Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “hydropower”

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 OSTI2022

Closed-Loop Pumped Storage Hydropower Resource Assessment for the United States. Final Report on HydroWIRES Project D1: Improving Hydropower and PSH Representations in Capacity Expansion Models

Pumped storage hydropower represents the bulk of the United States' current energy storage capacity: 23 gigawatts (GW) of the 24-GW national total (Denholm et al. 2021). This capacity was largely built between 1960 and 1990. PSH is a mature and proven method of energy storage with competitive round-trip efficiency and long life spans. These qualities make PSH a very attractive potential solution to energy storage needs, particularly for longer-duration storage (8 hours or more); such storage will be crucial to bridge gaps in electricity production as variable wind and solar production continue to comprise an ever-larger portion of the United States' energy portfolio (Cole et al. 2021; Frazier et al. 2021). However, it is unclear how much potential the United States has for the development of new PSH. No new large PSH has been constructed in the United States since the 1990s, and attempts to quantify technical potential capacity from PSH project applications to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) suffer from inconsistent site and cost evaluation methodologies and likely are not representative of all PSH opportunities. This study seeks to better under understand the technical potential for PSH development in the United States by developing a national-scale resource assessment for closed-loop PSH. Individual sites are not modeled in sufficient detail for project-level development, but they do provide valuable insights into potential resource areas across the United States, including the ability to provide estimates for a range of long-term development scenarios.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hydropower Geotechnical Foundations: Current Practice and Innovation Opportunities for Low-Head Applications

Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to challenges frequently encountered with traditional approaches. With this understanding, it is critically important to understand and document the current state of practice for hydropower geotechnical foundations, identify key challenges, and define opportunities for innovative solutions. To this end, this report documents the current state of practice across the three main phases of geotechnical foundation development: (1) geotechnical site assessment, (2) design, and (3) construction for hydropower systems. It also describes the major challenges with conventional approaches and identifies opportunities for innovation to reduce hydropower foundations costs, timelines, and risks. Key takeaways from this report include the following: Approximately 80% of available low-head sites are expected to have foundations on soil beds rather than rock beds, suggesting that rockfill and earthfill dams may be the most cost-effective conventional dam type for new projects.; Geotechnical and geologic investigation activities are time-consuming and expensive but are essential to define the parameters and criteria needed for foundation design.; Certain riverbed soil and bedrock types present significant technical challenges or require expensive foundation construction, which can prove financially prohibitive for low-head project development.; Modular hydropower design and prefabricated modular foundations represent a promising but unproven paradigm for new hydropower development. Design and construction approaches using optimized and highly repeatable, reliable components would benefit project cost, time, and risk but require additional research and development.; Temporary construction features for foundations, including cofferdams, water diversion, and water control systems, can prove costly and have inherent construction risk.; For economically viable development, hydropower geotechnical foundations should be limited to 4 to 15% of the project’s total initial capital costs. Many proposed projects have experienced cost overruns attributable to foundation difficulties or surprises during construction. These overruns may have been due to inadequate investigations, lack of adequate engineering effort to tailor the structures to site geology and topography, and/or contractual terms, among other considerations.; Challenges for hydropower foundations and opportunities for innovative technology solutions are identified in the following areas (consistent with the three main phases of foundation development): Geotechnical site assessment, Foundation design and materials, Construction methods and technology. Ultimately, this report aims to provide information about geotechnical foundations for low-head hydropower and to motivate transformative technologies to support hydropower growth.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Small Hydropower Interconnections: Best Practices

