Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “EIA”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Coal Power Plant Reinvestment Visualization Tool

This tool, available at https://energycommunities.gov/coal-power-plant-reinvestment-visualization-tool/, serves as a public database and map for the purposes of enabling state and local economic development officials, project developers, and power plant owners to identify and pursue opportunities for plant and community reinvestment. The Coal Power Plant Reinvestment Visualization Tool focuses on coal power plants that have been closed or set-to-retire, alongside key infrastructure characteristics that are relevant for potential redevelopment reinvestment opportunities, including the opportunity to query these data based off pre-defined or user-set queries to identify opportunities for coal power facility reinvestment to support solar, wind, manufacturing, and nuclear. These Data for visualization and query include, but are not limited to: • Electric Transmission Lines • EPA Brownfield Sites (assessed with Federal funding) • Petroleum Terminals • Ports • Railroads • Others The tool will be updated periodically to provide relevant information to enable state and local economic development officials, project developers, and power plant owners to identify and pursue opportunities for economic revitalization and community reinvestment. Within this application data are focused on U.S. power plants with coal generation, where at least one on-site generator utilizes or utilized coal as a fuel source, including planned retirements through 2058 (EIA, 2024). Additional information on energy communities and revitalization opportunities can be accessed on the Interagency Working Group on Coal & Power Plant Communities & Economic Revitalization Energy Communities website (https://energycommunities.gov).

Closures↗
DOE OSTI2024

Offshore Advanced Infrastructure Integrity Model (AIIM) Dashboard

The Advanced Infrastructure Integrity Model (AIIM) is a multivariate, multi-machine learning modeling technology applied to evaluate the integrity of offshore energy infrastructure (e.g., pipelines, platforms) in the U.S Gulf Region. Offshore energy infrastructure plays an essential role in ensuring access to safe and secure energy for the United States. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), production in the U.S. Gulf Region accounts for 15% of total crude and 5% of total natural gas from the United States. Many of these structures have been operating for close to or past their design life, while others have the chance of attrition before return on investment. To better understand the potential for reuse or life extension opportunities, an assessment of the infrastructure integrity is critical to inform safe decision making. Assessing structural integrity, AIIM provides key insights that inform infrastructure use and reuse, as well as hazard prevention planning, in support of stakeholders including researchers and industry.

Advanced Infrastructure Integrity Model↗
DOE OSTI2021

Hybrid Power Plants: Status of Installed and Proposed Projects [Slides]

As battery prices fall and wind and solar generation rises, power plant developers are increasingly combining wind and solar projects with on-site batteries, creating “hybrid” power plants. But hybrid or co-located plants have been part of the U.S. electricity mix for decades, with widely ranging configurations that extend beyond pairing a generator with a battery. This new summary tracks and maps existing hybrid and co-located plants across the United States while also synthesizing data from generation interconnection queues to illustrate developer interest in the next wave of plants. The scope is inclusive of co-located hybrid plants that pair two or more generators and/or that pair generation with storage at a single point of interconnection, and also full hybrids that feature co-location and co-control. The focus is on larger, 1 MW+ systems: smaller (often behind-the-meter) projects are also increasingly common, but are not included in the data synthesis. Based in part on EIA Form 860 data, there were at least 125 co-located hybrid plants (>1 MW) already operating across the United States at the end of 2019, totaling over 14 GW of aggregate capacity. Some of the most common configurations include wind+storage (13 projects, 1,290 MW wind, 184 MW storage), PV+storage (40 projects, 882 MW PV, 169 MW storage), and fossil+storage (10 projects, 2,414 MW fossil, 91 MW storage). Data from interconnection queues demonstrates the considerable commercial interest that exists in hybrid power plants, especially solar co-located with storage. By the end of 2019, there were at least 367 GW of solar plants in the nation’s queues; 102 GW (~28%) of this capacity was proposed as a hybrid, most typically pairing PV with battery storage. For wind, 225 GW of capacity sat in the queues, with 11 GW (~5%) proposed as a hybrid, again most-often pairing wind with storage. The proposed solar+storage plants are located throughout the United States, but with California and the non-ISO West being the most prominent areas of commercial interest. Proposed wind+storage and standalone storage plants also center to a degree on these regions of the country.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Mobile Sorption-based Thermal Battery for Harvesting Low-Temperature Geothermal Energy

