Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Cost”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

CPUC Avoided Transmission and Distribution Cost Study to Support the Avoided Cost Calculator: Avoided Transmission Costs Draft Research Plan

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) have been contracted by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) Energy Division (ED) to perform a study which explores and selects an improved methodology to estimate avoided electricity transmission and distribution (T&D) infrastructure costs that can be attributed to the presence of distributed energy resources (DERs). PNNL is performing the study for avoided electricity transmission infrastructure costs and LBNL is performing the study for avoided electricity distribution infrastructure costs. This document summarizes CPUC’s research questions related to avoided transmission infrastructure costs and PNNL’s proposed technical approach to answer these questions.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Manufacturing Cost Analysis for PEM Electrolyzers and Perspectives for Future Cost Reduction

Electrolyzer capital costs strongly influence the total levelized cost of hydrogen production and have implications for hydrogen deployment. Current electrolyzer costs are high, and large cost reductions may be needed to achieve competitive hydrogen costs and targets. Understanding pathways for cost reduction via R&D and deployment is a critical research area for informed energy planning and enabling hydrogen use. This work presents bottom-up cost estimates of polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolyzer systems tied to design specifications and discusses perspectives for cost reduction opportunities based on ongoing research. We use a detailed manufacturing and process model for a 1 MW PEM electrolyzer stack and balance of plant (BOP) for rigorous cost estimation. This allows for robust estimates of component and manufacturing costs and examination of key cost contributors. Stack costs are dominated by material costs such as iridium and platinum catalysts, especially at high manufacturing rates; power electronics and hydrogen purification equipment are the largest contributors to BOP cost. At higher manufacturing rates, better equipment utilization could reduce stack costs significantly, and we estimate that experience and bulk purchasing will allow for cost reductions to some BOP components. Still, many well-established BOP technologies and stack material costs are less likely to see significant cost reductions at high manufacturing rates. As such, manufacturing scale is limited in how much it can reduce electrolyzer costs, and additional advances for cost reduction may be needed to achieve cost targets. It will likely take many combined strategies to achieve significant cost reductions for electrolyzers and enable low-cost hydrogen production. We can use our manufacturing cost model to quantify potential cost reductions from the considerations described above and demonstrate pathways to lower cost electrolyzers. This allows for better understanding of cost reduction strategies and enables more informed research, development, and deployment for electrolyzers.

cost↗
DOE OSTI2025

Soft costs and EVSE – Knowledge gaps as a barrier to successful projects

There has been a recent push to increase access to electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure. The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) has made significant funding available for major charging infrastructure projects along state thruways, and many state and local incentives exist for EV owners to install chargers in their homes. However, deployment of these chargers has not kept up with demand, primarily due to issues in project planning, permitting processes, and unforeseen delays. This paper serves as a review of the current understanding of these and other non-hardware costs in EV charging infrastructure projects (collectively known as “soft costs”). We found that soft costs in EV charging infrastructure projects are not well understood. Specifically, there is little agreement on how soft costs should be categorized and tracked, and less agreement still on best practices for controlling these costs and lowering barriers to infrastructure deployment. A broader review of EV charging infrastructure cost analyses shows that these costs can have significant impacts on project outcomes. EV charging infrastructure projects may be able to examine the success of the solar industry in lowering soft costs, and a similar effort may lower project costs significantly. Further work on standardizing and collecting data on EV charging infrastructure costs is required to begin addressing and controlling these costs.

32 - ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZA↗
DOE OSTI2025

NE-COST plug-in: Expanding ACCERT's Capabilities for Life-Cycle Cost Modeling

The Algorithm for the Capital Cost Estimation of Reactor Technologies (ACCERT) is a structured methodology and software tool designed to simplify and standardize cost estimation for nuclear reactor technologies [1]. By utilizing a relational database structure and modular cost estimation algorithms, ACCERT delivers a robust, flexible, and scalable framework for evaluating costs across various reactor types and configurations [2]. The recent integration of the NE-COST plugin further expands ACCERT’s scope by introducing detailed life-cycle cost modeling and probabilistic analysis of uncertainties. This addition enables users to evaluate costs across front-end processes such as uranium enrichment and fabrication, as well as back-end activities including waste disposal and geologic storage. Through Monte Carlo statistical cost simulations, the plugin provides probabilistic insights into cost ranges, offering critical decision-making support for stakeholders including reactor developers, policymakers, and researchers.

