DOCSLIB.ORG

Methods for Estimating Water Consumption for Thermoelectric Power Plants in the United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Methods for Estimating Water Consumption for Thermoelectric Power Plants in the United States USGS National Water Census and National Streamflow Information Program Methods for Estimating Water Consumption for Thermoelectric Power Plants in the United States Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5188 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey Cover. Aerial photographs of thermoelectric power plants in the United States from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP), 2007. Refer to figures 2, 3, 5, and 6. Methods for Estimating Water Consumption for Thermoelectric Power Plants in the United States By Timothy H. Diehl, Melissa A. Harris, Jennifer C. Murphy, Susan S. Hutson, and David E. Ladd USGS National Water Census and National Streamflow Information Program Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5188 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior SALLY JEWELL, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey Suzette M. Kimball, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2013 For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment, visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1-888-ASK-USGS For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, visit http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod To order this and other USGS information products, visit http://store.usgs.gov Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report. Suggested citation: Diehl, T.H., Harris, M.A., Murphy, J.C., Hutson, S.S., and Ladd, D.E., 2013, Methods for estimating water consumption for thermoelectric power plants in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2013–5188, 78 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20135188. ISSN 2328-031X (print) ISSN 2328-0328 (online) ISBN 978-1-4113-3714-5 iii Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................................................................1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................1 Purpose and Scope ................................................................................................................................................2 A Heat Budget Approach to Thermoelectric Water Consumption ...........................................................................2 Data Compilation and Quality Assurance ....................................................................................................................4 Plant Master List .....................................................................................................................................................4 Generation Data ......................................................................................................................................................4 Cooling System Data ..............................................................................................................................................5 Power Plant Locations and Elevations ......................................................................................................5 Cooling-System Type Validation .................................................................................................................5 Environmental Data ......................................................................................................................................8 Data Sources .......................................................................................................................................9 Data Quality .......................................................................................................................................10 Methods of Determination for Environmental Input Variables ..................................................11 Uncertainty Analysis ........................................................................................................................13 Supplemental Methods ....................................................................................................................14 Computing Heat and Water Budgets ...........................................................................................................................14 Estimation of Condenser Duty by Generation Type .........................................................................................18 Combustion-Steam Generation ................................................................................................................18 Combined-Cycle Generation .....................................................................................................................21 Nuclear Generation ....................................................................................................................................21 Geothermal Generation .............................................................................................................................22 Estimating Thermoelectric Evaporation by Cooling-System Type ................................................................23 Estimating Evaporation from Cooling Towers ........................................................................................24 Estimating Forced Evaporation from Surface Water ...........................................................................25 Error Analysis and the Prediction of Maximum and Minimum Likely Consumption ..................................28 Other Types of Water Consumption .............................................................................................................................29 Solar-Thermal Generation ...................................................................................................................................29 Flue-Gas Desulfurization......................................................................................................................................29 Minor Water Consumption at Combined-Cycle Plants ...................................................................................29 Conclusions......................................................................................................................................................................29 Acknowledgments ..........................................................................................................................................................30 Selected References ......................................................................................................................................................30 Glossary ............................................................................................................................................................................35 Appendix 1: The 1,284 thermoelectric plants one megawatt nameplate capacity or greater with water-cooling systems in the United States, 2010 ..............................................................38 Appendix 2: Guide to data contained in the U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2010 Annual Electric Generator Data, Form-860, and the 2010 Power Plant Operations Report, Form EIA-923, used for the classification of thermoelectric plants and consumption estimation model input ............................................................72 Appendix 2. Table 1: Data used in the two-tiered classification system for thermoelectric plants and heat and water budget models to estimate water consumption from the 2010 Annual Electric Generator Data, EIA Form-860 and 2010 Power Plant Operations Report, Form EIA-923 ..................................................................................73 Appendix 2. Table 2: Prime mover types used to classify plants according to generation type ................................................................................................................................................75 Appendix 2. Table 3: Energy sources used to classify plants by generation type ...............................................76 Appendix 2. Table 4: Cooling-sytem types used to classify plants by cooling system technology ...........................................................................................................................................77 Appendix 3: Databases accessed for thermoelectric plant classification and modeling data ...................................................................................................................................................78 Appendix 4: Forced Evaporation from Water Surface (FEWS) spreadsheet ............................... available online in an Excel file at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2013/5188/appendix/sir2013-5188_appendix4_fews_ version_3.104.xlsx iv Figures 1. Map showing geographic distribution of the 1,284 thermoelectric plants one megawatt nameplate capacity or greater with water-cooling systems in the United States, 2010 ....................................................................................................................6 2. Aerial photograph
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Board-Approved 2013-2014 Transmission Plan
    2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 APPENDIX A: System Data California ISO/MID A-1 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 A1 Existing Generation Table A1-1: Existing generation plants in PG&E planning area Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Humboldt Bay 166 Kekawaka 4.9 Pacific Lumber 32.5 PG&E - LP Samoa 25 Humboldt Fairhaven 17.3 Blue Lake 12 Humboldt Area Total 258 Santa Fe 160 Bear Canyon 20 Westford Flat 30 Western Geo 38 Geysers 5 53 Geysers 6 53 PG&E - North Coast and Geysers 7 53 North Bay Geysers 8 53 Geysers 11 106 Geysers 12 106 Geysers 13 133 Geysers 14 109 Geysers 16 118 California ISO/MID A-2 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Geysers 17 118 Geysers 18 118 Geysers 20 118 Bottle Rock 55 SMUD Geo 72 Potter Valley 11 Geo Energy 20 Indian Valley 3 Sonoma Landfill 6 Exxon 54 Monticello 12 North Coast and North Bay Area Total 1,619 Pit River 752 Battle Creek 17 Cow Creek 5 North Feather River 736 South Feather River 123 PG&E - West Feather River 26 North Valley Black Butte 11 CPV 717 Hatchet Ridge Wind 103 QFs 353 North Valley Area Total 2,843 California ISO/MID A-3 2013-2014 ISO Transmission Plan March 25, 2014 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Wadham 27 Woodland Biomass 25 UC Davis Co-Gen 4 Cal-Peak Vaca Dixon 49 Wolfskill Energy Center 60 Lambie, Creed and Goosehaven 143 EnXco 60 Solano 100 High Winds 200 Shiloh 300 Bowman Power House 4 PG&E - Camp Far West (SMUD) 7 Central Valley Chicago Park Power House 40 Chili Bar Power House 7 Colgate Power House 294 Deer Creek Power House 6 Drum Power House 104 Dutch Plat Power House 49 El Dorado Power House 20 Feather River Energy Center 50 French Meadow Power House 17 Green Leaf No.
    [Show full text]
  • Agecroft Power Stations Generated Together the Original Boiler Plant Had Reached 30 Years for 10 Years
    AGECROl?T POWER STATIONS 1924-1993 - About the author PETER HOOTON joined the electricity supply industry in 1950 at Agecroft A as a trainee. He stayed there until his retirement as maintenance service manager in 1991. Peter approached the brochure project in the same way that he approached work - with dedication and enthusiasm. The publication reflects his efforts. Acknowledgements MA1'/Y. members and ex members of staff have contributed to this history by providing technical information and their memories of past events In the long life of the station. Many of the tales provided much laughter but could not possibly be printed. To everyone who has provided informati.on and stories, my thanks. Thanks also to:. Tony Frankland, Salford Local History Library; Andrew Cross, Archivist; Alan Davies, Salford Mining Museum; Tony Glynn, journalist with Swinton & Pendlebury Journal; Bob Brooks, former station manager at Bold Power Station; Joan Jolly, secretary, Agecroft Power Station; Dick Coleman from WordPOWER; and - by no means least! - my wife Margaret for secretarial help and personal encouragement. Finally can I thank Mike Stanton for giving me lhe opportunity to spend many interesting hours talkin11 to coUcagues about a place that gave us years of employment. Peter Hooton 1 September 1993 References Brochure of the Official Opening of Agecroft Power Station, 25 September 1925; Salford Local History Library. Brochure for Agecroft B and C Stations, published by Central Electricity Generating Board; Salford Local Published by NationaJ Power, History Library. I September, 1993. Photographic albums of the construction of B and (' Edited and designed by WordPOWER, Stations; Salford Local Histo1y Libraty.
    [Show full text]
  • Calpine Corporation (A Delaware Corporation) I.R.S
    10-K 1 cpn_10kx12312014.htm CALPINE 10-K FOR YEAR-ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 ____________________ Form 10-K ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF [X] 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT [ ] OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission File No. 001-12079 ______________________ Calpine Corporation (A Delaware Corporation) I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 77-0212977 717 Texas Avenue, Suite 1000, Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 830-2000 Not Applicable (Former Address) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Calpine Corporation Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value Name of each exchange on which registered: New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes [X] No [ ] Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes [ ] No [X] Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