Around 20% of the total primary energy in the United States is consumed for thermal demands of buildings such as space cooling, dehumidification, and space heating (EIA 2018). Low-temperature geothermal energy is abundant and can effectively satisfy buildings’ thermal demands. However, low-temperature geothermal energy is underutilized because the energy density of geothermal fluid is too low to justify the costs associated with transporting it between existing geothermal resources and buildings. The mobile sorption-based thermal battery (MSTB) system has been developed using three-phase (i.e., vapor–liquid, solution–solid, crystal) sorption technology to harvest low-temperature heat and store it with a much higher energy density than the geothermal fluid. The energy density of salt crystals is over six times higher than geothermal fluid, which makes long-distance transportation of salt crystals economically feasible. Salt crystals can be used to dehumidify air or provide space cooling in buildings, which alleviates peak demand on the electricity grid by offsetting electricity use for these end uses. This helps improve the grid’s stability and resilience. High-energy storage density, fast crystallization, and dissolution of salt crystals are all critical to the viability and performance of the MSTB system. Therefore, the design and operation of MSTB systems need to ensure effective generation and dissolution of salt crystals inside the MSTB. To achieve this target, this seedling project developed an experimental apparatus for characterizing the crystallization and dissolution processes. The energy density and potential latent cooling capacity of the MSTB are also evaluated based on lab test results. The crystallization results showed that the generated lithium chloride hydrate crystals are fluffy, the crystallization process lasts about 50 min, and the maximum crystal fraction (i.e., the ratio of crystal mass to the mass in the MSTB) can be up to 51.1% of the total mass in the MSTB at a solution flow rate of 1.58 g/s. The dissolution results show that the salt crystals in the MSTB can be fully dissolved within 15–28 min, based on different test conditions. Reducing solution flow rate and cooling water temperature can achieve increased energy storage density and crystal fraction. While the increase in the discharge rate (i.e., latent cooling capacity for dehumidifying air) is achieved by increasing flow rate and temperature of inlet diluted solution, as well as by using a pump for internal solution circulation, the discharge rate increases by 38%, from 0.95 kW to 1.31 kW. Compared with increasing the inlet solution flow rate, power consumption of salt solution transportation can be reduced by using a pump for internal solution circulation. The crystallization test results also showed that the maximum energy storage density is 981.8 kJ/kg, and the maximum discharge rate of the dissolution tests is ≤1.79 kW. Both are above the target values of 900 kJ/kg and 1.75 kW) for this project. The work reported here proves the feasibility and advancement of the MSTB system, which is helpful to the further study and improvement of the MSTB system.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

U.S. Renewables Portfolio Standards 2021 Status Update: Early Release

Berkeley Lab’s annual status report on U.S. renewables portfolio standards (RPS) provides an overview of key trends associated with U.S. state RPS policies. The report, published in slide-deck form, describes recent legislative revisions, key policy design features, compliance with interim targets, past and projected impacts on renewables development, and compliance costs. The 2021 Early Release, published in lieu of a 2020 edition, presents historical data through year-end 2019, with some limited results for the year 2020. Key trends from this edition of the report include the following: Evolution of state RPS programs: States continue to refine and revise their RPS policies. Among other significant changes since the start of 2019, eight states enacted higher RPS targets or created new clean-energy/zero-carbon targets (AZ, DC, MD, NM, NV, VA, WA), in most cases setting targets equal to at least 50% of retail sales. Historical impacts on renewables development: Roughly half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity (RE) generation and capacity since 2000 is associated with state RPS requirements, though that percentage has declined in recent years, representing 23% of all U.S. RE capacity additions in 2019. However, within particular regions-namely, the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic-RPS policies continue to serve a central role in motivating RE growth. Future RPS demand and incremental needs: RPS demand growth through 2030 will require roughly 90 GW of new RE capacity and will require total U.S. non-hydro RE generation to reach 17% of electricity sales (compared to 12% in 2019). Relative to EIA projections, this amounts to roughly one-third of projected RE growth over the next decade. RPS target achievement to-date: States have generally met their interim RPS targets in recent years, with only a few exceptions reflecting unique, state-specific issues. REC pricing trends: Prices for NEPOOL Class I RECs rose steeply over 2019, reaching $40/MWh and remaining at roughly that level over 2020. PJM Tier I REC prices continued to rise at a modest pace over the course of 2020, reaching $10/MWh by year-end. Prices for solar RECs remained relatively stable over 2020, and continue to exhibit wide variation across states, with the highest prices ($200-450/MWh) in NJ, MA, and DC.RPS compliance costs and cost caps: RPS compliance costs in 2019 averaged roughly 2.6% of retail electricity bills in RPS states, compared to 2.3% in 2018, with costs in most states ranging from 0.5% to 4.5% of retail electricity bills.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Evaluation of Technically-Recoverable Resources in the Marcellus and Utica Shale Gas Plays of the Appalachian Basin

Well production estimates are evaluated to provide estimates of total and remaining technically-recoverable gas resources in the Marcellus and Utica shale gas plays of the Appalachian basin. Domestic gas resources are critical contributors to the United States (U.S.) economy and will be key to enabling the sustainable and carbon-neutral fuel systems of the future. Recent assessments by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) continue to identify resources of the Appalachian region as critical to meeting energy demand, with the Marcellus and Utica- Point Pleasant (“Utica”) shale plays combining for more than 30 percent of projected U.S. domestic natural gas production through 2050.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2021 Electricity Update [Slides]

