Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “zero carbon”

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 OSTI2021

The Modeling of Synfuel Production Process: ASPEN Model of FT production with electricity demand provided at LWR scale

Synfuels, or electro-fuels (e-fuels) have the unique potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across the transportation sector. This is especially true for applications with substantial payloads and daily miles traveled, such as long-haul heavy-duty vehicles, rail locomotives, marine vessels and aviation aircrafts that are challenging to directly electrify via battery or fuel cell powertrain technologies. Synfuels, or electro-diesel/electro-jet fuels, have similar properties with the incumbent petroleum fuels, compatible with current infrastructure but have much lower GHG emissions relative to the petroleum counterpart, because they utilize waste carbon dioxide (CO2) streams and green hydrogen (H2) sourced from electrolysis. To achieve substantial reductions in GHG emissions, electricity sources must be zero carbon or near-zero carbon, which is the case with solar, wind, hydro and nuclear power. Compared to the intermittency of solar, wind and hydro, nuclear energy provides a steady energy source. In addition, it’s advantageous for nuclear power to produce synfuels because it provides not only near-zero carbon electricity to displace grid electricity, but also near-zero carbon steam to displace carbon-intensive natural gas combustion for steam generation. The availability of electricity and steam also enables more efficient green hydrogen production by using high-temperature electrolysis. In this work, Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) models a synfuel production process via the Fischer- Tropsch (FT) reaction by using nuclear power to provide electricity and steam. In 2021, using ASPEN Plus software, ANL established a detailed process model of a stand-alone FT production facility, assuming feedstocks of pure CO2 and H2. This stand-alone model can be expanded to integrate H2 production from nuclear power via low-temperature and high-temperature electrolysis at light-water reactor (LWR) scale. This report summarizes the stand-alone ASPEN Plus model results with a detailed mass and energy analysis. Our modeled facility produces 351 MT/day (130,000 gal/day) of FT fuel (a mixture of naphtha, jet fuel, and diesel) by converting 223 MT/day of H2 and 2,387 MT/day of CO2. The FT fuel production energy efficiency is 58% and the carbon conversion efficiency (from CO2 to FT fuel) is 46%. The production of green hydrogen requires 390–470 MWe of electricity, which is compared with the capacity of an LWR plant. For the stand-alone FT process, the detailed energy demand (electricity and heat) is summarized in the table below. Based on the energy supply source and the required temperature, potential insertion points of nuclear energy are identified. Based on the potential nuclear energy utilization, this report discusses potential modification options for expanding the system boundary to integrate nuclear power use, for example on-site hydrogen production via water electrolysis. Modeling of the integrated system is conducted by closely working with ANL and Idaho National Laboratory (INL) collaborators to harmonize design parameters of nuclear plants and the FT production process.

Zang, Guiyan↗
DOE OSTI2022

The Modeling of the Synfuel Production Process: Process models of Fischer-Tropsch production with electricity and hydrogen provided by various scales of nuclear plants

Synthetic fuels (synfuels), also known as electro-fuels (E-fuels), are hydrocarbon fuels produced from waste CO2 streams and water electrolysis, with electricity as the primary source of energy. To achieve substantial reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, electricity sources must release zero carbon or near-zero carbon, as is the case with solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear power. Nuclear power is one of the largest and steadiest domestic sources of clean energy in the United States. Moreover, nuclear power has the potential to produce hydrogen economically for less than $2/kg, reaching the DOE near-term target price. Thus, using nuclear power to produce synfuels has the unique potential to significantly reduce the GHG emissions of hydrocarbon fuels production and end-use applications. Fisher-Tropsch or FT fuel (a mixture of naphtha, jet fuel, and diesel) is of great interest because it is a drop-in fuel that can be blended with conventional petroleum counterparts and is compatible with existing infrastructure. By using the ASPEN Plus model, this report develops FT fuel production models on three scales, corresponding to nuclear plants with capacities of 1000 MWe, 437 Mwe, and 100 MWe, respectively. The FT model case with energy from a 437-MWe nuclear plant is used as a baseline case. This report summarizes the baseline ASPEN Plus model results with a detailed mass and energy analysis. Our modeled facility produces 507 MT/day (185,000 gal/day) of FT fuel by converting 255 MT/day of hydrogen and 1,580 MT/day of CO2. The FT fuel production energy efficiency from hydrogen and electricity energy inputs is 70% (lowerheating-value or LHV-based). Including the high-temperature electrolyzer in the system boundary, the FT fuel production LHV efficiency from electricity and thermal energy inputs is 51%, considering 39.8 kWh/kg of electricity and 6.86 kWh/kg of thermal energy use from a nuclear plant for hydrogen production. The FT production efficiency can potentially be increased by further integrating the heat exchange between nuclear plant and FT process, and this study is underway. The carbon conversion ratio in the baseline case is 99%, with process CO2 capture and recirculation and oxy-combustion using the oxygen by-product from water electrolysis. The hydrogen consumption is 1.38 kg/gal-FT fuel and the CO2 consumption is 8.56 kg/gal-FT fuel in the baseline case. With different FT production scales determined by the nuclear plant capacity, the FT model was scaled using the same operating parameters, which led to the same conversion efficiency regardless of scale. However, the different FT plant scales will impact the economics of FT fuel production; this impact will be examined in the next phase of this study.