Zhou, Jia↗
DOE OSTI2024

Cost-Benefit Analysis For Indonesia Building Sector: Whole-Building Cooling Solutions

The Net Zero World (NZW) Initiative Collaborative Work Program with the Government of Indonesia (GoI) includes technical assistance and investment mobilization facilitation to accelerate deployment of energy efficiency technologies and solutions for the building sector. A February 2023 U.S.–Indonesia Joint Workshop on Decarbonizing the Building Sector yielded a NZW Indonesia Building Decarbonization Working Group (NZW IBDWG) with four sub-working groups (SWG): SWG-A National Center, SWG-B Capacity Building, SWG-C Investment and Financing, and SWG-D Pilot Projects. Technical analysis of whole-building cooling solutions for tropical climates of Indonesia was conducted by SWG-A to quantify energy savings, carbon dioxide reductions, and comfort improvements offered by 12 passive or low-energy cooling strategies: ceiling fans with and without thermostat setbacks; cool roofs; cool walls; exterior awnings; exterior shades; interior shades; insulated roofs; insulated walls; low-e windows; solar window films; and natural ventilation. Leveraging the results from SWG-A, cost-benefit analysis (CBA) was conducted by SWG-C to assess the consumer and national costs and impacts associated with these 12 cooling solutions. The evaluation involved estimating life-cycle costs (LCC), payback period (PBP), net present values (NPV), annual electricity burden change for low-income households, and reduced national annual power-sector generation demand by 2030, 2040, 2050, and 2060. This evaluation can help guide Indonesia’s Just Energy Transition Partnership (JETP) investments in policies and programs to advance research, development, deployment, and commercial adoption (RDDCA) of efficient residential building sector cooling technologies and solutions in Indonesia. Four key energy conservation measures (ECM) have been identified to reduce air-conditioning (AC) energy demand in single-family housing in Indonesia: ceiling fan with temperature setback (to 28.1 °Celcius from 25 °C); insulated walls; insulated roof; and cool roof. This study found that low-income households with AC installations in Indonesia currently face a high energy cost burden of approximately 10%. However, by implementing a ceiling fan with temperature setback, this burden could decrease to 2.5% today and further reduce to 1.3% by the year 2060. The PBP for a ceiling fan with temperature setback is one year, indicating one of the lowest LCC and best NPV. In the planned upcoming phase of CBA, a series of building cooling improvement scenarios can be further defined, incorporating more than one ECM in combination with socio-economic factors evaluated in the initial CBA phase. Additionally, the analysis of ECM effects in multifamily housing can be expanded. This broader national analysis aims to encompass a holistic and comprehensive system-level perspective, including factors such as avoided power sector infrastructure investments, domestic job creation, domestic manufacturing job creation, and gross domestic product (GDP) growth.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Solid Sorbent Cost Sensitivity Analysis: A Framework for UNF Reprocessing Sorbent Cost Comparison

Solid sorbents have been the subject of research and development across the U.S. Department of Energy national laboratory complex for many years. They are generally accepted as a safer alternative to cryogenic distillation for noble gas capture, and they present an easier pathway in development of long-term waste forms after iodine capture. As more types of sorbents have been proposed for capture of volatile radionuclides, it has become necessary to compare them based on performance and cost criteria. This report details cost and performance information for three promising sorbents and provides a cost sensitivity analysis. The goal of this analysis is to establish a framework which can be utilized to directly compare future sorbents, with differing properties, to the sorbents discussed in this report. Direct comparison is instrumental to making informed decisions to efficiently guide research and minimize laborious detours. In all cases, sorbent capacity is a major cost driver as it influences the mass of sorbent, operational footprint, and disposal cost requirements., However, sorbent price can greatly increase the cost of a capture technology. For sorbents used in krypton capture, the purity of krypton released to storage is the highest cost driver.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2026

The Energy Costs of Dewatering Feedstock Microalgae Species Using Conventional Implementations of Ultrasonic and Crossflow Filtration Technologies

