Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “STORAGE”

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 559 records · Page 31
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Transport and Storage Planning and Viability Support Tools

The EDX disCO2ver Carbon Transport and Storage Planning and Viability Support Tools are made up of the Carbon Storage Planning Inquiry Tool (CS PlanIT, Justman et al. 2024) and the Carbon Storage Technical Viability Approach Support Tool (CS TVA). Together, these tools support data access to support understanding data availability to support planning efforts for carbon transport and storage. The Carbon Storage Planning Inquiry Tool (CS PlanIT) is an online web mapping application designed to help users explore, query, and evaluate multiple data layers to support and accelerate carbon storage resource and feasibility assessments and planning efforts. CS PlanIT currently contains a range of datasets associated with geologic, technical, and infrastructure factors. The data sets can be filtered geographically for an area of interest to update statistics and charts within the dashboard. The dashboard is divided into different sections called widgets, relating to different steps in the carbon storage planning process. The resources in this submission include a link to PlanIT, as well as a data catalog and link to user documentation. The original citation for the CS PlanIT tool, which has now been integrated into the toolset here, was: - Devin Justman, Scott Pantaleone, Maneesh Sharma, Lucy Romeo, Paige Morkner, CS PlanIT (Carbon Storage Planning Inquiry Tool) , 6/28/2024, https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/cs-planit-carbon-storage-planning-inquiry-tool, DOI: 10.18141/2377953 The Carbon Storage Technical Viability Approach Support (CS TVA) Tool displays spatial data availability for the many components of Geologic Carbon Storage (GCS) technical viability assessment (Creason al 2025). Identifying sites suitable for GCS requires evaluating the intersection of myriad factors, including reservoir conditions, subsurface and surface hazards, infrastructure requirements, and energy community metrics. The technical viability of a site can only be confirmed for instances where all these factors have data available, and where those data support viability. Additional Resources related to the Technical Viability Assessment Tool: - Julia Mulhern, Casey White, Araceli Lara, Neyda Cordero Rodriguez, Zachary Jackson, Jacob Shay, Gabriel Creason, MacKenzie Mark-Moser, Paige Morkner, Kelly Rose, Carbon Storage Technical Viability Approach (CS TVA) Database, 3/26/2025, https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/edx4ccs-carbon-storage-technical-viability-approach-database , DOI:10.18141/1984655 - Julia Mulhern, MacKenzie Mark-Moser, Gabriel Creason, Casey White, Araceli Lara, Neyda Cordero Rodriguez, Zach Jackson, Paige Morkner, Kelly Rose, Carbon Storage Technical Viability Approach (CS TVA) Matrix, 3/27/2025, https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/carbon-storage-technical-viability-approach-cs-tva-matrix , DOI: 10.18141/2539979 - Gabriel Creason, Zach Jackson, Neyda Cordero Rodriguez, Julia Mulhern, Casey White, Araceli Lara, MacKenzie Mark-Moser, Paige Morkner, Kelly Rose, Carbon Storage Technical Viability Approach (CS TVA) Data Availability Results Database, 3/27/2025, https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/carbon-storage-technical-viability-approach-cs-tva-data-availability-results-database, DOI:10.18141/2538557