Zang, Guiyan↗
DOE OSTI2024

ZeroCAL: Eliminating Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Limestone’s Decomposition to Decarbonize Cement Production

Limestone (calcite, CaCO 3 ) is an abundant and cost-effective source of calcium oxide (CaO) for cement and lime production. However, the thermochemical decomposition of limestone (~800 °C, 1 bar) to produce lime (CaO) results in substantial carbon dioxide (CO 2(g) ) emissions and energy use, i.e., ~1 tonne [t] of CO 2 and ~1.4 MWh per t of CaO produced. Here, we describe a new pathway to use CaCO 3 as a Ca source to make hydrated lime (portlandite, Ca(OH) 2 ) at ambient conditions (p, T) while nearly eliminating process CO 2(g) emissions (as low as 1.5 mol. % of the CO 2 in the precursor CaCO 3 , equivalent to 9 kg of CO 2(g) per t of Ca(OH) 2 ) within an aqueous flowelectrolysis/ pH-swing process that coproduces hydrogen (H 2(g) ) and oxygen (O 2(g) ). Because Ca(OH) 2 is a zero-carbon precursor for cement and lime production, this approach represents a significant advancement in the production of zero-carbon cement. The Zero CArbon Lime (ZeroCAL) process includes dissolution, separation/recovery, and electrolysis stages according to the following steps: (Step 1) chelator (e.g., ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, EDTA)-promoted dissolution of CaCO 3 and complexation of Ca 2+ under basic (>pH 9) conditions, (Step 2a) Ca enrichment and separation using nanofiltration (NF), which allows separation of the Ca-EDTA complex from the accompanying bicarbonate (HCO 3 – ) species, (Step 2b) acidity-promoted decomplexation of Ca from EDTA, which allows near-complete chelator recovery and the formation of a Ca-enriched stream, and (Step 3) rapid precipitation of Ca(OH) 2 from the Ca-enriched stream using electrolytically produced alkalinity. These reactions can be conducted in a seawater matrix yielding coproducts including hydrochloric acid (HCl) and sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO 3 ), resulting from electrolysis and limestone dissolution, respectively. Careful analysis of the reaction stoichiometries and energy balances indicates that approximately 1.35 t of CaCO 3 , 1.09 t of water, 0.79 t of sodium chloride (NaCl), and ~2 MWh of electrical energy are required to produce 1 t of Ca(OH) 2 , with significant opportunity for process intensification. This approach has major implications for decarbonizing cement production within a paradigm that emphasizes the use of existing cement plants and electrification of industrial operations, while also creating approaches for alkalinity production that enable cost-effective and scalable CO 2 mineralization via Ca(OH) 2 carbonation.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Grid-Integrated Production of Fischer-Tropsch Synfuels from Nuclear Power