The use of microalgae as a feedstock for biofuels and other products continues to be explored, but large-scale biomass production faces persistent high costs. One major cost contributor is the energy required for harvesting and dewatering, a challenge resulting from the dilute nature of microalgae cultures as well as the properties of microalgae cells. This study investigated the energy demands of concentrating three diverse microalgae species (Nannochloropsis salina, Scenedesmus obliquus, and Chlorella luteoviridis) exhibiting different settling velocities, a key harvesting property, using conventional ultrasonic and crossflow membrane filtration. Membrane-free ultrasonic filtration removed 60-80% of the microalgae largely in steady-state operations, increasing concentrations 20-100 times, while consuming 1-6 kWh/m3 - similar to centrifugation. In contrast, crossflow membrane filtration retained nearly 100% of the microalgae, increasing concentrations over 20-fold, but consumed 158 kWh/m3 - over 10 times the energy of centrifugation. Both approaches exceeded the 10% energy target suggested in the 2010 National Algal Biofuel Technology Roadmap. This study also highlights potential sources of energy savings. For ultrasonic filtration, attention to an innovative, dynamic property of the ultrasonic chamber called the Energy Efficiency Factor, could lead to energy reductions by no more than 10-fold and improve the favorability of two of the microalgae species studied. For membrane filtration, a dead-end configuration could reduce energy consumption by no more than 1000-fold, making it favorable for all three species. This study not only highlights the need to further increase the energy content of microalgae cultures, but also the critical importance of continued development of ultrasonic filtration and other harvesting technologies to achieve low-cost, energy-sustainable algal biofuels.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Policy and Cost Allocation Considerations for Large Electric Load Interconnections: Emerging Policy Trends in Rate Structures, Interconnection, and Cost Impacts on Other System Users

Load growth in the United States is rapidly increasing: load from data centers alone has tripled over the past decade, and this growth is forecasted to continue accelerating. These and other large electric loads (LELs) promise economic benefits at the state and local level, but their deployment has also led to increasing concerns about grid impacts and potential cost shifts onto other ratepayers. Legislators, regulators, and other stakeholders are increasingly proposing and enacting policies in effort to balance these and other considerations. This white paper reviews state-level legislation, selected utility rate cases, and relevant federal orders in an effort to describe and categorize relevant trends in policies related to LEL cost allocation, interconnection, and deployment. Policy categories identified through this review include tax incentives, rate actions, and requirements related to interconnection, permitting, and reporting. By offering a taxonomy of policies, this white paper aims to offer a resource to policymakers and other stakeholders navigating this transformative moment for the grid.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

A cost and community perspective on the barriers to microbiome data reuse

Microbiome research is becoming a mature field with a wealth of data amassed from diverse ecosystems, yet the ability to fully leverage multi-omics data for reuse remains challenging. To provide a view into researchers’ behavior and attitudes towards data reuse, we surveyed over 700 microbiome researchers to evaluate data sharing and reuse challenges. We found that many researchers are impeded by difficulties with metadata records, challenges with processing and bioinformatics, and problems with data repository submissions. We also explored the cost constraints of data reuse at each step of the data reuse process to better understand “pain points” and to provide a more quantitative perspective from sixteen active researchers. The bioinformatics and data processing step was estimated to be the most time consuming, which aligns with some of the most frequently reported challenges from the community survey. From these two approaches, we present evidence-based recommendations for how to address data sharing and reuse challenges with concrete actions for future work.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Cost-effective valorization of 2,3-butanediol to high-value chemicals and jet fuel

Here, this work outlines an optimized process for converting 2,3-butanediol (BDO) into sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) and C4 chemicals. BDO is reactively separated from fermentation broth by forming dioxolanes, which are converted to isobutyraldehyde, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), and 1,3-butadiene. These intermediates are reduced and dehydrated over Cu/ZSM-5 to form alkenes, which can be oligomerized and hydrotreated to jet-range alkanes. Previous BDO-dioxolane-alkene processes are limited by the requirement for a continuous aldehyde source for dioxolane formation. Brønsted acidic zeolites catalyze dioxolane deacetalization to form isobutyraldehyde and MEK in a >2:1 molar ratio, providing an internal, recyclable aldehyde source. Dioxolane formation optimization was performed to achieve >95% dioxolane yields over Amberlyst-15 and minimize isobutyraldehyde recycle. The overall BDO-dioxolane-fuel process yields an alkane mixture that enables at least a 50% v/v blend with Jet-A. Techno-economic analyses and life cycle assessments for this BDO-dioxolane-fuel process yield scenarios with <$2.50 per gallon gas equivalent and >58% reduction in CO2 emissions.