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' renewable energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, PV plus storage, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for nuclear and conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2021 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Microwave Plasma Flash Pyrolysis for Coal-to-Product Applications

Since 2010, the US coal industry has experienced a precipitous decline, with coal production volumes dropping by as much as 35% according to EIA. This decline is hardly surprising given that 90% of domestic coal use is allocated to electricity production: While coal generation supplied about 45% of the nation's power in 2010, its share is projected to fall to only 22% in 2020. Fortunately, alternative uses for coal as a feedstock rather than as energy source are available. Coal tar is an established feedstock for chemicals and high-value carbon products including carbon fiber and battery-grade graphites. At present, growth of these uses is constrained by the low availability, purity, and yields of currently available coal liquids, and high energy- and CO2-intensity of current methods of production (i.e. coking). Previously reported work conducted in a partnership with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory demonstrated technical and economic viability of flash pyrolysis of coal in a microwave plasma environment at bench scales targeting production of fuel feedstocks (synthetic oil). H Quest’s work since then indicated promise of microwave-derived coal liquids to be uniquely suited for the lower-cost production of carbon materials, including synthetic graphite, carbon fiber, and composites. Low bulk process temperatures, subsecond residence times, and ambient pressure operation enable small-scale deployment, reduce capital and operating costs, and suppress formation of impurities, including QI material, typical in conventional coal tars. With no inherent production of CO2 or water consumption, microwave plasma flash pyrolysis presents a viable route to the sustainable production of both platform chemicals and carbon-based materials. Most recently, H Quest developed a novel, ruggedized microwave plasma reactor, which departs from the proof-of-concept approach and addresses the problems typically encountered in scaling laboratory microwave plasma apparata (e.g. eliminating fragile quartz enclosures prone to coking and fouling). This reactor has been integrated with a 15kW microwave power supply, a pulverized coal injection system, and a product recovery system. A series of screening tests across a range of coals (including hv-, lv-bituminous and subbituminous PRB), entrainment gas flows and compositions and microwave energy inputs are performed to evaluate conversion rates within the novel, scaled-up system, confirm yields of liquid products, and to perform compositional (GC/MS and elemental) analyses of the products. Results of these tests will be presented and discussed.

Skoptsov, George↗
DOE OSTI2021

There's No Place Like Home: Residential Parking, Electrical Access, and Implications for the Future of Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure

In March 2021, the cumulative sale of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs), including plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) and battery electric vehicles (BEV), reached 1.8 million in the United States (Argonne National Laboratory 2021). However, PEV adoption is still in its infancy; its market share has just reached around 3% of new light-duty vehicle (LDV) sales by the end of 2020 (Alliance for Automotive Innovation 2021). Current trends suggest that PEV market share in the United States is increasing. The U.S. Energy Information Administration's (EIA's) 2020 Annual Energy Outlook forecasts PEV registrations to exceed 8 million vehicles by 2030 (AEO 2020). PEV adoption is expected to be led by states that are regulating the sale of zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) (California Air Resources Board). California continues to push for more aggressive ZEV regulations; the state recently issued an executive order aimed at 100% of LDV sales being ZEVs by 2035 (Office of Governor Newsom). At the federal level, the Biden administration has shown great ambition in encouraging broader electric vehicle (EV) adoption, including setting the goal of installing 500,000 new chargers nationwide (The White House 2021). Access to charging infrastructure is consistently cited as one of the primary barriers to the increased sale of PHEVs and BEVs (Carley et al. 2019). In the United States, PEV charging options are often described using a pyramid structure, with residential charging as the foundation, workplace charging in the middle, and public charging on top (Figure 1). The existing electricity system, which generates, transmits, and distributes electric fuel to residential households, has helped PEVs partially overcome the "chicken and egg" conundrum that has haunted other alternative fuels. Viable home access to electric charging is also an important equity issue, because non-residential PEV charging options (e.g., workplace or public charging stations) are generally more expensive. Households without residential charging access may experience higher total cost of PEV ownership if non-residential charging options are more costly.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Liquid Salt Combined-Cycle Pilot Plant Design

