Utilizing the Energy Resource Potential of DOE Lands (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Review of the Approach Taken in the NREL/CSM Study
2 Review of the Approach Taken in the NREL/CSM Study
Pages 11-17
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 11... ...
The properties were also not fully characterized for infrastructure needs to develop energy resources on-site for on-site use or for sale to regional wholesale electricity markets or to local utilities. COMMENTS ON NREL AND CSM APPROACH Overall Approach DOE identified 148 sites for study by NREL.1 From that list, they performed an initial screening on the feasibility of adding an energy project at the site.
|
From page 12... ...
for each resource, other than geothermal, on each of the 55 sites. Data inputs to the model included site area and latitude and longitude, renewable energy resource data available from other studies or estimated for immediate purposes, technology effectiveness and cost assumptions, available transmission capacity excluding costs, and relevant government policies and availability of financial incentives for renewable resource development.
|
From page 13... ...
Kansas City Plant (Bannister Road) 120 2.5 2.5 $91 Waste to Bonneville Power Administration Ross 250 138.3 100.0 −$25 energy Complex Argonne National Laboratory 1,700 487.9 100.0 $5 Concentrating Nevada National Security Site 775,680 Unlimited 50.0 $200 solar power Los Alamos National Laboratory 28,000 Unlimited 50.0 $210 Geothermal Shoal, Nevada, Site 2,560 - - Lakeview, Oregon, Disposal Site 40 - - Nevada National Security Site 775,680 - - Central Nevada Test Area, Nevada, Site 2,560 - - two or three projects with lowest LCOE for each resource.2 This was done so that each type of resource would be represented in the more detailed analysis.
|
From page 14... ...
Many other widely used methods are available, including the following: more rigorous site analysis, discounted cash flow analysis, and utility-scale integrated resource planning and dispatch models. The use of LCOE as the sole criterion most likely led to a different list of top sites for renewable resource development than would have resulted if the sites were more completely characterized and screened using more relevant criteria, such as those used in the market opportunities analyses.
|
From page 15... ...
Overall Conclusions The committee believes that the basic design of the NREL/CSM study was flawed. Early in the process, there were missed opportunities to learn about DOE or other federal sites that already have developed energy resources and to engage with the energy industry development community.
|
From page 16... ...
The committee suspects that assumptions used in the LCOE analysis might lead to incorrect conclusions regarding the technology types selected for detailed analysis. For example, in earlier versions of the analysis reported to the committee, NREL found solar PV technology to be best suited for development based on LCOE, but later analyses pointed to waste-to-energy technology as being the most cost effective from a LCOE perspective.
|
From page 17... ...
However, rapidly reducing prices of renewable technologies, particularly for photovoltaics, should have been incorporated into the LCOE model as they became available. In summary, the committee believes that the NREL analysis provides a somewhat useful database of information about renewable energy resource potential on DOE properties.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.