2,3-butanediol↗
DOE OSTI2025

Q1-2024 Solar Cost Benchmarks

Each year, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) and its national laboratory partners develop cost benchmarks for U.S. solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. These benchmarks track progress toward reducing solar costs and guide R&D priorities. Unlike typical studies that report only $/W, SETO uses intrinsic units (e.g., $/m² for mounting structures) to better capture how technology improvements such as module efficiency would impact system costs. This allows flexible modeling where inputs can vary significantly to assess cost sensitivity. Costs are reported in two ways: Minimum Sustainable Price (MSP): Long term, financially viable price under stable market conditions. Modeled Market Price (MMP): Actual market price, influenced by short term distortions such as tariffs or subsidies. Three national labs collect cost data from industry stakeholders, ensuring no duplication in outreach to stakeholders. Data reflects real transactions (primarily from Q1) and is weighted based on the number of sources per cost element. The PV System Cost Model (PVSCM) divides total installed system cost into eight categories: 1. Module (PV) 2. Inverter 3. Energy Storage System (ESS) 4. Structural BOS (SBOS) 5. Electrical BOS (EBOS) 6. Fieldwork 7. Office work 8. Other (developer/EPC costs) The first five are hardware costs, while the last three are soft costs. Each category includes fixed and variable cost components, where “size” depends on context (e.g., manufacturing capacity for modules vs. system capacity for installation costs). Variable costs are expressed using appropriate intrinsic units. The model reflects the owner’s upfront overnight capital cost, excluding tax credits. Tariffs and subsidies are treated as temporary market distortions affecting MMP but not MSP. PVSCM is implemented in Excel, where cost elements are aggregated into total system cost. Additional sheets handle unit conversions and operation & maintenance (O&M), with O&M costs levelized over the system’s lifetime.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Meta-Analysis of Advanced Nuclear Reactor Cost Estimations

Supporting Data can be downloaded at: https://gain.inl.gov/content/uploads/4/2024/06/INL-RPT-24-77048-R1.xlsx Nuclear energy is a critical cornerstone of the current United States clean energy supply and may play a larger role in the future in support of a transition to a net-zero economy. The current fleet of nuclear reactors predominantly consists of large light-water reactors (LWRs), while many of the reactor designs under consideration are smaller and/or different technologies. Because these new designs have not yet been built, there is a high degree of uncertainty associated with their cost. This complicates energy-planning efforts because cost projections are not always standardized, consistent, and centralized in an easily accessible location. To help support energy planning in the US, this report provides advanced nuclear cost ranges using a transparent methodology along with other relevant information that can be used to help support decision making and energy planning. The purpose of this work was to conduct a methodical process for cost evaluation using only public information that was vetted with the end-goal to provide reference cost projections for nuclear energy. To provide a solid basis for these values, the approach and assumptions are explicitly laid out throughout the report allowing any user of the data to challenge or reconsider them. Because future US nuclear-reactor costs are still unknown due to little recent observed data, the report opted to compile a comprehensive list of bottom-up estimates and evaluate averages/trends within the data to identify reference ranges. This was deemed preferable to opining on the robustness or validity of one cost estimation versus another. To that end, the work evaluated thousands of lines of cost subaccounts from several bottom-up cost estimates. A wide variety of different reactor types captured in the data are of various sizes and technologies. Some of these reactors will be representative of advanced reactors under development while others will not. Thus, the results here are dependent on the data that are available and the accuracy of the estimates that are used. Each bottom-up estimate was reviewed to determine whether it was complete. Incomplete data sets were corrected to ensure an adequate basis of cross-comparison. The report is not without limitations and should be interpreted as an initial step to develop cost ranges for nuclear technology. Ultimately, future work can build upon the methodology with refined cost estimates to reduce uncertainty. US-based overnight capital cost (OCC) estimates were compiled from extensive data sets into ranges for both large and small reactor sizes for 2030. To project the cost declines over time, learning rates were sampled from literature sources. No SMRs were previously built; hence, learning rates based on bottom-up approaches (e.g., by quantifying the impact stemming from fabrication of different components, modular work, site construction, commissioning) were prioritized. For larger reactors, actual learning rates from deployments were used to project future costs (adjusted to account for standardization or lack thereof between designs). Other costs included are fixed and variable operations and maintenance costs. The final variables were capacity factors and ramp rates to support energy planning.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Generator Interconnection Costs to the Transmission System in non-ISO Balancing Authorities [Slides]