The work described in this report is responsive to the Office of Fossil Energy program ‘Energy Storage for Fossil Power Generation.’ This Phase I report has been prepared by Pintail Power LLC, with support from Nexant ECA, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and Southern Company Services as a deliverable for the U.S. Department of Energy for NETL Award DE-FE-00320016. The Liquid Salt Combined Cycle™ (LSCC™) technology provides large-scale energy storage integrated with Fossil Electric Generating Units (FEGUs) to meet critical needs in the energy transition by providing: • the lowest cost large-scale storage for time-shifting of renewable energy, • superior fuel efficiency to reduce GHGs from dispatchable resources, • flexible capacity and ramping to balance variability of wind and solar resources, • essential grid stability services to assure reliability of a low-carbon grid. The LSCC approach: • employs equipment that has already been proven in utility service, • uses safe, non-toxic, non-degrading, perpetual-life storage medium, • leverages and repurposes existing FEGU assets, • expands the value stack of energy storage to reduce market, financing, and commodity risks. Pintail Power has developed the LSCC technology to meet the need for reliable, efficient, and cost-effective integration of Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) into a low-carbon electric grid by coupling proven thermal energy storage with proven gas turbines, steam turbines, and heat transfer equipment. This novel approach is intended to address the key issues facing the grid and operators of renewable and fossil generating units including: • Overgeneration and curtailment of renewables, • Need for fast ramping dispatchable resources, • Improved efficiency and flexibility of fossil units, • Additional peaking capacity to support electrification of transportation and heating, • Provision of reliability services to support high penetration of VRE, especially synchronous inertia and fast frequency response. A Technology Readiness assessment by EPRI confirmed that LSCC technology consists of commercially proven hardware used in industrial and utility applications. Although the novel LSCC approach has not yet been demonstrated as a complete system, interfaces between major components have been conservatively specified. A Phase III pilot is planned to demonstrate equipment integration and operation. The patented innovation is removal of the evaporator section from the exhaust heat recovery system, with the evaporation performed by stored energy in a separate steam generator. This arrangement couples renewable and fossil power generation via long-duration energy storage to deliver cost, performance, and operational synergies, including superior charging and discharging flexibility, reduced fuel consumption and lower CO 2 emissions compared to conventional Combined Cycle Power Plants, and low-cost, large-scale energy storage. The LSCC technology is composed of proven equipment integrated with gas turbine exhaust heat in a novel system. During charging, electric heaters raise the salt temperature as it flows from the Cold Salt Tank to the Hot Salt Tank. During discharging, hot salt produces steam from feedwater that is heated with gas turbine exhaust, which also superheats steam to drive a steam turbine. LSCC technology can be added to any combustion-turbine to integrate renewable energy, provide needed grid services, and increase the value of fossil electric generating units based on the technology’s following attributes: • Long-duration storage enables time-shifting of VRE to avoid curtailment and impairment of renewable assets. • Long storage duration combined with fast-charging capability increases arbitrage opportunities by storing more energy when the price is low and discharging more hours when the price is high. • Long storage duration allows resource adequacy to be supplied across multiple days to increase reliability and reduce risk. • The stored energy reduces fuel heat rate and GHG emissions, and increases merit, so the LSCC dispatches earlier and longer to increase the plant’s capacity factor and asset value. • The stored energy enables pre-heating and startup of the steam cycle, without operating the gas turbine, to enable fast startup and ramping when dispatched for discharge. • The steam turbine can operate without the gas turbine so it can provide valuable synchronous inertia during charging without consuming fuel. • Fast frequency response and regulation services can be provided during charging using solid-state heater and pump controls to vary the charge power input in response to grid signals. • The LSCC system can be configured for resilience including black start, islanded/micro-grid operation, and even self-recharging of storage using either gas turbine power or gas turbine exhaust heat. The commercialization plan is to add LSCC technology to existing simple cycle gas turbine power plants with the 50MW GE LM6000 aero-derivative gas turbine as the reference design basis. A Techno-economic assessment of the reference design evaluated the benefits (Levelized Avoided Cost of Energy) and costs (Levelized Cost of Energy). The plant definition included all major systems and budgetary vendor quotes. Pintail Power and NexantECA developed the overall cost estimate for the LSCC plant up to the total plant cost level, following the DOE-NETL cost estimate guidelines at AACE Class 3 (-20%/+30%). This includes the equipment cost, bulk material, direct and indirect labor costs to arrive at the bare erected cost. Engineering costs are factored from the BEC and added to it to arrive at the EPC cost. Process and project contingencies were then factored from the EPC cost and rolled-up to yield the total plant cost of $\$$184 million for 1746 MWh of discharge electricity. • At $\$$105/kWh, the reference plant costs less than any of the Energy Storage Systems evaluated by PNNL in 2020 for the Energy Storage Grand Challenge. Operations and Maintenance cost estimates were scaled from combined cycle practice, assuming that the LSCC unit was co-located with and sharing some labor expense with other units, to arrive at $\$$2.2 million per year. Plant economics were evaluated using prices from the ERCOT Day-Ahead Market for calendar year 2019 (excluding the market disruptions from the COVID pandemic and the February 2020 deep freeze event). Assuming economic dispatch in the ERCOT Day-Ahead market, the reference plant capacity factor would have discharged for 2777 hours at 91.9 MW, a 31.66% capacity factor, with a marginal cost of $\$$25.59/MWh, and a LACE of $\$$82.41/MWh. Fixed charges were calculated according to EIA guidelines to arrive at an LCOE of $\$$83.48. The benefit-to-cost ratio of 0.99 suggests that the reference plant would have been cost-effective and competitive in the market. EPRI interviewed selected utilities to gauge the need for, applicability of and interest in the LSCC system. Several utilities are currently managing increased load growth along with the inclusion of increasing levels of renewable generation, putting pressure on conventional generation by requiring increased turndown requirements and ultimately lower capacity factors. All of the utilities interviewed have CO 2 reduction targets in the 2030-2050 timeframe that will severely limit the participation of fossil generation and require better utilization of carbon free generation. While there is limited opportunity for storage in the current markets, the utilities interviewed stated that there will be a substantial need for long duration energy storage in the future given the expected trends. Utilizing an energy storage system will generally be preferred over new gas capacity in some cases, with the capabilities of the LSCC system being a potential option for retrofit to existing simple cycle gas turbine units, allowing them to deliver greater participation in the market with lower carbon intensity. A technology gap assessment and technology maturation plan identified a pilot-scale demonstration as the final step before commercialization. Key gaps to be addressed during the Phase II FEED (Front-End Engineering Design) are component selection and design, commissioning procedures, and operational procedures and the control system for LSCC charging and discharging. The project team has been expanded to include Wood Group PLC as EPC. The proposed Phase II work leads to a pilot-scale engineering demonstration (TRL 6) to be conducted at Southern Company’s Plant Rowan, where the prototype system will perform “all the functions that will be required of the operational system.” The proposed pilot will facilitate commercialization (TRL-9) by scale-up to utility-scale systems integrated with peaking GTs or directly to facility scale systems using industrial GTs. The conceptual design for the pilot plant focuses on the novel integration aspects of LSCC technology. A slipstream of gas turbine exhaust will feed a waste heat recovery unit coupled to a molten salt steam generator heated by stored energy. The pilot is intended to demonstrate all key operating modes of the LSCC technology during charging, discharging and standby. The pilot equipment will be approximately one-seventh scale of the LM6000 commercial target and is expected to have commercial off-ramp potential for facility-scale applications.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2022