Small hydropower projects have been the predominant source of capacity growth of U.S. hydropower for more than a decade, and they present the most cost-effective and environmentally permissible avenues for hydropower growth (DOE 2016; Johnson et al. 2018). However, interconnection to electricity distribution and transmission grids is a persistent barrier due to cost surprises and schedule overruns. As a culmination to research into the status and requirements of small hydropower interconnection across the United States, this paper presents the best practices for setting interconnection standards that can improve the process for small hydropower developers. As part of the analysis, the interconnection costs are compared between small hydropower, solar, and wind. The analysis of the small hydropower interconnection landscape across the United States was carried out by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) with support from the U.S. Department of Energy Water Power Technologies Office. The research team was guided by a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) and gleaned data from publicly available sources, such as the HydroSource database (ORNL 2020) and interconnection queues hosted by utilities, balancing authorities, independent system operators (ISOs), and regional transmission organizations (RTOs). The results of this work are shared in a series of papers detailing the state of small hydropower in the United States (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Small Hydropower in the United States”), the variety of state interconnection processes to connect power generators with the grid (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: State Interconnection Processes”), and an analysis of the interconnection processes (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Analysis of Interconnection Processes”). In this, the final paper in the series, best practices for interconnection processes (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Best Practices”) are identified from the solar energy and distributed wind energy industries that are transferrable to small hydropower development. This information will help overcome barriers to future small hydropower development.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Advanced Hydropower and PSH Capacity Expansion Modeling (Final Report on HydroWIRES D1 Improvements to Capacity Expansion Modeling)

Hydropower and pumped-storage hydropower (PSH) have played a key role in providing flexible, low-carbon electricity to the U.S. electricity system for over a century. As variable generation (VG) deployment increases the demand for flexible, dispatchable generation, it is important to use all available methods for understanding how hydropower and PSH interfaces with VG in a future low-carbon grid. Capacity expansion models (CEMs) of electricity systems are often used to study future electricity scenarios, but these tools often have difficulty representing site- and technology-details of hydropower and PSH due to limited spatial, temporal, or process resolution. This report demonstrates a set of model advancements to improve hydropower and PSH representations in CEMs and other models that consider hydropower and PSH's role in electricity systems. Model advancements include new data integration to define closed-loop PSH resource availability and cost, along with site-level parameterizations of existing PSH capacity and energy storage specifications. Shifting energy across seasons for both hydropower and PSH is explored to demonstrate the potential value of long-duration storage. New representations of hydropower upgrades offer opportunities to increase dispatchability, add pumps, or independently add capacity or energy depending on what is most valuable. New model structures and data are demonstrated individually and in combination to observe their impact on model results and provide initial insights into what is most important for analysts, electricity system planners, and hydropower decision-makers to consider when assessing future roles of hydropower. Improving flexibility of existing hydropower assets has the potential to reduce CO 2 emissions through complementing VG technologies and/or improve electricity system economics by reducing the need to deploy higher-cost systems. Large-scale energy storage is also shown to provide opportunities for balancing seasonal differences in VG, particularly solar photovoltaics (PV). Initial analysis with a new closed-loop PSH resource and cost dataset also demonstrate the potential for new PSH deployment to offer new grid flexibility opportunities. Future analysis and modeling of hydropower's role in the U.S. and other electricity systems could include methodological improvements based on those discussed here along with sensitivity analysis to better represent current and future potential hydropower and PSH flexibility. Improvements to geospatial and site-level data can further improve the understanding of how hydropower and PSH can be upgraded and operated in response to future electricity system needs. This work lays the groundwork to use advanced planning models to explore the range of roles hydropower and PSH can play in the grid of the future.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Small Hydropower Interconnections: State Interconnection Processes

Small hydropower projects with rated power output between 0 to 20 MW have been the predominant source of hydropower growth over the past decade in the United States (DOE 2016; Johnson et al. 2018). However, interconnection to electricity distribution and transmission grids is a persistent barrier. Interconnection of an electricity generating unit is overseen by the distribution or transmission owner, who use interconnection standards and requirements that vary by state. The differences between standards in standards may affect the final cost, timeline, and success of a small hydropower project. Small hydropower project developers across the United States have found interconnection procedures to be fraught with cost surprises and schedule overruns. System operators have struggled to understand impacts to overburdened or rapidly evolving transmission and distribution grids. The results of these shortcomings have been stranded costs and unrealized small hydropower potential. Though regulatory actions and policy recommendations at the state level have increased the situational awareness of interconnection challenges, the remote locations of small hydropower resources and the relatively small revenues associated with energy production through small hydropower facilities continue to make interconnection processes and requirements confusing and costly. Noting these challenges, the U.S. Department of Energy Water Power Technologies Office enlisted Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to investigate the small hydropower interconnection landscape across the United States. The second in a series, this paper investigates the interconnection process in each state in the U.S. to compare their attributes. Subsequent papers in the series will analyze these interconnection processes (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Analysis of Interconnection Processes”) and present best practices (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Best Practices”) that will help overcome barriers to future small hydropower development. The first paper in the series examined the state of small hydropower projects in the United States (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Small Hydropower in the United States”) to understand the industry characteristics.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Small Hydropower Interconnections: Analysis of Interconnection Processes