Carbon storage↗
DOE OSTI2023

Liquid Air Combined Cycle TM for Power and Storage

Liquid Air Combined Cycle (LACC) is a hybrid liquid air energy storage (LAES) system combining energy storage with a combustion turbine to enable large-scale, long-duration energy storage (LDES) while reducing fuel intensity compared to the current state-of-the-art. The LACC technical approach employs proven equipment (cryogenic refrigeration, storage, tanks, pumps, gas turbines, exhaust heat recovery equipment, and turbines) to limit technical risk to a novel organic Rankine cycle (ORC), which was evaluated during this project and found to be feasible. Moreover, LACC storage is safe and relatively compact, to facilitate siting close to loads and within metropolitan regions. The air storage medium is freely available and eliminates supply chain constraints. LACC uses cryogenic air as a storage medium and a gas turbine as the source of heat to drive the discharge process. LACC is distinguished from other LAES technologies by several factors. The charge and discharge processes are decoupled so that cryogenic liquid air is the only storage medium. Other systems also store the higher temperature thermal energy from the liquefaction process in an additional medium. Subsequently, LACC focuses on maximization of the discharge energy and power. LACC also permits the use of commercially available cryogenic refrigeration and storage technologies to increase competition. This project identified product requirements to support market entry and commercialization of the LACC in modular units of approximately 117 MW, each drawing liquid air from customary cryogenic storage tanks capable of storing 75 GWh of dispatchable energy, more than pumped storage hydro or compressed air energy storage technologies. An economic analysis identified the specific liquid air consumption (quantity of liquid air per unit of discharge energy) as a critical parameter. Minimizing the air consumption reduces the specific capital cost ($\$ $/kW) for charging and discharging equipment by reducing the size of piping and turbomachinery. Likewise, the specific cost of energy capacity ($\$ $/kWh) is reduced by increasing the energy deliverable from a given size tank. The cycle was analyzed to identify the optimal equipment selection and operating conditions, which in turn were combined with quotes and cost estimates to calculate the cost of energy from an LACC system. A substantial effort was focused on the ORC, which draws low-temperature heat from the gas turbine exhaust and condenses at low temperature using the cryogenic liquid air as a heat sink. Alternative turbomachinery arrangements were evaluated for feasibility and cost. A technology maturation plan lays out a low-risk approach to development of the novel ORC components and demonstration of LACC technology at pilot scale.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2015

Twenty years of dry interim storage of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in Germany- History and developments - 15575

According to article 6 of the German Atomic Energy Act, storage of nuclear fuel requires a license granted by the competent authority in this field, which is the Federal Office of Radiation Protection. In 1983 a license to store spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and later expanded for vitrified high level waste (HAW) for the interim storage facility in Gorleben was granted. Dry Interim storage at the NPP sites in its actual form started in 2002 in the interim storage facility next to the NPP Lingen. Since this time each NPP erected its own storage facility and three central storage facilities have been built. All of these facilities use dry storage in metallic casks. The actual storage licenses for SNF and the HAW (which is stored in Gorleben and Rubenow) are limited to 40 years starting with the first cask emplacement. As no opening of the cask is intended during the storage period the condition of the inventory and the cask before loading has to be known in detail. This requires for instance detailed knowledge of the history of the SNF loaded as well as supervision of the manufacturing process of the cask. Within the last twenty years several mishaps influenced the regulatory point of view. During a loading campaign in a boiling water reactor traces of pool water remained in the gasket slot and during the drying procedure crystalline boron salts prevented the required tightness. After that event a long-term experiment was started and is still going on which studies the effects of water and minor damages to the gasket. As well changes in the loading procedure have been introduced. The pressure switch used to monitor the pressure in the space between primary and secondary lid has a self surveillance function. This indicated a malfunction 23 times in the last twenty years. Examinations of all events indicated no systematic failure, but a weak point seems to be the plug-in connection. The manufacturer introduced some modifications to improve the system. Introduction of FEM methods in safety analysis to amend the existing methods of testing allowed a new view on and in the cask safety analysis. Progress in this field is closely connected to the available computing capacity and stipulates experts to ongoing improvement. After expiring of the storage license which will be the case for the first cask loaded in 1992 and stored in Ahaus 2032 an extension or a new license can only be granted if the at this time relevant requirements are met. This will require detailed knowledge about the happenings and accidents during the previous storage period. All experience of the periodic safety assessment (PSA) which started in 2013 and accompanying experiments conducted till now and during the licensed storage time will be needed. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2014

Subtask 2.17 - CO 2 Storage Efficiency in Deep Saline Formations

As the field of carbon capture and storage (CCS) continues to advance, and large-scale implementation of geologic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage progresses, it will be important to understand the potential of geologic formations to store meaningful amounts of CO 2 . Geologic CO 2 storage in deep saline formations (DSFs) has been suggested as one of the best potential methods for reducing anthropogenic CO 2 emission to the atmosphere, and as such, updated storage resource estimation methods will continue to be an important component for the widespread deployment of CCS around the world. While there have been several methodologies suggested in the literature, most of these methods are based on a volumetric calculation of the pore volume of the DSF multiplied by a storage efficiency term and do not consider the effect of site-specific dynamic factors such as injection rate, injection pattern, timing of injection, pressure interference between injection locations, and overall formation pressure buildup. These volumetric methods may be excellent for comparing the potential between particular formations or basins, but they have not been validated through real-world experience or full-formation injection simulations. Several studies have also suggested that the dynamic components of geologic storage may play the most important role in storing CO 2 in DSFs but until now have not directly compared CO 2 storage resource estimates made with volumetric methodologies to estimates made using dynamic CO 2 storage methodologies. In this study, two DSFs, in geographically separate areas with geologically diverse properties, were evaluated with both volumetric and dynamic CO 2 storage resource estimation methodologies to compare the results and determine the applicability of both approaches. In the end, it was determined that the dynamic CO 2 storage resource potential is timedependent and it asymptotically approaches the volumetric CO 2 storage resource potential over very long periods of time in the two systems that were evaluated. These results indicate that the volumetric assessments can be used as long as the appropriate storage efficiency terms are used and it is understood that it will take many wells over very long periods of time to fully realize the storage potential of a target formation. This subtask was funded through the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC)– U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Joint Program on Research and Development for Fossil Energy-Related Resources Cooperative Agreement No. DE-FC26-08NT43291. Nonfederal funding was provided by the IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2017