Production of Fischer-Tropsch Synfuels at Nuclear Plants

A case study analysis was performed to evaluate nuclear-powered synthetic fuel production in the midwestern United States (U.S.). A Fischer-Tropsch (FT) fuel synthesis plant design was used as the basis for the analysis. The FT plant design was configured to produce a product slate consisting of diesel fuel, jet fuel, and motor gasoline blend stocks from carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and hydrogen (H 2 ) feedstocks. The CO 2 feedstock for the FT plant was assumed to be sourced from biorefineries in the region around a Midwest light water reactor (LWR) nuclear power plant (NPP). The analysis specifies that power from the LWR is used to produce H 2 via high-temperature steam electrolysis and to operate the FT synfuel production plant. Capital costs were estimated for the FT plant while capital costs for the electrolysis plant were based on previous Idaho National Laboratory (INL) studies. In addition to labor and maintenance costs for the FT and electrolysis plants, operating costs also include the costs for CO 2 feedstock transport. An analysis was performed to determine the cost of transporting CO 2 from the distributed biorefinery sources to the centralized fuel synthesis plant as a function of the synfuel plant capacity and corresponding CO 2 demand. The primary revenue streams are associated with sales of the synthetic fuel products. The synthetic fuel products will likely follow the same market trends as the conventional fuel products. The synfuel price data was thus based on projections made by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2021 Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) for conventional fuel products minus federal and state taxes, as well as marketing and distribution costs. The economic analysis also considered cases that included and excluded revenues from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) clean hydrogen production tax credit (PTC) of $\$ $3.00/kg for the first ten years of operation. The economic analysis calculated the net present value (NPV) for cases involving steady-state synfuel production for comparison with the NPV for a business-as-usual case in which NPP continues to sell only electric power to the grid. A synfuel production “Reference Case” was considered in addition to sensitivity cases in which the plant capacity, electricity price, and synthetic fuel product prices were perturbed. The synfuel production Reference Case considered a scenario in which the electrolysis and synfuel plants utilized a combined electrical load of 1000 megawatt electrical (MWe) from the LWR with the balance of the LWR power output being sold to the electric grid. The economic analysis suggests that the synfuel production Reference Case evaluated in this analysis would lead to considerable economic potential for near-term deployment of a nuclear-based synfuel production plant. Specifically, the economic analysis suggests that the deployment of a 1000 megawatt (MW) nuclear-powered synfuel plant could result in a NPV increase of approximately $\$ $1.7 billion for a case with no clean synfuel price premium relative to conventional petroleum fuels when accounting for the additional revenues from the 2022 IRA clean hydrogen PTCs of $\$ $3/kg. Sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of perturbation of selected model input parameters on the NPV for the synfuel production Reference Case. The sensitivity analysis indicates that the plant capacity has the largest impact on the differential NPV, with a smaller synfuel production capacity resulting in a decrease in revenue when a larger fraction of the power from the NPP is sold to the grid and a smaller fraction of the power is used to produce synthetic fuel products. The synfuel product pricing has the next largest impact on the differential NPV, with lower synfuel prices resulting in decreased NPV from decreased synfuel sales revenue while higher synfuel prices result in increased NPV from increased synfuel sales revenue. Electricity pricing has a smaller effect on the NPV than the fuel sales price since, in the Reference Case, most of the energy from the NPP is used for synfuel production and a smaller amount of the system revenues are associated with electrical power sales. However, the electricity price sensitivity does indicate that the Synfuel Integrated Energy System (IES) would have a greater NPV than the business-as-usual case (e.g., grid power sales only) when electricity market prices are low, suggesting that synfuel production could provide a strategy for decreasing the economic risks to NPPs posed by a loss of revenues attributed to falling electricity market prices.