Small hydropower projects have faced the challenge of navigating the process to interconnect their generation source to electricity distribution and transmission grids. Small hydropower developers have found interconnection procedures to be opaque and ultimately result in unexpected cost surprises and long timelines. Noting these challenges, the U.S. Department of Energy Water Power Technologies Office enlisted Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) to investigate the small hydropower interconnection landscape across the United States. After reviewing the status of small hydropower (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Small Hydropower in the United States”) and the interconnection procedures across the United States (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: State Interconnection Processes”) in the first two white papers of this series, this paper uses recent data from small hydropower interconnection applications to benchmark the efficacy of the process. Using data from interconnection queues hosted by utilities, balancing authorities, independent system operators (ISOs), and regional transmission organizations (RTOs), this paper provides context for the costs, timelines, and types of upgrades required for small hydropower projects. Interconnection applications and study reports for small hydropower projects were analyzed to collect key pieces of information about the interconnection process, timeline, costs, and type of upgrades required for interconnection. Information sourced from the reports was entered into an Interconnection Benchmarking database (IBdb), which may be found in Appendix A.1. Information from this database was used to evaluate the performance and challenges associated with interconnecting small hydropower projects. This white paper presents a description of the sources contained in the interconnection database (Section 2.0), an analysis of the interconnection timeline (Section 3.0), an evaluation the cost of interconnection upgrades (Section 4.0), and a description of the types of infrastructure upgrades (Section 5.0). The final paper in this series (“Small Hydropower Interconnections: Best Practices”) will use the analysis described here to outline best practices for interconnection processes that will help overcome barriers to future small hydropower development.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydropower Supply Chain Gap Analysis

In 2022, DOE conducted supply chain "deep dives" for renewable energy technologies, including hydropower (Uria-Martinez, Hydropower Industry Supply Chain Deep Dive Assessment 2022). The deep dive identified several challenges in the current hydropower supply chain. In addition, Nguyen et. al (2022) conducted an analogous deep-dive assessment on large (> 100-MW) power transformers (LPTs), a critical component of hydropower installations, and concluded that the LPTs as well as several upstream components and materials also have domestic supply chain challenges. These deep dives were the initial high-level assessments of these supply chains and were focused on identifying the biggest issues. Both recommended further investigation. In the two years since the deep dives were published, the Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) has focused on improving our understanding of the hydropower supply chain and developing strategies for addressing these challenges. Because the challenges outlined above are most acute for large hydropower systems, most of the report and specifically, this report concentrates on the larger > 100-MW hydropower systems. Early in 2023, DOE's Secretary of Energy asked the Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) to engage the hydropower community and seek input on strategies to secure and encourage domestic manufacturing. WPTO has established three focus areas for engagement: 1) Define the market for planned rehabilitations and new construction of the domestic fleet, 2) Provide insights for policies, incentives, loan programs, and technology investments to encourage domestic content, and 3) Define the existing and required domestic hydropower manufacturing capabilities and workforce. This report summarizes these efforts and complements the earlier work by further exploring the identified challenges and identifying potential actions to address these challenges. Furthermore, we conducted a detailed gap analysis of the domestic hydropower supply chain, down to the component level. From this analysis, we then make specific, actionable recommendations for closing these gaps. Section 2 of the report summarizes recent (i.e., since 2021) legislation impacting hydropower deployment and/or its supply chain. It then describes the efforts of WPTO to assess and improve the hydropower supply chain since the publication of the deep-dive assessments. In Section 3, the report updates the earlier supply chain and market studies, identifying specific capabilities by company and location. Section 4 outlines the hydropower demand signal for both new builds due to clean energy goals as well as refurbishments and upgrading of the current domestic fleet. Section 5 is a detailed gap analysis while Section 6 provides actionable recommendations for closing the gaps. Section 7 concludes the report by linking the recommendations to the identified gaps and discusses future efforts.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Long-term basin-scale hydropower expansion under alternative scenarios in a global multisector model