Idaho National Laboratory (INL) investigates the relative economic profitability of an integrated energy system (IES) coupling an NPP with a synfuel production process at selected case study locations across the United States. In the synfuel IES, a high-temperature steam electrolysis (HTSE) plant is thermally and electrically coupled with an NPP to produce zero-carbon hydrogen. The synthetic fuel is produced from this H 2 combined with a CO 2 supply using the reverse water gas shift process followed by the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) reaction. This analysis considers a system in which the CO 2 is sourced from regional CO 2 emitters via the construction and operation of pipeline-based CO 2 supply networks. Locating the FT plant at the same site as the NPP and HTSE plants enables the NPP to provide zero-carbon heat and power to the HTSE plant and zero-carbon power to the FT plant as well as avoid the requirement for long-distance H 2 product transport from the HTSE plant to the FT plant. Hydrogen storage is used to enable the NPP to dispatch power to the electrical grid (instead of the HTSE plant) when grid demand increases, thus enabling the FT plant to continue to operate in a steady-state production mode. The ability to cease hydrogen production for several hours within each day enables the NPP to provide power to the grid to balance the electricity market during peak periods and maximize revenues for the nuclear synfuel IES. The FT process design considered has a 99% carbon conversion efficiency. The use of nuclear energy and nuclear energy-derived hydrogen enables synfuel production to achieve this high level of carbon utilization. Additionally, the life-cycle carbon emissions of the nuclear-based synfuel production process are very low, with WTW emissions of approximately 25 gCO 2 e/MJ, including steam credits (generated from FT process excess heat), and approximately 7 gCO 2 e/MJ, if steam credits are excluded. This compares favorably with the WTW emissions of 90.5 gCO 2 e/MJ for a compression-ignition, direct injection (CIDI) vehicle with a fuel economy of 31.6 miles per gallon gasoline equivalent (MPGGE), using low-sulfur diesel produced using conventional petroleum production and refining processes. Several NPPs in various regions of the U.S. are considered as case study analyses. Supply locations and transportation via pipeline of the CO 2 feedstock to the NPP site are analyzed through the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) CO 2 Transport Cost model. The team finds that the amount of CO 2 generated by different sectors is sufficient for the synfuel production process at all locations considered. The CO 2 transportation costs are functions of the distance of the source to the NPP location, the CO 2 capture cost at the source, and the quantity of CO 2 transported. Historical electricity prices for the NPP case study locations are collected and analyzed. Monthly average prices, price range, and duration of negative-price periods vary among these locations. For each location, an auto-regressive moving average (ARMA) model is trained on historical electricity price data. ARMA validation is done to ensure the synthetic price distributions represent one of historical prices with high fidelity. Synthetic time series from these ARMA models are used in a coupled dispatch and system optimization in the Holistic Energy Resource Optimization Network (HERON) to compute the differential net present value (NPV) of the IES. The team finds that this econometric is positive, ranging from $14M–1.3bn (2020) depending on the location. The optimal synfuel IES configuration to obtain this increase in NPV often maximizes the size of the synfuel production process with regards to the size of the NPP. However, the team shows that the NPP still plays a stabilizing role for the grid: In periods of high prices and high loads, more electricity from the NPP is sent to the grid. A high variability of electricity prices and extreme maximum prices tend to drive up electricity production. While it requires significant investment, the synfuel IES could increase the economic profitability for the existing fleet of LWRs across the country while still maintaining the grid stabilizer role of NPPs. During its lifetime, the main costs for the nuclear synfuel IES are the carbon feedstock transportation costs, followed by the capital expenses (CAPEX) and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs while the revenue comes first from the IRA H 2 production tax credit (PTC) and then from the sales of synfuel products. The profitability of the synfuel IES is most sensitive to the value of the hydrogen PTC and the synfuel products as well as the cost of the carbon feedstock, highlighting the importance of governmental incentives regarding hydrogen, carbon emissions, and synfuel in driving the deployment of future nuclear synfuel IESs.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2020