10 SYNTHETIC FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Impact of Non-Steady State Operation on Cooling Water Consumption at Coal- and Natural Gas-Fired Power Plants

Increased renewable energy penetration in the electricity grid in coming decades will result in more frequent cycling at thermal power plants. Simultaneously, thermal power plants may face water scarcity with declining availability of cooling water. Therefore, to enhance thermal power plants’ resiliency to water shortages it is important to understand how non-steady conditions due to cycling will impact cooling water consumption and withdrawal intensity. Non-steady operation at power plants has been previously shown to decrease power plant thermal efficiency. Energy balance models have also demonstrated that a decrease in thermal efficiency is expected to increase cooling water consumption intensity. Furthermore, past work has used operating hours data to show idling and cycling gaps where cooling systems operate more than corresponding generators. As a result, an increase in cycling behavior may impact cooling water consumption and withdrawal intensity. This study uses data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to quantify the impact of cycling cooling water consumption intensity for recirculating cooling systems and withdrawal intensity for once-through cooling systems using energy balance and statistical approaches. In a novel application of a fixed effects model to study the effect of temperature on cooling water consumption and withdrawal intensity, this study finds temperature was consistently expected to increase consumption intensity and withdrawal intensity. Non-steady state conditions do not increase cooling water consumption intensity with statistical significance across unit types. However, additional validation of cooling water data is required to confirm these observed trends due to the sensitivity of these findings to model form and concerns with data quality of the dependent variables, cooling water consumption and withdrawal.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Near-Term Reliability and Resilience (NTRR) (Final Report)

The Near-Term Reliability and Resiliency (NTRR) was awarded in December 2020 as an inter-lab project to examine the reliability and resilience of the electricity grid and natural gas transportation availability. The project builds on studies conducted by The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and other non-governmental research and operational focused on reliability and resilience analyses challenges. The research was conceived to address near-term scenarios (within 10 years), when many local and regional policy transitions could begin to impact grid reliability, resilience, and supporting infrastructure availability. To integrate the natural gas interdependency, the team began with the generating capacity and demand projections from the 2020 NERC Long-Term Reliability Assessment and the Bulk Electric System (BES) transmission topologies defined in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) Anchor Data Set, Eastern Interconnection Reliability Assessment Group Multi-Regional Modeling Working Group (ERAG/MMWG) Data Set, the team calculated baseline regional power sector gas demands from present electricity delivery year through the end of delivery year 2030/31 by applying security constrained economic dispatch. This demand was compiled along with demand projections for regional residential, commercial, and industrial natural gas demands from the most recent Energy Information Administration (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook Reference Case into Deloitte’s MarketBuilder® North American Gas Model. Through the application of these demands, MarketBuilder® was projected the topology of natural gas flows in the natural gas pipeline network across the interconnected North American system along with regional natural gas prices that may be seen by market participants in future years Additionally, contingencies and sensitivities focused on the built models of the Eastern Interconnection (EI) and Western Interconnection (WI). They address challenges from the following with the outcomes being an identification of performance under the extreme conditions and an identification of potential grid weaknesses that should be addressed to mitigate the reduced performance and improve the resilience and reliability of the specific regions as well as the National Grid: • Weather events including extreme heat, extreme cold, high wind, no wind, wind and solar forecasting errors, and wildfires. • Gas availability, factoring in supply disruption (contractual and physical), seasonal availability constraints, and infrastructure limitations; and • Transmission availability and congestion.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Evaluating Impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law on the U.S. Power System