Abstract Hydropower is an important source of renewable, low-carbon energy. Global and regional energy systems, including hydropower, may evolve in a variety of ways under different scenarios. Representation of hydropower in global multisector models is often simplified at the country or regional level. Some models assume a fixed hydropower supply, which is not affected by economic drivers or competition with other electricity generation sources. Here, we implement an endogenous model of hydropower expansion in the Global Change Analysis Model, including a representation of hydropower potential at the river basin level to project future hydropower production across river basins and explore hydropower’s role in evolving energy systems both regionally and globally, under alternative scenarios. Each scenario utilizes the new endogenous hydropower implementation but makes different assumptions about future low-carbon transitions, technology costs, and energy demand. Our study suggests there is ample potential for hydropower to expand in the future to help meet growing demand for electricity driven by socioeconomic growth, electrification of end-use sectors, or other factors. However, hydropower expansion will be constrained by resource availability, resource location, and cost in ways that limit its growth relative to other technologies. As a result, all scenarios show a generally decreasing share of hydroelectricity over total electricity generation at the global level. Hydropower expansion varies across regions, and across basins within regions, due to differences in resource potential, cost, current utilization, and other factors. In sum, our scenarios entail hydropower generation growth between 36% and 119% in 2050, compared to 2015, globally.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hydropower Capital and O&M Costs: An Exploration of the FERC Form 1 Data

This report explores the potential for using responses from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) “Electric Utility Annual Report,” also known as FERC Form 1, as a cost database for conventional and pumped storage hydropower (PSH). The report outlines the process used to compile an easy-to-access database from the original FERC Form 1 data and discusses the historical cost/performance data. The steps for developing the database include downloading the annual FoxPro files from the FERC website (FERC, 2020), reading them into an Excel format, and reconciling naming issues across years, repeated entries, and shared assets, among others. The cleaned and compiled Form 1 database is available on Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL’s) HydroSource website. For this report, the compiled Form 1 database was linked to two other hydropower databases, the National Inventory of Dams and the ORNL Existing Hydropower Assets, that provide additional information on the characteristics and other features of plants in the Form 1 data. Explorations of the plant characteristics, performance, capital costs, and operation and maintenance (O&M) cost data in the combined database were presented separately for conventional hydropower and PSH projects. Form 1 has several advantages as a hydropower cost database. First, the cost data is reported directly by plant owners. Second, Form 1 provides cost breakdowns of capital and operating costs for large conventional and PSH plants enabling more detailed tracking of hydropower costs compared with typical total cost estimates. Third, although the Form 1 data is not reported by all operational hydropower plants in the United States, the available data represents a wide range of plant characteristics and a sizable proportion of the hydropower fleet (61% of PSH plants and 22% of conventional hydropower plants by capacity). The lower proportion of the conventional hydropower fleet is because Form 1 reporting requirements apply only to private utilities that meet given size thresholds, leaving out federally owned facilities and many smaller hydropower plants. Overall, the Form 1 cost database represents a unique, publicly available database on hydropower asset capital and O&M costs. This report leads to a compiled database for the reporting years 1994 to 2020 that helps resolve issues with accessibility and use of the FERC Form 1 data by hydropower plant owners, project developers, technology developers, and regulators.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

In-Conduit Hydropower for Public Water Supply Systems: Development Challenges and Costs