The Cost of Floating Offshore Wind Energy in California Between 2019 and 2032

California’s energy planning is centered around meeting the emissions reduction and renewable energy requirements of Senate Bill 350 by 2030. However, state power system planning is expected to eventually address California’s requirement to achieve 100% of total retail electricity sales from renewable energy and zero-carbon resources by 2045, as mandated by Senate Bill 100. To comply with these directives, California needs to investigate the further development of energy efficiency, storage, and a diverse range of renewable energy, zero-carbon emission, and transmission resources, including offshore wind. Wind resources off the coast of California have the potential to generate a significant portion of the state’s electric energy as it moves toward a zero-carbon economy and can help diversify its energy mix. Floating offshore wind technology, which is suitable for the deep waters along the California coast, is currently in a precommercial phase, with approximately 84 megawatts (MW) installed worldwide at the end of 2019. Globally there are over 7,000 MW in planning and permitting phases of development, with the first commercial-scale projects expected to be operational in 2024. This study provides site-specific cost and performance data for floating offshore wind to inform California’s long-term energy planning. The identification of new resources to meet California’s policy goals at least cost is part of the Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) process, which is coordinated by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). In 2019–2020 IRP modeling, offshore wind was included for the first time as a candidate resource in some sensitivity cases (CPUC 2019). The data and information presented in this report can be used to update offshore wind inputs in future IRP cycles. The authors conducted a geospatial cost analysis over portions of the offshore wind resource area of California. The analyzed spatial domain includes sites with a mean wind speed of at least 7 meters per second and water depths between 40 meters (m) and 1,300 m. Costs and energy production vary across this analysis domain. We calculated these parameters on a grid layout with over 750 sites, with each site representing a 1,000-MW commercial offshore wind power plant. Levelized cost of energy (LCOE) was calculated at each site over the analysis domain. The resulting variation in LCOE across the analysis domain is illustrated through heat maps in this report. Five study areas were selected within the analysis domain where more detailed cost analysis was conducted and cost parameters, such as annual energy production, capital cost expenditures (CapEx), operational cost expenditures (OpEx), and net capacity factors are reported. These five study areas include Morro Bay, Diablo Canyon, Humboldt, Cape Mendocino and Del Norte.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Basic Energy Sciences Roundtable: Foundational Science for Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies (Brochure)

Basic research to identify and understand the fundamental principles governing carbon dioxide removal processes of capture, conversion, and storage is essential for achieving zero carbon emissions by 2050. In March 2022, the Office of Basic Energy Sciences (BES)—in coordination with the US Department of Energy (DOE) technology Offices of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, and Nuclear Energy—held a roundtable titled, “Foundational Science for Carbon Dioxide Removal Technologies,” to discuss the scientific and technical barriers for CO 2 capture, conversion, and storage. Five priority research opportunities were identified to address these scientific and technical challenges and accelerate progress toward the realization of zero carbon emissions. The PROs are as follows: 1) Master Interfacial Processes of CO2 Transport and Reactivity Across Multiple Length and Time Scales; 2) Create Materials that Simultaneously Exhibit Multiple Properties for CO 2 Capture and Release or Conversion; 3) Discover Unconventional Pathways for Energy-Efficient CO 2 Capture, Release, and Conversion; 4) Control Multiphase Interactions Required for CO 2 Conversion into Minerals and Materials; and 5) Achieve Predictive Understanding of Coupled Processes in Complex Subsurface Geologic Systems for Secure Carbon Storage.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Power Technologies for Rail Decarbonization Workshop: Summary Report

Argonne National Laboratory organized the Power Technologies for Rail Decarbonization Workshop for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Vehicle Technologies Office. The workshop offered an inclusive venue for different stakeholders to convey their perspective on challenges and opportunities in decarbonizing the rail sector. The first day of the workshop focused on (1) rail decarbonization efforts in the DOE and collaboration opportunities, (2) technology pathways to decarbonize rail, and (3) prime mover and low-carbon options for rail. The second day was devoted to (1) prime mover and zero-carbon options for rail, and (2) rail logistics, infrastructure, and safety. Each day raised challenges and solutions through presentations from national leaders and discussions among panel members and the audience. Through this engagement with different stakeholders, we will produce a cross-disciplinary recommendation for the role of government agencies to contribute meaningful research to address current technology gaps. The workshop included up 139 active participants and featured keynote speakers and panelists from Association of American Railroads, Progress Rail Locomotive, Wabtec, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, Amtrak, Caterpillar, Cummins, Renewable Energy Group-Chevron, DOE’s Bioenergy Technologies Office, California Air Resources Board, Federal Railroad Administration and multiple DOE national laboratories. This summary report presents highlights from participant discussions covering the topics of technology pathways to decarbonize rail, prime mover and low-carbon options, prime mover and zero-carbon options, as well as rail logistics, infrastructure, and safety. The variety of input gathered from the stakeholder attendees is vital, as it helps inform DOE on rail decarbonization challenges and opportunities. Stakeholder feedback is balanced against DOE strategic directions and priorities with consideration of the roles of government and industry.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Techno-economic performances and life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of various ammonia production pathways including conventional, carbon-capturing, nuclear-powered, and renewable production