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, commonly referred to as the 'Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL),' collectively represent the largest commitment of the U.S. Federal Government to invest in the modernization and decarbonization of the U.S. energy system. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that total support for the broad range of climate and clean energy programs, tax credits, and other incentives authorized through the two laws will exceed $430 billion from 2022 through 2031 (CRS 2022; CBO 2021, 2022). While the climate and clean energy provisions are numerous and have the potential to impact all aspects of the U.S. energy system from fuel and electricity production to final consumption in industry, transportation, and buildings, the provisions relevant to the electricity sector - in particular the suite of tax credits for clean generation, storage, and carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) capture and storage - are expected to be some of the most consequential in terms of emissions reduction and clean energy deployment (Larsen et al. 2022; Jenkins, Mayfield, et al. 2022; Mahajan et al. 2022; Zhao et al. 2022). In this report, we detail the methods and results of a study estimating the potential impacts of key provisions of IRA and BIL on the contiguous U.S. power sector from present day through 2030. The analysis employs an advanced power system planning model, the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS), to evaluate how major provisions from both laws impact investment in and operation of utility-scale generation, storage, and transmission, and, in turn, how those changes impact power system costs, emissions, and climate and health damages. While not exhaustive in capturing every provision, the analysis estimates the possible scale of power-sector impacts that could result from the modeled provisions in IRA and BIL. The study is structured around two scenarios to evaluate the potential impacts of both laws on the power sector: 1) No New Policy: A counter-factual scenario that reflects all Federal and state policies enacted as of September 2022, with exception to IRA and BIL, and assumes load growth consistent with the Energy Information Administration's Annual Energy Outlook 2022 (AEO22) Reference case (EIA 2022a); 2) IRA-BIL: A scenario reflecting all Federal and state policies enacted as of September 2022, including key IRA and BIL provisions, most notably the investment and production tax credits for zero-carbon emitting electricity generation and storage (ITC and PTC), the tax credit for CO 2 capture and storage (45Q), and the tax credit for existing nuclear plants (described further in Section 2.3). To account for the impacts of IRA and BIL on electrification, assumes increased load growth consistent with a scaled version of the Medium Electrification scenario from the Electrification Futures Study (Mai et al. 2018). These scenarios are simulated across seven sets of assumptions with varying projected future electricity market conditions, including technology costs and performance, natural gas prices, and the degree of availability, feasibility, and cost of development of renewable resources, electricity transmission, and CO 2 pipeline, injection, and storage infrastructure. In addition, we simulate two sensitivities on the 'policy' treatment in which we vary key assumptions pertaining to the realized value of the clean electricity ITC and PTC: 1) the cost of monetization of tax credits, and 2) the level of bonus crediting realized by project developers. We demonstrate that IRA and BIL have the collective potential to drive substantial growth in clean electricity by 2030, while reducing costs for consumers, mitigating climate change, and decreasing the human health impacts of power sector emissions. However, we also demonstrate that if expected cost improvements of clean technologies are not realized and/or constraints on deployment driven by factors such as supply-chain challenges, regulatory hurdles, and the social acceptability of energy infrastructure development limit the rate of clean energy and associated infrastructure deployment (such as transmission), then the share of clean generation achieved and the associated emissions benefits realized may be substantively reduced.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Field Validation of Air-Source Heat Pumps for Cold Climates

Heating energy is the largest end-use for U.S. residential buildings accounting for approximately one-third of residential building energy consumption (EIA 2021). Historically, air-source heat pumps have been limited to temperate climates because of subpar performance at extremely cold outdoor air temperatures. However, recent advances to cold-climate air-source heat pump technology, which typically rely on inverter-driven, variable-speed compressors and variable-speed fans, have significantly improved low-temperature heat pump performance enabling the technology to save energy for many homes in cold climates. The primary objective of this project was to measure in-field performance of centrally ducted, variable-capacity air-source heat pumps in cold climates to validate performance and develop field-based performance maps. The project focused on quantifying heat pump performance at cold temperatures. The sites identified for the study were primarily located in the Northwest United States since homes in the region tend to have all-electric space heating systems and high-efficiency heat pumps have been incentivized in the region for several years. NREL partnered with Ecotope, Inc., a small energy consulting firm located in Seattle, WA, for site recruitment, monitoring equipment installation, data quality management. All the sites included in the study had previously installed a high-efficiency, central heat pump system. One site was in a Denver, CO suburb, which was the only dual fuel heat pump in the study. We used airside and power measurements, collected at 5-second intervals, to quantify heat pump capacity, coefficient of performance (COP), and auxiliary heater energy consumption. We developed algorithms to automatically determine the heat pump operating mode including defrost and auxiliary heating operation. A whole-house thermal and duct audit was completed during the initial site visit to estimate winter heating loads and assess heat pump sizing. Whole-home heating design loads were calculated at ASHRAE 99% design temperatures and compared to manufacturer-reported maximum capacities to assess the heat pump sizing at each site.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

U.S. State Renewables Portfolio & Clean Electricity Standards: 2023 Status Update [Slides]

