal heat to improve the performance of a natural-gas power plant in East Texas. The area of interest is the Eastman Chemical plant in Longview, Texas, which is on the northwestern margin of a geologic region known as the Sabine Uplift. The feasibility study focused on determining the potential for accessing a subsurface hot-water geothermal resource within a 10-km radius of the site to provide thermal energy for absorption chillers. Wells within a 20-km radius are included for broader geological comparison to determine the heat flow, temperature-at-depth, field porosity and permeability. The lithologies of most interest are the Lower Cretaceous Trinity Group and Upper Jurassic Cotton Valley Group. The deeper Cotton Valley formations are hotter (averaging 117 to 130°C), yet permeability and porosity are low. The shallower Trinity Group contains more variability in permeability and porosity and lower temperatures averaging about 98 to 117°C. The shallower formations are considered despite the lower temperature because of increased ability to produce larger volumes of water and extract enough heat before reinjection. The complete SMU analysis is available in the National Geothermal Data System (NGDS). Tapping such deep geothermal sources for direct heating (as opposed to power generation) is known as geothermal deep direct use (DDU). Geothermal DDU has potential across a wide swath of the United States but is underutilized due to challenging project economics associated with developing a deep geothermal resource for what are typically small-scale, variable-demand projects. This project examines the feasibility of geothermal energy integration in a natural-gas combined cycle power station in East Texas. The DDU resource is tapped to drive absorption chillers (24/7) for production of chilled water at 5-10°C (41-50°F). This chilled water is stored until needed, which allows for continuous operation with a relatively small-capacity geothermal/absorption chiller system. When conditions are favorable, the chilled water is dispatched to cool the air entering the compressor stage of a gas combustion turbine. This process, known as turbine inlet cooling (TIC), boosts power production during periods of high temperature and high-power demand. Such systems can enhance grid reliability and reduce the cost for peak-demand power. A simulation model of the power plant was developed in IPSEpro software and validated against operational data from the plant. This model allowed the team to estimate the additional power that could be produced by applying TIC under different operating and ambient conditions. Absorption chiller performance was estimated from vendor sources to determine the production rate of chilled water from the geothermal resource. Geothermal drilling and development costs were estimated using NREL's GEOPHIRES 2.0. The expected lower drilling costs in this region led to an estimated cost of geothermal heat of about $4/MMBtu (1.4 cents/kWh t ). The estimated cost for the absorption chillers and TIC hardware were obtained from literature sources and project partners. Hourly data were obtained for weather, natural gas and electricity prices, and plant operating state for 2017, which served as a representative year. NREL estimated the capital cost, operating cost, and additional electricity production and revenue for different combinations of geothermal capacity, chiller capacity, and water storage-tank size. The analysis drove toward smaller geothermal and chiller systems to reduce equipment cost. A relatively low-cost water storage tank accumulated the near-continuous chilled water output for later use when TIC was most valued.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

2022 GETEM Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update: Preprint

The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is an essential tool for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technology Office (GTO) to understand the performance and cost of technologies it is seeking to improve. This detailed model is used for supply curve analyses, assessing the current economic feasibility and Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) of hydrothermal geothermal systems and EGS, and evaluating the potential impact of advanced geothermal technologies. GETEM can be used to estimate the performance and costs of currently available U.S. geothermal power systems. It is also used to estimate the costs of technologies 5 to 20 years in the future, given the direction of potential research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects. The model is intended to help GTO determine which proposed RD&D programs and projects might offer the most efficient improvement when using taxpayer funding. The model requires annual updates as well as revisions to reflect the current state of the art. Drilling costs are a significant portion of total geothermal development costs. The current GETEM drilling cost inputs rely on drilling data from 2009 and require an updated analysis of more recent data to ensure they remain representative of current technologies. An updated, more accurate understanding of costs could help the geothermal industry secure project development financing and investment funding and better allow the oil and gas (O&G) industry (both operators and service companies) weigh potential geothermal market participation and customization. This report details recent drilling improvements from the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and O&G, comparing drilling performance and costs with values in GETEM, particularly the baseline drilling cost curves. Though drilling performance at FORGE has improved significantly, we did not find associated cost decreases that would justify lowering the GETEM baseline cost curves as of now.