Ammonia (NH 3 ) is conventionally produced using fossil natural gas (NG) for hydrogen production through steam reformation and synthesis in the Haber–Bosch (HB) process. The global conventional ammonia production contributes more than 420 million tons of CO 2 emissions annually. Here, in this work, we investigated the techno-economics and well-to-plant-gate (WTG) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of conventional NG-based, carbon-capturing, nuclear-powered, and renewable ammonia production by developing an engineering process model for each. Carbon-capturing ammonia production refers to the NG-based ammonia production while capturing CO 2 and transporting it via pipelines for storage or utilization. Nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia production represents an alternative ammonia production through water electrolysis, air separation, and the HB process using carbon-free energy sources. Nuclear and renewable energy sources are assumed to be used for nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia production, respectively. Sensitivity analyses are performed for CO 2 pipeline transport distances, potential carbon capture tax credits, and clean H 2 production cost. Carbon-capturing ammonia production reduces WTG GHG emissions by 55–70% compared to conventional NG-based ammonia production methods. Nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia production almost eliminate GHG emissions since energy supply is either zero carbon or near-zero carbon. However, when $4.16–4.83 per kg is the cost assumed for clean H 2 production using state-of-the-art electrolysis technologies, the levelized costs of nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia are calculated to be $0.92–1.06 per kg NH 3 , which are approximately four times higher than the conventional NG-based ammonia production cost. The cost of CO 2 emission avoidance is estimated in the range of $266–318 per metric ton of CO 2 for nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia production. The clean H 2 production cost is the major contributor to the levelized costs of nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia production. A lower production cost, near $1 per kg H 2 , for clean H 2 is required for nuclear-powered and renewable ammonia production to be cost-competitive with conventional NG-based ammonia production.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2022

Carbon footprint prediction considering the evolution of alternative fuels and cargo: A case study of Yangtze river ships

For reducing carbon emissions in the shipping sector, application of alternative low-carbon and zero-carbon fuels is the consensus. However, requirements of economic development cannot be ignored while focusing on emission reduction. Cargo development is an important prerequisite. Considering the cargo growth as a novelty, a method to calculate the annual carbon emissions of different alternative fuel-powered ships in different cargo growth prospects and power scenarios is proposed. With respect to the time dimension, the relationship between alternative fuels, cargo, and carbon reduction is revealed. The Yangtze River bulk carrier case was studied and the life cycle carbon emission analysis of diesel, LNG hybrid, LNG, hydrogen, methanol, and ammonia were carried out. The annual carbon curves of the high, steady, and low cargo growth prospects were obtained for different scenarios of the power system structure. The results show that LNG hybrid, LNG and methanol fuels are currently the suitable choices. Their life cycle carbon emissions were reduced by 31.5–38.1% compared with those of diesel power. The carbon emissions of green hydrogen and green ammonia were reduced by 78.8% and 91.3%, respectively, compared with those of hydrogen and ammonia. The carbon reduction results of green fuels in their initial application were explored which are at 0.6–10.8%. In addition, there is a balanced annual growth rate, whose annual carbon curve will be steady under its corresponding scenario of power system structure, which could help the ship owners plan their future.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2021

Enabling Power System Transformation Globally: A System Operator Research Agenda for Bulk Power System Issues

The primary objective of a power system is to safely provide reliable energy services to society at an affordable cost. In many countries, this objective has been supplemented by another: meeting the energy demand with sustainable resources, which has culminated in the energy transition to low-carbon and zero-carbon energy systems. This transition, occurring rapidly around the world, is characterized by the increasing penetration of variable renewable energy (VRE), inverter-based resources (IBRs), and distributed energy resources (DERs).

costs↗
DOE OSTI2023

Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) Plant Optimization Study for the California Power Market (CalCSP)