This report provides an overview and status update on U.S. state renewables portfolio standards (RPS) and has been expanded from previous editions to also cover 100% clean electricity standards (CES) adopted by a growing number of states. The report, published in slide-deck form along with accompanying data files, describes recent legislative revisions, key policy design features, compliance with interim targets, past and projected impacts on clean electricity development, and compliance costs. The 2023 edition presents historical data through year-end 2022 and projections out to 2050. Key trends from this edition of the report include the following: -Evolution of state RPS and CES programs: States continue to refine and revise their RPS policies, often by adopting higher targets and/or broader CES policies. Among the 29 states plus DC with an RPS, 16 states have RPS targets of at least 50% of retail sales, and 17 states have a 100% CES or RPS target. -Historical impacts on renewables development: Roughly half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity (RE) generation and capacity since 2000 is associated with state RPS requirements, though that percentage has declined in recent years, representing 30% of all U.S. RE capacity additions in 2022. Within some regions, particularly the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, RPS policies play a more central role in motivating RE growth. -Future RPS and CES demand and incremental needs: RPS and CES policies will require roughly 300 terawatt-hours (TWh) of additional clean electricity supply by 2030 and 800 TWh by 2050, requiring total U.S. non-hydro RE generation to reach 28% of electricity sales by 2050 (compared to 17% today). This amounts to roughly one-quarter of EIA’s projected RE growth through 2050. -RPS target achievement to-date: States have generally met their interim RPS targets in recent years, with only a few exceptions reflecting unique, state-specific issues. Most CES targets are not yet in force. -Renewable energy certificate (REC) pricing trends: Prices for NEPOOL Class I RECs remained at roughly $\$40$ /MWh over the past year, just below alternative compliance payment (ACP) rates in the larger state markets, while PJM Tier I REC prices continued to rise, reaching $\$30$ /MWh by year-end. Prices for solar RECs (or SRECs) remained relatively stable, and continue to exhibit wide variation across states, with the highest prices ($\$200-450$ /MWh) in NJ, MA, and DC. -RPS compliance costs: RPS compliance costs average roughly 3.5% of retail electricity bills across RPS states, though vary widely from state to state, with the highest costs (8-12% of retail bills) in states with solar carve-outs and high SREC prices.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Renewable Energy Materials Properties Database: Summary

Renewable energy is providing a growing share of electricity generation in the United States, with generation from utility scale wind and solar increasing by 12% and 29%, respectively, in 2020 (EIA 2021). Installation of new renewable energy facilities requires material inputs that range from common construction materials to specialized, high-performance materials that may have limited availability. This report summarizes the Department of Energy (DOE) Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) and DOE Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) database of materials used in domestic wind and solar installations. The Energy Act of 2020 directs WETO and SETO to deliver a "comprehensive physical property database of materials for use in [wind and solar] energy technologies, which shall identify the type, quantity, country of origin, source, significant uses, projected availability, and physical properties of materials used in [wind and solar] energy technologies" by no later than September 1, 2022. This report is the summary and directions for use of the Renewable Energy Materials Property Database (REMPD), in response to that direction. The related full text of the Energy Act of 2020 is provided in Appendix A. The focus of the REMPD and this accompanying report is on quantifying the raw and processed materials used in renewable energy technologies. The database contains information on the amount of each material that goes into wind and solar power plants, descriptions of the relevant material properties, and the primary countries of origin for each material. Some materials go through several stages of processing and/or are incorporated into subcomponents that make up the completed energy generation facilities. This report does not analyze supply chains for the production of renewable energy plant components. The Department of Energy has carried out related analysis in response to Executive Order 14017, which directed production of "America's Supply Chains" reports for Wind and Solar. The supply chain reports can be found at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Wind%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20Final%202.25.22.pdf (Wind) and https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Solar%20Energy%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20Final.pdf (Solar). Additional reports in this series that are relevant to wind, solar and hybrid plants include: Energy Storage at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Energy%20Storage%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20final.pdf and Neodymium Magnets at https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/Neodymium%20Magnets%20Supply%20Chain%20Report%20-%20Final.pdf.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Using National-Scale Data to Inform Coal Power Plant Redevelopment and Coal Community Revitalization Planning

In the United States, individual coal plants have high variation in their construction and operation. Coal plants commonly have multiple units, with different commissioning ages, operational position, and maintenance conditions – even multiple fuels. These units may be in changing states of utilization, with variation in productivity depending on economic contexts. Coal plants themselves may be temporarily offline, mothballed, retired, or decommissioned due to owner/operator portfolios or market conditions, and the current posture of the plant may be difficult to ascertain without local news sources (Tarekegne et al. 2021). Anticipated dates of plant closures are prospectively represented to regulators and to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), but may also experience uncertainty due to the engineering, environmental, economic and social complexity of closing a very large power plant. As noted in this report, closure of the first unit to the last within a single plant may span more than 20 years. Yet tracking and predicting the position of our nation’s coal fleets on a national scale is deeply important. In developing a case for federal datasets and an approach to building and curating these data, this report identified that data must have high fidelity at the plant-level to be meaningful in aggregate. Plant-scale detail is also a match for its application: national priorities in federal investment range from economic revitalization for coal plant communities to maintaining reliable electric grid operations. This document is organized into a statistical review of coal plant retirements, past and prospective, in the United States; trends in the relationship between closures and existing federal investment programs for community revitalization; and potential methods for accelerating site redevelopment through advanced geospatial analysis based on federal data.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