API↗

Techno-Economic Implications of Electrical Machine Scaling for Wave Energy Converters

The sizing of an electrical machine for a Wave Energy Converter (WEC) can have a substantial impact on the overall sizing, cost, and rating of the device. An electrical generator is typically part of the power take-off system, which is the mechanism by which the energy absorbed by the prime mover is transformed into usable electrical energy. For practically all WECs, the rate of change of actuation is predominantly determined by the wave resource (i.e., the wave height and frequency), and devices will see a sinusoidal varying velocity according to the wave conditions. The same can then be said for both directly and indirectly coupled power take-offs with electrical generators. This techno-economic study investigates electrical machine scaling and associated cost implications through core machine design theory, manufacturer data, supporting literature, and the Reference Model Project sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. The Reference Model Project was a partnered effort to develop open-source marine energy point designs as reference models to benchmark marine energy technology performance and costs, methods for design and analysis of marine energy technologies, estimations for capital costs, operational costs, and levelized cost of energy. The results from this study show torque is directly related to (1) the physical size of the machine required to increase the air-gap sheer stresses, (2)the amount of active material, (3) the support structure, (4) bearing size and rating, and (5) offshore cable rating, all of which have a significant effect on overall system costs in terms of both capital and operational expenditures. This paper aims to be a critical benchmark in helping determine an "optimal" nameplate rating for wave energy devices and their associated power take-offs. With an optimized rating and sizing process, WEC costs can be reduced and overall performance can be improved.

cables↗

Examination of Factors Affecting the Cost and Performance of a Natural Gas Combined Cycle Equipped with Carbon Dioxide Capture

The purpose of this Technical Note is to report the findings of an examination of the effect of plausible deviations in select study assumptions on the reported cost and performance estimates for a power plant case drawn from NETL’s “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity” (known as the Fossil Energy Baseline). An F-Class NGCC power plant equipped with state-of-the-art, solvent-based, post-combustion carbon dioxide (CO2) capture (95 percent carbon capture rate)—designated as Case B31B.95—was selected for this work. This sensitivity analysis provides insight into the effects of parameter variations within and across selected categories—ambient conditions, construction cost, natural gas (NG) price, capacity factor, and finance—on the plant performance and capital and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, and the subsequent impact on common figures of merit.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

2022 GETEM Geothermal Drilling Cost Curve Update

The Geothermal Electricity Technology Evaluation Model (GETEM) is an essential tool for the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) to understand the performance and cost of technologies it is seeking to improve. This detailed model is used for supply curve analyses, assessing the current economic feasibility and levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of hydrothermal geothermal systems and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), and evaluating the potential impact of advanced geothermal technologies. GETEM can be used to estimate the performance and costs of currently available U.S. geothermal power systems. It is also used to estimate the costs of technologies 5 to 20 years in the future, given the direction of potential research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects. The model is intended to help GTO determine which proposed RD&D programs and projects might offer the most efficient improvement when using taxpayer funding. The model requires annual updates as well as revisions to reflect the current state of the art. Drilling costs are a significant portion of total geothermal development costs. The current GETEM drilling cost inputs rely on drilling data from 2009 and require an updated analysis of more recent data to ensure they remain representative of current technologies. An updated, more accurate understanding of costs could help the geothermal industry secure project development financing and investment funding and better allow the oil and gas (O&G) industry (both operators and service companies) to weigh potential geothermal market participation and customization. This report details recent drilling improvements from the Utah Frontier Observatory for Research in Geothermal Energy (FORGE) and the O&G sector, comparing drilling performance and costs with values in GETEM, particularly the baseline drilling cost curves. Although drilling performance at FORGE has improved significantly, we did not find associated cost decreases that would justify lowering the GETEM baseline cost curves at this time.

API↗

Updated Oregon Floating Offshore Wind Cost Modeling [Slides]

The study provides heat maps showing updated estimates of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) for floating offshore wind energy off the coast of Oregon. This project builds on a 2019 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) floating offshore wind power cost study in Oregon (Musial et al. 2019) and a recent NREL California cost analysis (Beiter et al. 2020). Floating wind power cost data, modeling methodology, and resource data are updated and LCOE is estimated through 2032 using 2019 as a reference year. Comparisons are made to the previous offshore wind energy cost studies (Musial et al. 2019; Beiter et al. 2020). The study does not prioritize specific sites or make judgments about marine spatial planning viability.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

Transmission Alternatives for California North Coast Offshore Wind, Volume 4: Cost-Benefit Analysis Report

The purpose of this report is to compare the costs and benefits of installing offshore wind power plants with capacities up to 500 megawatts (MW) in the Humboldt Wind Energy Area offshore California, focusing on identifying the costs related to transmission upgrades and possible alternatives such as energy storage. We identify several options that result in lower costs than upgrading transmission to provide full deliverability. Our estimates of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) assuming full deliverability range from $80/MWh for a 144-MW plant to $73/MWh for a 480-MW plant with a 2030 commercial operation date; however, the additional cost of transmission upgrades increases these values to between $86/MWh and $98/MWh. Based on curtailment and revenue estimates developed using a production cost model, the LCOEs for plant capacities of 144 MW and 168 MW with Energy Only deliverability are lower than the combined cost of energy and transmission upgrades for full deliverability. The addition of a 4-hour, 15-MW battery energy storage system increases revenue for both plant sizes, with the 144 MW + storage scenario producing the most revenue relative to LCOE.

17 WIND ENERGY↗