Optimizing and Quantifying CO 2 Storage Resource in Saline Formations and Hydrocarbon Reservoirs

In an effort to reduce carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from large stationary sources, carbon capture and storage (CCS) is being investigated as one approach. This work assesses CO 2 storage resource estimation methods for deep saline formations (DSFs) and hydrocarbon reservoirs undergoing CO 2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR). Project activities were conducted using geologic modeling and simulation to investigate CO 2 storage efficiency. CO 2 storage rates and efficiencies in DSFs classified by interpreted depositional environment were evaluated at the regional scale over a 100-year time frame. A focus was placed on developing results applicable to future widespread commercial-scale CO 2 storage operations in which an array of injection wells may be used to optimize storage in saline formations. The results of this work suggest future investigations of prospective storage resource in closed or semiclosed formations need not have a detailed understanding of the depositional environment of the reservoir to generate meaningful estimates. However, the results of this work also illustrate the relative importance of depositional environment, formation depth, structural geometry, and boundary conditions on the rate of CO 2 storage in these types of systems. CO 2 EOR occupies an important place in the realm of geologic storage of CO 2 , as it is likely to be the primary means of geologic CO 2 storage during the early stages of commercial implementation, given the lack of a national policy and the viability of the current business case. This work estimates CO 2 storage efficiency factors using a unique industry database of CO 2 EOR sites and 18 different reservoir simulation models capturing fluvial clastic and shallow shelf carbonate depositional environments for reservoir depths of 1219 and 2438 meters (4000 and 8000 feet) and 7.6-, 20-, and 64-meter (25-, 66,- and 209-foot) pay zones. The results of this work provide practical information that can be used to quantify CO 2 storage resource estimates in oil reservoirs during CO 2 EOR operations (as opposed to storage following depletion) and the uncertainty associated with those estimates.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

Southeast Offshore Storage Resource Assessment (SOSRA) (Final Technical Report)

Subsurface geologic storage of CO 2 can play a major role in offsetting greenhouse gas emissions in a manner that is safe, economical, and acceptable to the public. Due to legal advantages and potential vast resource capacity, offshore storage offers an attractive alternative to onshore storage. Indeed, the success of the Sleipner project in the North Sea demonstrates the technical feasibility of offshore storage as not only a viable option, but as an early opportunity for commercial deployment. Although the storage capacity of offshore reservoirs is expected to be vast, no comprehensive assessment of the offshore storage resource in the southeastern United States had been performed. In a preliminary analysis of a 10,000 mi 2 area of offshore Alabama and the western Florida Panhandle, Hills and Pashin (2010) suggested that about 170 Gt of CO 2 could be stored in Miocene sandstone and that at least 30 Gt could be stored in deeper Cretaceous formations. A task force convened by the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) and the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC) found that no assessment had been made of the offshore storage resource potential in the shelf areas of the Atlantic seaboard and the eastern Gulf of Mexico in the southeastern US. Considering that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that about 40% of anthropogenic CO 2 emissions in the US are generated in the southeast, the lack of an offshore CO 2 assessment constitutes a major gap in understanding of the regional storage resource. In order to address this significant gap in knowledge of the regional storage resources and geologic capacity the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) led a coalition of southern universities and technical experts to assess prospective geologic storage resources for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in the State and Federal waters of three planning areas: The Mid-Atlantic; The South Atlantic; and The eastern Gulf of Mexico. The Southeast Offshore Storage Resource Assessment (SOSRA) project developed a high-level approximation of the amount of CO 2 that might be stored utilizing key geologic and environmental factors which influence the storage potential. The research included significant advances in knowledge and technology that will facilitate assessment and quantification of offshore CO 2 storage resources in the SOSRA region and provide a pathway toward commercialization.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Transient dynamics of terrestrial carbon storage: Mathematical foundation and numeric examples