In the United States, many states are implementing goals to achieve 100% carbon free power generation by 2050 or sooner. California has one of the more aggressive goals to achieve 100% carbon free generation of its retail power sales by 2045. California has excellent solar resources, but to accomplish this goal, California’s power utilities will need new zero carbon resources that can replace the natural gas units that they currently rely on for suppling power at night. Appropriately configured concentrating solar power plants with thermal energy storage are an option to serve this nighttime load. These plants would be designed to take advantage of CSP’s low-cost thermal energy storage and collect and store energy during the day and then be dispatched to produce power at night. The U.S. Department of Energy has funded a study to identify the design of a CSP plant that optimally meets the evolving CA grid needs. This will be done by taking a fresh look at how CSP technologies can best be designed to meet the emerging nighttime market for carbon free power generation or zero-carbon firm resources. The paper provides an overview of the study and present preliminary findings on the California power market requirements, CSP configurations, technoeconomic analysis, siting opportunities, and key issues for CSP deployment in this market.

Price, Hank (ORCID:0000000267049197)↗
DOE OSTI2022

Status Report 2: Advanced Nuclear Reactors Utilized for Synthetic Fuel Creation

Synthetic fuels (synfuels) are hydrocarbon fuels that source energy from electricity. Synfuels have the potential to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions throughout the transportation sector. To achieve this substantial reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, the electricity must be sourced from zero- or near-zero-carbon fuel sources such as solar, wind, hydroelectricity, and nuclear power. Synfuels are produced from a combination of carbon and hydrogen sources. Hydrogen can be sourced from water electrolysis with near-zero-carbon electricity and heat (e.g., nuclear), while carbon dioxide can be sourced from ethanol and ammonia plants. In the hydrocarbon fuel synthesis process, hydrogen and carbon dioxide can be reacted to produce carbon monoxide and water, via the so-called reverse watergas shift reaction. Carbon monoxide can then react with additional hydrogen to form hydrocarbons, with carbon chains ranging from C1–C30 in the reaction known as the Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) synthesis reaction. The synthesized hydrocarbon molecules can then be hydro-processed with additional hydrogen and distilled into different carbon chain lengths so as to be compatible with existing conventional gasoline, jet, and diesel fuels. Carbon-free synfuel production comes with a “green premium” over the manufacture of identical products via conventional fossil fuels. Reports from Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) reveal that hydrogen costs dominate the cost of carbon-free synfuel production. This suggests that for the cost of green synfuel to approach that of conventional petroleum fuel, the cost of hydrogen must be approximately $\$1$/kg. Of the primary low-carbon energy sources, only nuclear carries the potential to produce hydrogen at below $\$2$/kg. (Still a bit above the lofty $\$1$/kg goal, but perhaps manageable). To further identify the potential for creating low-cost synfuels capable of competing with legacy technologies, the Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy has funded a multi-program, multi-lab effort among ANL, Idaho National Laboratory (INL), the Integrated Energy Systems (IES) program, and the Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) program. This collaboration effort will determine the possibility of using current and next generation nuclear reactors to create low-cost carbon-free synfuels for sale in the U.S. energy and commodities market.

10 SYNTHETIC FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2021

A hub and spoke approach to optimizing energy wheeling of renewable resources

The deployment of zero carbon renewable energy sources needs to increase significantly to support the goal of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. At the same time energy end use needs to decarbonize. This will change both energy supply and energy demand patterns, requiring the energy delivery infrastructure (grid-based transmission circuits) to become increasingly flexible to maintain security of supply everywhere and always. The integration of zero carbon renewable energy requires cross-border and cross energy system coupling and a fit-for-purpose design. Nowadays, energy systems are planned, designed and operated in silos with a strong national focus. However, large-scale offshore wind production needs to be transported to deep inland locations, across country borders. The increased peak generation capacity of renewable energy sources will, at times, significantly exceed demand (Matthew Langholtz, 2020). The traditional solution of continuously reinforcing and extending the electricity grid is not sustainable from a cost and societal perspective. This paper will, however, propose a deterministic approach on how networked (interconnected grid) Points of receipt (POR) to Points of Delivery (POD) can be optimized for wheeling renewable energy resources while minimizing energy cost with a hub and spoke approach. The statistical approach will be done via using existing daily energy market clearing prices, available transmission capacity and firm daily transmission prices in open access energy markets. Renewable energy targets, including specific offshore wind targets, need to be in line with the ramp-up as implied by the Paris Agreement. These targets are required to provide industry with a secure market outlook that allows them to build up supply chains accordingly. Optimizing wheeled energy paths from carbon neutral resources such as renewables make them not only cost competitive on the unit commitment stack, but also more accessible on the dispatch stack to other carbon heavy forms of generation such as coal and natural gas turbines (Matthew Langholtz, 2020). This correlates to maximizing renewable resource inertia (wind, solar, biomass) within an interconnected grid without having to consider additional expansion of resources via land purchases and de-forestation.