Conduit hydropower leverages existing water infrastructure to provide energy solutions, though deployment has been slow. A 2022 US Department of Energy (DOE)–funded report led by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) summarizes a reconnaissance-level study of hydropower potential at national conduits (Kao et al., 2022). The report includes power and energy estimates across three major sectors of conduit hydropower potential: municipal, agricultural, and industrial. Water resources include public water supply systems (municipal and industrial), irrigation canal systems (agricultural), thermoelectric cooling systems (industrial), and wastewater systems (municipal and industrial). In total, 1.41 GW of power potential was estimated nationwide. Subsequently, DOE has funded ORNL through the Conduit Hydropower Engineering, Evaluation, and Technology Acceleration project (CHEETA) to improve deployment potential for conduit hydropower. Work thus far has focused on “in-conduit” hydropower (ICH)—or “in-pipe” hydropower—for public water supply systems, though the project is planning to cover conduit hydropower more broadly. The timeline of ORNL’s conduit hydropower related research and development (R&D) is shown in Figure 1. The results of CHEETA should benefit the hydropower industry by providing insights into costs, barriers, and other considerations that impact project development. The hydropower industry and municipal/industrial conduit stakeholders will use the output to inform development decisions and advance low-impact hydropower growth in the US.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Baseline Cost Model for Hydropower: Documentation (2025)

Hydropower currently contributes about 80 GW of conventional and 23 GW of pumped storage capacity to the United States (US) power grid. Previous studies have estimated a considerable amount of remaining US hydropower resources, including non-powered dams (NPD) (Hadjerioua et al., 2012), new stream-reach developments (NSD) (Kao et al., 2014), pumped storage hydropower (PSH) and canal/conduit (Kao et al., 2022). The combined theoretical capacity potential of these various hydropower resources is comparable to the existing US hydropower capacity. There is a continuing interest in developing this hydropower potential, particularly to help meet the increasing demand for electricity. However, available data (Sasthav and Oladosu, 2022) show that the rate of new hydropower development has slowed considerably over time despite the interest of industry stakeholders. This is partly due to the competition from other energy resources and from the highly dispersed nature of remaining hydropower resources, which lead to high information requirements for evaluating the feasibility of potential projects. Cost information provides the most succinct summary of the feasibility of a potential hydropower project required by stakeholders, including developers, investors, policymakers, consumer groups, etc., considering investment options. The best estimates of hydropower costs can be obtained through detailed engineering design and cost assessments of individual projects. However, this approach has high data and resource (time, funds, cross-disciplinary expertise) requirements that render it inapplicable for rapid cost estimation with limited data. Although innovative approaches can overcome some of these impediments (see Oladosu and Ma, 2024 for such an application to potential NPD projects), the development of such approaches still requires significant amounts of resources and are not generally applicable to all hydropower project types. Therefore, statistical and parametric methods using simpler cost specifications remain of significant utility to hydropower stakeholders and are, at the least, complementary to more detailed approaches, particularly when evaluating many potential projects.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Differential Impact of Climate Change on the Hydropower Economies of Karakoram and Himalayan River Basins

Water stored in the form of snow and glaciers in the High Mountain Asia (HMA) region regulates the water supply, and resultant water-based economies, that support the livelihoods of millions of people. Trends in the seasonal and long-term melting of snow and glaciers, governed by initial ice reserves, meteorological factors and geographic features, vary across sub-basins in the HMA region. We examined the economic impacts of climate-led changes in river flow in two drainage basins, one each from the Karakoram and Central Himalaya region. We used an integrated assessment framework to estimate the changes in economic value of the hydropower generation from hydropower plants on rivers fed by snow and glacier melt in the two sub-basins. The framework, developed under a NASA High Mountain Asia project, coupled biophysical models (a suite of climate models, snow/glacier-hydrology, and hydropower model) with economic analysis. We compared the differences in estimated river flow over historic and future time using the water balance model in sixteen scenarios (eight climate models and two emissions scenarios) for rivers upstream of hydropower plants in each sub-basin. Using the hydropower model we developed, we estimated the changes in hydropower generation at the Naltar IV hydropower plant, with an 18 MW capacity, located in Hunza, Karakoram, and the Trishuli hydropower plant, with a 19.6 MW capacity, in Trishuli, Central Himalaya. When compared to their baselines, the estimated impact of climate change and temporal variability were higher for the Naltar plant than for the Trishuli plant. Our sensitivity analysis shows that hydropower plants with water storage facilities help reduce the impact of changes, but the estimated impacts are higher for the higher capacity plants. This study provides an example of the differential impacts of climate change on hydropower plants located in rivers fed by varying amounts of snow and glacier melt at different decades in this century. This type of integrated assessment of climate change impact will support the scientific understanding of hydrologic flow and its impacts on a hydropower economy under various climate scenarios, as well as generate information about water resource management in a changing climate.