Terrestrial ecosystems absorb roughly 30% of anthropogenic CO 2 emissions since preindustrial era, but it is unclear whether this carbon (C) sink will endure into the future. Despite extensive modeling, experimental, and observational studies, what fundamentally determines transient dynamics of terrestrial C storage under climate change is still not very clear. Here we develop a new framework for understanding transient dynamics of terrestrial C storage through mathematical analysis and numerical experiments. Our analysis indicates that the ultimate force driving ecosystem C storage change is the C storage capacity, which is jointly determined by ecosystem C input (e.g., net primary production, NPP) and residence time. Since both C input and residence time vary with time, the C storage capacity is time-dependent and acts as a moving attractor that actual C storage chases. The rate of change in C storage is proportional to the C storage potential, the difference between the current storage and the storage capacity. The C storage capacity represents instantaneous responses of the land C cycle to external forcing, whereas the C storage potential represents the internal capability of the land C cycle to influence the C change trajectory in the next time step. The influence happens through redistribution of net C pool changes in a network of pools with different residence times. Furthermore, this and our other studies have demonstrated that one matrix equation can exactly replicate simulations of most land C cycle models (i.e., physical emulators). As a result, simulation outputs of those models can be placed into a three-dimensional (3D) parameter space to measure their differences. The latter can be decomposed into traceable components to track the origins of model uncertainty. Moreover, the emulators make data assimilation computationally feasible so that both C flux- and pool-related datasets can be used to better constrain model predictions of land C sequestration. We also propose that the C storage potential be the targeted variable for research, market trading, and government negotiation for C credits.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1995

Fuel cell systems for First Lunar Outpost-reactant storage option

The office of Space, DOE, appointed a Lunar Surface Power Working Group to review candidate systems for the First Lunar Outpost habitat. The working group met for a total of five days in the fall of 1992 and concluded that the candidate involving a photovoltaic unit, a fuel cell, a regenerator to recycle the reactants, and storage of oxygen and hydrogen gases was the most attractive for this application. Most of the volume (97 percent) and weight (63 percent) are taken up by the reactants and their storage tanks. Therefore, in my work for the Group, and in this report, I have concentrated on finding ways to reduce these volumes and weights. Three options were considered: (1) the baseline case considered in the preliminary system design, that of separate high pressure (200 bar) storage tanks; (2) the use of two of the descent storage propellant tanks wrapped with graphite fibers to increase the pressure capability; and (3) the use of cryogenic storage of reactants in the propellant tanks. The first option results in high storage tank mass and volume. The second option saves 90 percent of the volume by making use of the propellant tanks, but it has little if any weight advantages; the weight saved by not providing extra tanks for reactant storage is nearly entirely added back by the weight of the additional material (graphite fibers) to strengthen the propellant tanks. Use of the descent storage propellant tanks for storage of the fuel cell reactants as cryogenic liquids requires a gas liquefaction system. The weight of this system is expected to be less than that of the storage tanks but it would require development and testing to prove its reliability. The solar array would have to be 40 percent larger and the heat projection range would be 170 percent larger than for storage of reactants as high pressure gases. For a high power system (greater than 20 kW) the larger energy storage requirement would probably favor the cryogenic storage option.

Nelson, P. A.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Economic viability of using thermal energy storage for flexible carbon capture on natural gas power plants