Mukherjee, Srijib↗
DOE OSTI2023

The Role of Hydropower Flexibility in Integrating Renewables in a Low-Carbon Grid

In this study, we looked at the role of hydropower flexibility in variable renewable energy (VRE) integration. Our focus was on facilities that have at least ten hours of storage, i.e., plants that are "dispatchable" and have capacity values similar to that of fossil-fired generation. For our modeling framework, we used NREL's Mid-Case/95% Carbon Reduction by 2035 standard scenario as our foundation. This zonal model is representative of the buildout of a near-zero carbon policy grid in an otherwise "business-as-usual" policy and economic environment. We chose this scenario because it aligns well with the Administration's net-zero carbon grid by 2035 goal.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Transitioning Coal Power Plants to Nuclear Power

Most large U.S. power companies are setting zero-carbon-emission goals and is a reflection of utility commitments to carbon reduction and policies at the Federal and State levels. Increasing the rate of coal power plant (CPP) retirements has been seen across the industry. Previous transitions of coal to gas fuel are becoming less desirable as having zero carbon emissions become ever more import. As CPPs are retired, a reliable and affordable zero-emission power replacement is desired. Nuclear power plants (NPP) is the only existing dispatchable and clean source of energy that can directly replace a CPP. The report covers different factors that affect CPP to NPP projects.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Same Goal, Different Pathways for Energy Transition: A More Holistic, Multisector, Community-Driven Approach

Low- and zero-carbon power systems are central to global decarbonization efforts. Costs for renewable energy (RE) and storage have fallen significantly, and advances in technologies and practices have improved the grid flexibility and stability needed to maintain the reliability of high-RE systems. Zero-carbon power systems, in turn, enable deep decarbonization through the electrification of other sectors, including transportation, buildings, and industry.

100% clean electricity↗
DOE OSTI2022

Queued Up: Characteristics of Power Plants Seeking Transmission Interconnection As of the End of 2021 [Slides]

Proposed large-scale electric generation and storage projects must apply for interconnection to the bulk power system via interconnection queues. While most projects that apply for interconnection are not subsequently built, data from these queues nonetheless provide a general indicator for mid-term trends in developer interest. Berkeley Lab compiled and analyzed data from all seven ISOs/RTOs in concert with 35 non-ISO utilities, representing an estimated 85% of all U.S. electricity load. We include all "active" projects in these generation interconnection queues through the end of 2021, as well as data on "operational" and "withdrawn" projects where those data are available. We find that the amount of new electric capacity in these queues is growing dramatically, with over 1,400 gigawatts (GW) of total generation and storage capacity now seeking connection to the grid (over 90% of which is for zero-carbon resources like solar, wind, and battery storage). Solar (676 GW) and battery storage (~420 GW) are – by far – the fastest growing resources in the queues; combined they accounted for nearly 85% of new capacity entering the queues in 2021. Substantial wind (247 GW) capacity is also seeking interconnection, 31% of which is for offshore projects (77 GW). In total, about 930 GW of zero-carbon generating capacity is currently seeking transmission access, as is 74 GW of natural gas capacity. Hybrids now comprise a large – and increasing – share of proposed projects, particularly in CAISO and the non-ISO West. 286 GW of solar hybrids (primarily solar+battery) and 19 GW of wind hybrids are currently active in the queues; nearly half of battery storage in the queues is paired with generation. However, much of this proposed capacity will be withdrawn from the queues and not built. Among a subset of queues for which data are available, only 23% of the projects seeking connection from 2000 to 2016 have subsequently been built. Completion percentages appear to be declining and are even lower for wind and solar than other resources. Additionally, wait times are on the rise: for the regions with available data, the typical duration from connection request to commercial operation increased from ~2.1 years for projects built in 2000-2010 to ~3.7 years for those built in 2011-2021.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