climate change↗
DOE OSTI2025

The value of hydropower flexibility for electricity system decarbonization

Hydropower is an abundant, dispatchable, clean energy resource that will play an important role in supporting the clean energy transition. In particular, dispatchable hydropower can provide the operational flexibility that will be required in future systems with high variable renewable energy penetrations. However, the theoretical operational flexibility of hydropower can be restricted in practice by various non-power constraints. In this paper, we quantify how increasing the operational flexibility of dispatchable hydropower resources with reservoirs impacts least-cost generation portfolios and supports power system decarbonization. Specifically, we conduct a capacity expansion analysis of a two-zone system: a hydro-dominated region and a neighboring region with aggressive decarbonization targets that are represented by the United States Pacific Northwest and California respectively. We then introduce a quantifiable index for characterizing the operational flexibility of reservoir hydropower and assess how changes in this metric impact the system-optimal generation portfolio. We find that increasing hydropower flexibility leads to more investment in wind generation, less investment in natural gas generation, lower system costs, and lower system emissions. We further demonstrate a substitution effect between the grid services provided by flexible hydropower operation, increased transmission capacity on a congested line, and energy storage resources. Finally, we show that increasing the operational flexibility of hydropower increases the effective load carrying capability of both hydropower and wind resources. This research supports a more nuanced understanding of how hydropower can support electricity system decarbonization and may motivate reassessing the cost-benefit tradeoffs of non-power constraints that restrict operational flexibility.

Capacity expansion modeling↗
DOE OSTI2023

Mutually beneficial outcomes for hydropower expansion and environmental protection at a basin scale

Reshaping the scale of planning for hydropower development, from reaches to basin-scales, has been recommended as a more effective way to ameliorate the environmental impacts of hydropower. One approach is identifying mutually exclusive areas where development is precluded for conservation purposes and areas of low conservation value that present fewer barriers to development. This strategy, however, is less adoptable in developed countries where hydropower is already widespread and large-scale construction of new dams is unlikely. To broaden the adoption of basin-scale planning, alternative approaches and planning tools are needed for identifying mutually beneficial opportunities for simultaneous increases in hydropower capacity while improving environmental conditions. In this study, we present the Basin Scale Opportunity Assessment as a methodology to improve environmental conditions through either direct (on-site) or indirect (off-site) mitigation. We assess whether direct or indirect mitigation activities lead to optimal results in terms of added hydropower, environmental improvement, and monetary cost at a basin scale. We present two case studies for the Connecticut River and Roanoke River Basins, USA. Significant opportunities for expanding hydropower generating capacity are numerous in both basins. Results suggest that total hydropower capacity could be increased 4 to 7 % in the Roanoke and Connecticut Basins, respectively, without new dam construction and with net improvements in environmental conditions. We found that environmentally and economically optimal win-win strategies for increasing hydropower capacity and improving environmental conditions included improving environmental conditions in rivers downstream of existing dams. Off-site mitigation opportunities, such as dam removal and wetland mitigation, were identified as optimum solutions for achieving net environmental improvements only when they were associated with new hydropower construction. Our results demonstrate that opportunities to increase hydropower capacity and improve environmental conditions are expanded by viewing cumulative benefits at basin scales; however, increasing regulatory flexibility may be required to realize these opportunities.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Multi-scale impacts of climate change on hydropower for long-term water-energy planning in the contiguous United States