Fossil fuel-based power plants generate 80% of the electricity in the United States and provide a reliable generation source for both base and peak power demands. These plants are expected to adapt to changes in environmental policies that will require carbon management with carbon capture and storage (CCS) representing a possible solution. Current solvent-based CCS has a detrimental impact on a power plant's performance due to large heat loads required for carbon capture solvent regeneration. This parasitic load restricts the power plant's output and operation flexibility. Therefore, this study evaluates the feasibility of using thermal storage technologies for natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plants coupled with CCS to minimize the impact of solvent regeneration and enable the plant to operate at peak power output. Thermal storage can minimize the impact of CCS on the power plant by providing the heat load required for solvent regeneration during times of peak demand which will allow the plant to operate unrestricted and at full power. In total, fifteen unique thermal storage configurations were evaluated from three thermal storage categories: Brayton cycle heat pump, vapor compression heat pump, and heat recovery steam generator steam extraction for storage. The viability of these systems was determined by evaluating each configuration on thousands of real-world Locational Marginal Pricing (LMP) profiles from the New York Independent System Operator and California Independent System Operator electricity markets using a techno-economic analysis. Afterwards, results were compared to the performance of a base power plant (NGCC with CCS and no thermal storage) to determine the impact of thermal storage on power plant economics. Overall, six of the thermal storage configurations performed better than base CCS enabled power plant on between 11.5% and 38.7% of the LMP signals evaluated. The best performing configuration was a vapor compression heat pump that used flue gas as the working fluid and had both hot and cold thermal storage units. This configuration performed better than the base CCS power plant on 38.7% of the LMP profiles. The results of this study show thermal storage can mitigate the economic impact of carbon capture solvent regeneration on NGCC power plants. Discussion focuses on the impact of electricity pricing on the optimal thermal storage system, the advantages and disadvantages of the systems evaluated, and identifies limitations with the study.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2019

Assessment of options for the development of a stacked storage complex in the Northern Michigan Basin, USA

The Northern Michigan Basin (NMB) Carbon Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE) Integrated Pre-Feasibility Project is part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) CarbonSAFE initiative. Our objective of the NMB CarbonSAFE pre-feasibility project was to assess the feasibility of an integrated, commercial-scale carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage complex in the NMB, which includes one or more deep saline geologic formations with sufficient capacity to permanently store at least 50 million metric tons of CO 2 over a 20- to 30-year period. Subsurface injection of CO 2 into depleted oil reservoirs for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) was also evaluated in the pre-feasibility study as an additional geologic storage mechanism because there are hundreds of depleted pinnacle reef reservoirs in the NMB, along with an established CO 2 -EOR operation, a feature that distinguishes this area from most other locations in the United States. Additionally, these reefs are co-located with the most favorable saline formations in the basin – the St. Peter sandstone and the Bass Islands dolomite – making stacked storage a real possibility. The study demonstrates that there are multiple locations in the northern Michigan study area that could support a commercial-scale storage complex with either saline storage or associated storage via CO 2 -EOR in the depleted pinnacle reefs alone (i.e., each storage mechanism has sufficient capacity alone) or via a combination of the two storage mechanisms. The term stacked storage refers to the concept of using both mechanisms together, in the same area, to achieve the required storage capacity. Key sites were identified in the northern part of the southern Michigan Peninsula that had sufficient geologic storage, nearby CO 2 sources, a favorable social and economic setting, and a strong developed team.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Capacity Assessment and Cost Analysis of Geologic Storage of Hydrogen: A Case Study in Intermountain-West Region USA

Hydrogen is an integral component of the current energy transition roadmap to decarbonize the economy and create an environmentally-sustainable future. However, surface storage options (e.g., tanks) do not provide the required capacity or durability to deploy a regional or nationwide hydrogen economy. In this study, we have analyzed the techno-economic feasibility of the geologic storage of hydrogen in depleted gas reservoirs, salt caverns, and saline aquifers in the Intermountain-West (I-WEST) region. We have identified the most favorable candidate sites for hydrogen storage and estimated the volumetric storage capacity. Our results show that the geologic storage of hydrogen can provide at least 72% of total energy consumption of the I-WEST region in 2020. We also calculated the capital and levelized costs of each storage option. We found that a depleted gas reservoir is the most cost-effective candidate among the three geologic storage options. Interestingly, the cushion gas type plays a significant role in the storage cost when we consider hydrogen storage in saline aquifers. The levelized costs of hydrogen storage in depleted gas reservoirs, salt caverns, and saline aquifers with large-scale storage capacity are approximately $\$$1.15, $\$$2.50, and $\$$3.27 per kg of H 2 , respectively. Here, this work provides essential guidance for the geologic hydrogen storage in the I-WEST region.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2019

Developments in the Regulatory Framework of Nuclear Waste Management in Germany - Licensing Procedures for storage of SNF and Public Involvement - 19612