Electric transmission system operators—including Independent System Operators (ISOs), Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs), and utilities—require proposed power plants to undergo a series of interconnection studies before connecting to the grid. These studies assess what transmission upgrades or new infrastructure may be necessary and assign the associated costs to the project. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has compiled, aggregated, and cleaned interconnection cost data, originally for ISOs/RTOs, and now for five non-ISO Balancing Authorities: PacifiCorp, Bonneville Power Authority, Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Florida. Insufficient transparency in interconnection cost data may contribute to rapidly expanding interconnection queues, with active queue capacities tripling between 2020 and 2024 in the studied BAs. Most projects withdraw after receiving high interconnection cost estimates. Interconnection costs have increased since the early 2000s, with average costs for "complete" projects reaching $194/kW between 2018 and 2024. Active queue projects and withdrawn projects incur substantially higher costs, primarily due to rising network upgrade costs. Recent interconnection costs in non-ISO balancing authorities are higher than in ISO regions, potentially due to a greater willingness to pay among developers. Utility-scale solar, wind, and storage projects have interconnection costs that exceed those for natural gas. However, when focusing on projects that do not withdraw from the queue, the interconnection costs for these technologies are more similar to natural gas projects. Other key findings include: (1) Larger generation projects benefit from lower proportional interconnection costs, (2) capacity transmission service (NRIS) often requires additional network investments, and (3) projects with high network upgrade costs are often clustered geographically. The dataset includes results from 2,104 interconnection studies conducted between 2000 and 2024, covering projects that are operational, withdrawn, or still progressing through the study process. The Excel file contains (a) the complete project-level interconnection cost dataset, and (b) seven additional tabs summarizing cost metrics across dimensions such as time, market structure, cost category (point of interconnection vs. broader network upgrades), fuel type, service type (ERIS vs. NRIS), generator size, and geography.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Reported Energy and Cost Savings from the DOE ESPC IDIQ Program: FY 2024

Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs)are a contractual mechanism that allow a federal agency to procure energy savings and facility improvements without upfront capital costs to reduce costs and resiliency. ESPCs are covered under FAR Part 23.2, and 42 USC § 8287. Section 8287(a)(2)(A) of Title 42 of the U.S. Code requires that each energy savings performance contract (ESPC) undergo an annual energy audit, resulting in a separate audit report for every project. The objective of the present report is to compile and analyze all annual ESPC audit reports issued between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024, for projects awarded under Generations 1, 2, and 3 of DOE’s ESPC IDIQ contracts. During this period, 205 measurement and verification (M&V) reports were produced for 200 projects; the total number of reports exceeds the number of projects because some projects generated more than one report(for example, a few projects measure savings twice per year and produce two audit reports annually, each covering a different six-month period). By aggregating the results from these individual audits, the report determines the portfolio-wide realization rate of energy and cost savings for all active ESPC projects awarded under DOE’s IDIQ program. For all 205audit reports, sufficient information was available to compare project-level estimated, reported, and guaranteed cost savings. Reported cost savings accounted for ESCO verified savings per each project’s M&V plan. The total reported cost savings for the period addressed were $\$$647.8million,compared with the total guaranteed cost savings of $\$$601.6million. On average across the reported projects: •ESPC contractors guaranteed 92.8% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 100.0% of the estimated cost savings• projects reported achieving 107.7% of the guaranteed cost savings. The M&V performed for the period indicated adjustments for government operations and maintenance impacts to savings amount to$\$$43.9millionandcould be restored with the original operational parameters for impacted projects. Accounting for this potential cost savings impact, these projects still realized 100.4% of the guaranteed cost savings. The information on estimated and reported energy savings was collected and compared for all 205of the reports examined. Based on site energy, estimated savings totaled 14.88million MMBtu, and reported savings were 15.33million MMBtu; 3.1% greater than the estimated energy savings. All of the reports examined contained sufficient information to calculate source energy savings. Based on site-adjusted source energy, total estimated energy savings were 20.90 million MMBtu, and reported savings were 21.22million MMBtu, 101.5% of the estimated energy savings. For water savings, the estimated savings were 11,539,055 kGal and the reported savings were 13,315,930 kGal. This means 1,776,875 kGal more water was saved than estimated, which is about 15% higher than the estimate. These results indicate that, overall, the reported energy savings slightly exceeded the estimated values, while estimated water savings significantly exceeded estimated values, suggesting that the projects achieved greater cost savings than originally projected. The total annual expense for the ESCOs to perform annual M&V audits and reporting was $\$$10.02million. Through this effort, $\$$647.8 million in annual cost savings was verified. The M&V results indicated that $\$$43.9 million of these verified savings reflected adjustments due to government operations A-6and maintenance impacts, which could be restored under the original operational parameters for the affected projects. These findings show the value of M&V that only costs 1.7%of the guaranteed cost savings to ensure guarantees are met.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Validation of the NLR Pumped Storage Hydropower Cost Model