Climate change impacts on watersheds can potentially exacerbate water scarcity issues where water serves multiple purposes including hydropower. The long-term management of water and energy resources is still mostly approached in a siloed manner at different basins or watersheds, failing to consider the potential impacts that may concurrently affect many regions at once. There is a need for a large-scale hydropower modeling framework that can examine climate impacts across adjoining river basins and balancing authorities (BAs) and provide a periodic assessment at regional to national scales. Expanding from our prior assessment only for the United States (US) federal hydropower plants, we enhance and extend two regional hydropower models to cover over 85% of the total hydropower nameplate capacity and present the first contiguous US-wide assessment of future hydropower production under Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6’s high-end Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5-8.5 emission scenario using an uncertainty-aware multi-model ensemble approach. We present regional hydropower projections, using both BA regions and US Hydrologic Subregions (HUC4s), to consistently inform the energy and water communities for two future periods—the near-term (2020–2039) and the mid-term (2040–2059) relative to a historical baseline period (1980–2019). We find that the median projected changes in annual hydropower generation are typically positive—approximately 5% in the near-term, and 10% in the mid-term. However, since the risk of regional droughts is also projected to increase, future planning cannot overly rely on the ensemble median, as the potential of severe hydropower reductions could be overlooked. The assessment offers an ensemble of future hydropower generation projections, providing regional utilities and power system operators with consistent data to develop drought scenarios, design long duration storage and evaluate energy infrastructure reliability under intensified inter-annual and seasonal variability.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Designing Hydropower Flows to Balance Energy and Environmental Needs (HydroWIRES Topic A Final Project Report)

Hydropower is expected to play a new role in the US electricity grid as more variable renewable energy sources like wind and solar come online. Wind and solar generation increase fluctuations in electrical supply increasing the value of flexible generation sources that can quickly ramp generation up and down. The flexible generation hydropower can provide as well as the ancillary services (e.g., frequency and voltage regulation and reserves, black start capability) it provides for balancing and stabilizing the power grid are predicted to be of increased value in these future grid scenarios. Yet, the flexibility of hydropower may come with environmental costs due to up- and down-ramping of hydropower plants (i.e., quickly increasing or decreasing generation flows, respectively) which may strand fish, dewater or scour fish nests, alter habitat, or create unsafe recreational conditions that may be unacceptable to participants in the hydropower regulatory process. These types of environmental impacts are often mitigated through environmental flow requirements that specify minimum or maximum flow releases, or ramp-rates changes allowed at a hydropower facility. While it is not currently known to what degree electrical grid reliability could be affected by environmental flow requirements, gaining a better understanding of these interactions before the grid becomes more deeply decarbonized can help define what policy, regulation, or infrastructure may be needed to support the clean energy transition. As the future grid will rely on hydropower to provide both flexibility and robust environmental protections, the analyses and tools described in this report are centered on making mechanistic linkages between energy and the environment in hydropower systems. This understanding of energy-environment linkages can provide the foundational understanding needed to quantitatively assess the trade-offs between the increased generation flexibility that hydropower will be expected to provide and the environmental impacts of this flexibility. This report seeks to provide an objective foundation for building future science and tools that can be used by a broad spectrum of the hydropower community that is involved in licensing or environmental regulatory proceedings tasked with balancing energy and environmental objectives through flow management.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Restoration Hydro: A Watershed Approach to Standard Modular New Hydropower