According to article 6 of the German Atomic Energy Act (AtG), storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel requires a license. The competent licensing authority in this field is the Federal Office for Safety of Nuclear Waste Management (BfE). According to the Act for selecting a repository site for heat-generating radioactive waste (HAW) (Site Selection Act - StandAG) dating from 2017, BfE has been assigned the task of developing, conducting, and evaluating public participation procedures in the process of site search and selection for a deep geological repository for radioactive waste and SNF. Article 6 AtG applies to interim storage of SNF. If the legally defined licensing conditions by article 6 (2) AtG are met, the storage license applied for has to be granted. For on-site facilities, interim storage has been limited to 40 years. The licensing procedures for interim storage of SNF are carried out in accordance with the general administrative procedural rules. In certain cases due to the Environmental Impact Assessment Act (EIA Act), an EIA has to be carried out. In these cases, a formalized licensing procedure including an involvement of the public is conducted. The Nuclear Licensing Procedure Ordinance (AtVfV) originating from 1977 and reformulated in 1995 defines formalized rules for the public participation procedure which have to be followed strictly. These include a public hearing. The risen objections are evaluated by the licensing authority and taken account of in the licensing decision. The process of repository site selection defined by the StandAG exceeds these formalized procedures significantly: The objective of this process is to achieve a broad social consensus about the site selection procedure and about a repository site that will offer the best possible safety for one million years. Therefore, the process has to be particularly transparent, and involvement of the public - including newly developed forms of public involvement - is an essential part of it. BfE as competent authority in both the fields of repository site search and selection and licensing of interim storage of SNF has recently developed new strategies of involving the public concerning interim storage of SNF. Supplementing the standard licensing procedures, BfE presently informs and involves the public about topical issues regarding the present state and recent developments in the field of interim storage of SNF. Current central topics are for example the return of HAW and MAW from reprocessing of SNF in France and UK as well as perspective longer interim storage periods on the interface with final disposal. Regarding longer interim storage, host communities of interim storage facilities are concerned that interim storage might be extended indefinitely. Additionally, there is a strong fear of transports of radioactive waste and SNF from one place to another. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Energy Storage Technologies and U.S. Department of War Requirements

This report offers an overarching primer the energy storage market and assessment of each technology’s suitability for U.S. Department of War applications. We find that battery energy storage is the most promising technology for energy storage applications in terms of energy density and cost. While commercial and advanced Li-ion can satisfy certain electric mobility (e.g., cars, midsized vehicles) and electric flight application (e.g. drones) needs of DoW, next generation technologies like Li metal solid-state batteries, and conversion chemistries (Li-air, Li-CFx) are needed for heavy duty applications like armored vehicles, tanks, airplanes, jets. Batteries should also be supplemented with technologies such as supercapacitors and next-generation flywheels to provide short bursts of high energy for high power needs. Thermal energy storage solutions (sensible and latent heat) and fuel cells (PEMFC and SOFC) are good alternatives for supporting energy storage applications in terms of energy density and cost. Gravity-based energy storage promises the least energy density with high cost and should only be used for niche DoW applications. Of the different gravity energy storage technologies reviewed, pumped-hydro, flywheel, and compressed air energy storage are promising, while solid gravity energy storage appears the least attractive. Military facilities requiring 14 days of energy storage can benefit from flow batteries, especially commercial VFRBs and next generation iron-air systems. While VFRBs are expensive, iron-air batteries have the coupled benefits of low cost and good energy density promising 100+ hours of storage.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2026

Multi-system analysis of offshore geologic carbon storage: a review of open-source data science solutions

Geologic carbon storage projects are maturing worldwide and the footprint of deployment in the offshore is expanding. At present, there are ten projects in operation or that have been completed, more than 50 in construction and development, and dozens of characterization studies completed or underway. Offshore geologic carbon storage offers potential benefits over onshore geologic carbon storage. These offshore projects are generally remote in location, distant from population centers, and avoid complicated pore space rights while having abundant prospective storage potential. Some offshore fields targeted for carbon storage have comparatively fewer prior borehole penetrations except for areas that have been explored for petroleum production, minimizing potential issues such as pressure interference and infrastructure impacts. Yet offshore geologic carbon storage projects face distinctive technical and economic challenges, such as seafloor geohazards (e.g., seabed instability), expensive maritime transport, and meteorological-oceanographic conditions that can damage infrastructure and impact operations. Analytical capabilities and improved computational speeds have advanced engineering, earth and energy sciences in the wake of the arrival of modern data science over the last decade. These advancements have created an opportunity for integrated, multi-systems modeling approaches utilizing artificial intelligence and machine learning that are no longer limited by computational issues. Analytical tools developed alongside this advancement in data science can be leveraged to calibrate the potential advantages and challenges of carbon storage operations in the offshore. New methods and approaches that incorporate data science to analyze multiple aspects of engineered and natural systems can provide insights that complement the characterization and onsite engineering that traditional commercial and operational software addresses. These new methods and approaches can potentially improve the outcome of energy operations and carbon storage. Providing multi-system, science-driven data analytics enhances the knowledge base that offshore developers, operators, and regulatory bodies may draw from to improve offshore site selection and operational efficiency. Here, we provide a brief synopsis of geologic carbon storage efforts to date, an overview of the engineered and natural systems involved in offshore geologic carbon storage, and a review of publicly available, open-source, offshore and/or carbon storage related data- and science-driven tools developed by 2010 or later that are suitable for screening and assessing regions for offshore geologic carbon storage.