The National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) first released its pumped storage hydropower (PSH) cost model in 2023 as the most detailed bottom-up PSH cost model available to the public. It is available both as a spreadsheet and an interactive web tool, enabling users with a variety of PSH interests to transparently characterize costs of alternative PSH sites and designs. The PSH cost model cannot replace detailed site-level studies and design, but it is important to validate it against other industry PSH cost estimates. The initial model methodology report validated the cost model for a single proposed site, the Eagle Mountain Project in California. This slide deck documents an expanded validation exercise using cost data from six other sites: Goldendale (Washington), Seminoe (Wyoming), Gordon Butte (Montana), Swan Lake (Oregon), White Pine (Oregon), and Lewis Ridge (Kentucky). It compares itemized costs from Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) applications and other reported costs with NLR PSH cost model outputs after customizing inputs for each site. The validation exercise finds that the NLR model's conservative indirect cost assumptions often drive overall cost overestimation, with direct cost comparisons typically agreeing more closely. All cost model estimates are well within an Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) Class 5 estimation range (-50% to +100%), with five within the AACE Class 4 range (-30% to +50%) and four being within 15%. This result is considered reasonable performance for a parametric model applied at a preliminary design stage.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Long-term hydro-economic analysis tool for evaluating global groundwater cost and supply: Superwell v1.1

Abstract. Groundwater plays a key role in meeting water demands, supplying over 40 % of irrigation water globally, with this role likely to grow as water demands and surface water variability increase. A better understanding of the future role of groundwater in meeting sectoral demands requires an integrated hydro-economic evaluation of its cost and availability. Yet substantial gaps remain in our knowledge and modeling capabilities related to groundwater availability, recharge, feasible locations for extraction, extractable volumes, and associated extraction costs, which are essential for large-scale analyses of integrated human–water system scenarios, particularly at the global scale. To address these needs, we developed Superwell, a physics-based groundwater extraction and cost accounting model that operates at sub-annual temporal and at the coarsest 0.5° (≈50 km × 50 km) gridded spatial resolution with global coverage. The model produces location-specific groundwater supply–cost curves that provide the levelized cost to access different quantities of available groundwater. The inputs to Superwell include recent high-resolution hydrogeologic datasets of permeability, porosity, aquifer thickness, depth to water table, recharge, and hydrogeological complexity zones. It also accounts for well capital and maintenance costs, as well as the energy costs required to lift water to the surface. The model employs a Theis-based scheme coupled with an amortization-based cost accounting formulation to simulate groundwater extraction and quantify the cost of groundwater pumping. The result is a spatiotemporally flexible, physically realistic, economics-based model that produces groundwater supply–cost curves. We show examples of these supply–cost curves and the insights that can be derived from them across a set of scenarios designed to explore model outcomes. The supply–cost curves produced by the model show that most (90 %) nonrenewable groundwater in storage globally is extractable at costs lower than USD 0.57 m−3, while half of the volume remains extractable at under USD 0.108 m−3. The global unit cost is estimated to range from a minimum of USD 0.004 m−3 to a maximum of USD 3.971 m−3. We also demonstrate and discuss examples of how these cost curves could be used by linking Superwell's outputs with other models to explore coupled human–environmental system challenges, such as water resources planning and management, or broader analyses of multisectoral feedbacks.

Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM)↗