The objectives of FOA DE- FOA-0001836- “Standard Modular Hydropower” included designing a standardized, modular, and environmentally compatible hydropower schematic for implementation in greenfield sites that generate up to 10 MW of capacity. Utilizing funds competitively awarded under DOE’s Water Power Technologies Office, the Natel Energy team developed a concept for modular new stream reach (NSR) hydropower that incorporates multi species upstream and downstream fish passage, improved river channel connectivity, and recreational modules. The in-stream design of the collective modules minimized site specific design and maximized the opportunities for modularity. Financial data was also presented using actual costs from regional suppliers, with figures provided in 2022 dollars. While the project team did not address potential permitting process improvements, the site selection criteria did consider established barriers to hydropower development such as tribal and preserved lands, interconnection proximity, and endangered species to exclude or deprioritize. The project’s design schematic met the objectives of the FOA, and presented a unique solution that targets alluvial pockets as natural features for sustainable development. Natel’s concept also incorporated the company's fish-safe Restoration Hydro Turbine for safe downstream passage, while featuring a rock arch that integrates fish passage, water, recreation, and grade control modules (including sediment). Alignment with the Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) “Innovative Design Concepts for Standard Modular Hydropower and Pumped-Storage Hydropower” Program: According to the Hydropower Vision (DOE, 2016), approximately 16 GW of hydropower growth is possible with the development of technology solutions that balance efficiency, economics, and environmental sustainability. The desired outcome of the SMH program is transformational innovation specifically in the site identification, conceptual, and detailed design phases of technology development lifecycles (DOE, 2018). In developing the SMH design schematic, the team aimed to address the opportunities outlined in the Vision through an inverted design philosophy; rather than singularly prioritizing efficiency and power production, the team focused on integrating hydropower with restoration of degraded streams to optimal ecosystem function and provision of exceptional recreation value as design criteria. To achieve this, Restoration Hydro incorporates the principles of nature-based engineering (WWAP, 2018) and biomimicry (Biomimicry NL.) to strategically deploy complementary combinations of permanent, semi-permanent, and ephemeral low-head structures - such as natural and engineered log jams - that harness geomorphological and hydrological processes at the landscape-scale. Primary applications of Restoration Hydro include: 1) restoration of degraded watersheds’ natural ecological function and enhancement of hydrological connectivity; and 2) creation of associated co-benefits to hydro production, including increased groundwater recharge, improved sediment transport and management, improved water security and water quality. Restoration Hydro projects build upon proven watershed restoration engineering techniques by integrating hydropower turbines into low-head structures using innovative and evolving civil works concepts that facilitate fish and sediment passage, and in some cases create additional revenue-generating recreational opportunities. Powering low-head structures creates a directly monetizable layer of economic value in the form of flexible, reliable, renewable energy on top of the already high-value water, environmental and recreational benefits of watershed and river restoration. The approach aims to create a virtuous, self-reinforcing cycle whereby Restoration Hydro projects support the scaling of ecosystem restoration activities, creating a water-energy-carbon multiplier effect that, through the principles of adaptive change management: 1) improves the resilience of landscapes and downstream population centers for changing hydrological cycles; 2) creates a reliable energy resource that facilitates the integration of intermittent renewable power sources into grids; and 3) supports climate change mitigation through grid decarbonization and enhanced ecosystem carbon capture and retention.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Grid Planning Impacts of Hydropower Growth and Decline

Hydropower and pumped storage hydropower (PSH) have a complex and uncertain future in the U.S. electricity system. On one hand, existing assets have the potential for an expanded role in integrating variable renewable energy while new deployment, particularly of PSH, can help meet growing needs for grid flexibility and improved reliability. On the other hand, challenging environmental and cost considerations could limit the extent of new investments in hydropower and PSH capacity and flexibility. This technical presentation demonstrates the use of a high-fidelity capacity expansion model of the U.S. electric grid (the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Regional Energy Deployment System) to understand the impacts of alternative futures for the hydropower and PSH fleet, including scenarios of both growth and decline. Growth scenarios include new PSH deployment or improved hydropower flexibility, while scenarios of decline reduce the capacity or energy production potential of hydropower and PSH. Economic, environmental, and performance outcomes of the grid are compared across these scenarios to reveal the potential contributions of hydropower and PSH in the U.S. electric sector over the next several decades, focusing on changes to the grid technology mix, electric sector costs, electricity prices, and air emissions. This broad scenario approach demonstrates how flexible hydropower and PSH can help reduce air emissions and cost by complementing variable renewables, but the opposite can occur with reduced hydropower availability, particularly in the next decade. It is important to consider a wide range of scenarios and metrics to gain a national and regional understanding of hydropower's future in the United States.

capacity expansion↗