artificial intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2021

Optimal energy storage portfolio for high and ultrahigh carbon-free and renewable power systems

Achieving 100% carbon-free or renewable power systems can be facilitated by the deployment of energy storage technologies at all timescales, including short-duration, long-duration, and seasonal scales; however, most current literature focuses on cost assessments of energy storage for a given timescale or type of technology. In this work, we use an optimization framework with high spatial and temporal resolution to simultaneously assess the variable renewable power deployment and the optimal storage portfolio for seven independent system operators in the United States. Results indicate that achieving high (75–90%) and ultrahigh (>90%) energy mixes requires combining several flexibility options, including renewable curtailment, short-duration, long-duration, and seasonal storage. For instance, carbon-free and renewable energy mix targets of up to 80% are achieved with economic curtailment and a combination of short- and long-duration energy storage for the performance and cost assumptions used. After that, there is a point between 80% and 95% where seasonal storage becomes cost-competitive, depending on the specific power system. Moreover, our results indicate that storage-to-storage operation—one storage device used to charge another storage device—and the decoupling of charging and discharging storage power capacity are cost-effective options for the integration of high and ultrahigh shares of carbon-free or renewable power sources. Additionally, the results from this study show that an 85% carbon-free or renewable energy mix can be achieved at a cost of avoided CO 2 emissions of US$66.0 per tonne or less, regardless of the power system.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Techno-Economic Analysis of Green Hydrogen Energy Storage in a Cryogenic Flux Capacitor

Abstract The Cryogenic Flux Capacitor (CFC) is a cold, dense energy storage core that is being studied in the cryo-compressed, about 300 bar and 80K, region of gaseous hydrogen (GH2) storage and liquid hydrogen (LH2) region near the normal boiling point. Hydrogen storage is improved by physically bonding the molecules within the nanoscale pores of the aerogel composite blanket material. The process of bonding or debonding is governed by principles of physical adsorption (physisorption) and thermodynamics. The large surface area afforded by the nanoporous aerogel (∼1,000 m2/g) allows its storage performance to easily exceed capacities of high-pressure GH2 storage for an equivalent volume. With the integrated aerogel, subscale tests have shown that storage is increased by about 36% over a simple tank filled with GH2 at the same operating temperature and pressure. For LH2 conditions, the CFC is shown to operate at improved densities, but testing is ongoing. For the techno-economic analysis (TEA), the source of hydrogen is compared between onsite steam methane reforming (SMR) and onsite solar photovoltaic (PV) panels providing power to electrolyzers to produce green GH2. The TEA compares pure hydrogen produced at a small scale for a 25 MW power system and at a large scale in a 500 MW power system. The system allowed for hydrogen imports and exports at a set price with a tank sized for 10 hours of power production. The two power producing technologies are a combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) and hydrogen fuel cells. The SMR system uses natural gas as an input and includes a carbon capture and storage (CCS) system. The levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), levelized cost of hydrogen (LCOH), and levelized cost of storage (LCOS) are developed based on the capital cost and operating cost of the systems. The results are shown for current costs using a 2021 benchmark and DOE projections for cost improvements by 2030. The TEA showed that onsite hydrogen generation from SMR has an LCOH of about 1.4 to 2 USD per kg over the life of the plant and the PV hydrogen production LCOH is about 5.2 to 5.5 USD per kg. The LCOS of conventional GH2 systems is estimated to be $210/MWh and cost of storage for LH2 systems is $205/MWh for fuel cell systems and $249/MWh for CCGT systems. CFC improved the LCOS of all these systems to $198/MWh, $191/MWh and $233/MWh respectively. The LCOE also improved with conventional systems between $171/MWh and $228/MWh improved by CFC to between $167/MWh and $212/MWh. Using projections for improvement in costs following DOE’s goals by 2030, green hydrogen improved to as low as $78/MWh LCOS and LCOE for conventional cases. CFC improved over conventional storage with the lowest LCOS being $62/MWh and the lowest LCOE being $73/MWh. These results correspond to an LCOH of $2/kg. Finally, the TEA shows how LCOE is improved for hydrogen conditioning and storage over conventional systems and caverns in the 10 to 50 hour range.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2019

Initial Performance Evaluation and Ranking of Thermal Energy Storage Options for Light Water Reactor Integration to Support Modeling and Simulation

This report provides an in-depth analysis of current thermal storage technologies in the marketplace as of 2019 and develops a phenomenological identification ranking table (PIRT) and Figure of Merit (FOM) study for near-term thermal energy storage technologies with light water reactor technology. Particular focus was given the NuScale reactor as part of the Joint Use Modular Plant (JUMP) program between INL, NuScale, and the Utah Associated Municipal Project (UAMPs). Ancillary service industries and technologies are explored in detail to ascertain thermodynamic requirements for integration with thermal energy storage technologies. These industries include steel manufacturing, hydrogen production, desalination, pulp and paper manufacturing. It was determined that a large percentage of these industries can make use of existing nuclear output temperatures and pressures. Storage technologies that can maintain these values are advantageous for coupling purposes. The report then analyzes ten thermal energy storage technologies, with thirteen specific systems discussed in detail regarding their potential to integrate with LWR technology. A ranking tool identified important characteristics of thermal storage and ranked each of the technologies. Concrete, molten salt, and thermal oil sensible heat storages, and steam accumulators evaluated highly. After including cost estimations and qualitatively comparing these technologies, it is recommended that either molten salt or thermal oil is used for implementation with the JUMP module. The TES project cost will likely cost between $14,000,000 and $50,000,000. The potential flexibility of a two-tank sensible heat storage system should be able to demonstrate various new uses for nuclear heat. From power peaking via steam or liquid air heat topping to process heat applications, a two-tank system should be able to best provide a constant power transfer capability to the auxiliary energy consumer. Through commencement of this work, a more refined thermal storage selection process for Nuscale and existing nuclear power plants can be conducted. The ranking system developed here can be used to re-evaluate the energy storage options periodically depending on the projected installation dates. Current results suggest two-tank thermal energy storage is the most relevant technology in the near-term.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Progress and prospects of thermo-mechanical energy storage – A critical review

The share of electricity generated by intermittent renewable energy sources is increasing (now at 26% of global electricity generation) and the requirements of affordable, reliable and secure energy supply designate grid-scale storage as an imperative component of most energy transition pathways. The most widely deployed bulk energy storage solution is pumped-hydro energy storage (PHES), however, this technology is geographically constrained. Alternatively, flow batteries are location independent and have higher energy densities than PHES, but remain associated with high costs and low lifetimes, which highlights the importance of developing and utilizing additional larger-scale, longer-duration and long-lifetime energy storage alternatives. Here, we review a class of promising bulk energy storage technologies based on thermo-mechanical principles, which includes: compressed-air energy storage (CAES), liquid-air energy storage (LAES) and pumped-thermal electricity storage (PTES). The thermodynamic principles upon which these thermo-mechanical energy storage (TMES) technologies are based are discussed and a synopsis of recent progress in their development is presented, assessing their ability to provide reliable and cost-effective solutions. The current performance and future prospects of TMES systems are examined within a unified framework and a thermoeconomic analysis is conducted to explore their competitiveness relative to each other as well as when compared to PHES and flow battery systems. This includes carefully selected thermodynamic and economic methodologies for estimating the component costs of each configuration in order to provide a detailed and fair comparison at various system sizes. The analysis reveals that the technical and economic characteristics of TMES systems are such that, especially at higher discharge power ratings and longer discharge durations, they can offer promising performance (round-trip efficiencies higher than 60%) along with high lifetimes (> 30 years), low specific costs (often below 100 $/kWh), low ecological footprints and unique sector-coupling features compared to other storage options. TMES systems have significant potential for further progress and the thermoeconomic comparisons in this paper can be used as a benchmark for their future evolution.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