    [Show full text]
  • CSP Technologies
    CSP Technologies Solar Solar Power Generation Radiation fuel Concentrating the solar radiation in Concentrating Absorbing Storage Generation high magnification and using this thermal energy for power generation Absorbing/ fuel Reaction Features of Each Types of Solar Power PTC Type CRS Type Dish type 1Axis Sun tracking controller 2 Axis Sun tracking controller 2 Axis Sun tracking controller Concentrating rate : 30 ~ 100, ~400 oC Concentrating rate: 500 ~ 1,000, Concentrating rate: 1,000 ~ 10,000 ~1,500 oC Parabolic Trough Concentrator Parabolic Dish Concentrator Central Receiver System CSP Technologies PTC CRS Dish commercialized in large scale various types (from 1 to 20MW ) Stirling type in ~25kW size (more than 50MW ) developing the technology, partially completing the development technology development is already commercialized efficiency ~30% reached proper level, diffusion level efficiency ~16% efficiency ~12% CSP Test Facilities Worldwide Parabolic Trough Concentrator In 1994, the first research on high temperature solar technology started PTC technology for steam generation and solar detoxification Parabolic reflector and solar tracking system were developed <The First PTC System Installed in KIER(left) and Second PTC developed by KIER(right)> Dish Concentrator 1st Prototype: 15 circular mirror facets/ 2.2m focal length/ 11.7㎡ reflection area 2nd Prototype: 8.2m diameter/ 4.8m focal length/ 36㎡ reflection area <The First(left) and Second(right) KIER’s Prototype Dish Concentrator> Dish Concentrator Two demonstration projects for 10kW dish-stirling solar power system Increased reflection area(9m dia. 42㎡) and newly designed mirror facets Running with Solo V161 Stirling engine, 19.2% efficiency (solar to electricity) <KIER’s 10kW Dish-Stirling System in Jinhae City> Dish Concentrator 25 20 15 (%) 10 발전 효율 5 Peak.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental and Economic Benefits of Building Solar in California Quality Careers — Cleaner Lives
    Environmental and Economic Benefits of Building Solar in California Quality Careers — Cleaner Lives DONALD VIAL CENTER ON EMPLOYMENT IN THE GREEN ECONOMY Institute for Research on Labor and Employment University of California, Berkeley November 10, 2014 By Peter Philips, Ph.D. Professor of Economics, University of Utah Visiting Scholar, University of California, Berkeley, Institute for Research on Labor and Employment Peter Philips | Donald Vial Center on Employment in the Green Economy | November 2014 1 2 Environmental and Economic Benefits of Building Solar in California: Quality Careers—Cleaner Lives Environmental and Economic Benefits of Building Solar in California Quality Careers — Cleaner Lives DONALD VIAL CENTER ON EMPLOYMENT IN THE GREEN ECONOMY Institute for Research on Labor and Employment University of California, Berkeley November 10, 2014 By Peter Philips, Ph.D. Professor of Economics, University of Utah Visiting Scholar, University of California, Berkeley, Institute for Research on Labor and Employment Peter Philips | Donald Vial Center on Employment in the Green Economy | November 2014 3 About the Author Peter Philips (B.A. Pomona College, M.A., Ph.D. Stanford University) is a Professor of Economics and former Chair of the Economics Department at the University of Utah. Philips is a leading economic expert on the U.S. construction labor market. He has published widely on the topic and has testified as an expert in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, served as an expert for the U.S. Justice Department in litigation concerning the Davis-Bacon Act (the federal prevailing wage law), and presented testimony to state legislative committees in Ohio, Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Utah, Kentucky, Connecticut, and California regarding the regulations of construction labor markets.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Reporting
    20 ANNUAL 12REPORT Financial hIghLIghts kEy AccOmplishments • maintained annual dividend of $2.20 per share • Achieved a 42 percent increase in the number of retail • Reduced our projected environmental spend to customers served by our competitive subsidiary, $975 million, down from an original estimate of FirstEnergy Solutions (FES) $2 billion to $3 billion • Grew competitive sales by 10 percent, to nearly • Strengthened our balance sheet by contributing 100 million megawatt-hours $600 million to the pension plan • Improved distribution reliability financials at A glancE (dollars in millions, except per share amounts) 2012 2011 2010 Total REvenues $15,303 $16,147 $13,339 NET INcOmE $771 $869 $718 BASIc EARNINgS per common share $1.85 $2.22 $2.44 DILuted earningS per common share $1.84 $2.21 $2.42 DIvidends paid per common share $2.20 $2.20 $2.20 BOOk value per common share $31.29 $31.75 $29.47 net cash from operatiNg ActivitieS $2,320 $3,063 $3,076 FES CuStomErS SErvEd (in millions) 2012 2.6 2011 1.8 2010 1.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 CompEtitivE rEtAiL sales (in millions of megawatt-hours) 2012 99.7 2011 90.1 2010 80.2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 CompETITIVE gEnErAtion output (in millions of megawatt-hours) 2012 96.5 2011 96.5 2010 74.9 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 on the cover: Our Pleasants Power Station located along the Ohio River in Willow Island, W.Va. mESSAgE TO OUR ShAREhOLDERS The actions we took in 2012 will help position your company to compete and succeed.
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX A: System Data
    2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 APPENDIX A: System Data California ISO/MID A-1 2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 A1 Existing Generation Table A1-1: Existing generation plants in PG&E planning area Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Humboldt Bay 166 Kekawaka 4.9 Pacific Lumber 32.5 PG&E - LP Samoa 25 Humboldt Fairhaven 17.3 Blue Lake 12 Humboldt Area Total 258 Santa Fe 160 Bear Canyon 20 Westford Flat 30 Western Geo 38 Geysers 5 53 Geysers 6 53 PG&E - North Coast and Geysers 7 53 North Bay Geysers 8 53 Geysers 11 106 Geysers 12 106 Geysers 13 133 Geysers 14 109 Geysers 16 118 California ISO/MID A-2 2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Geysers 17 118 Geysers 18 118 Geysers 20 118 Bottle Rock 55 SMUD Geo 72 Potter Valley 11 Geo Energy 20 Indian Valley 3 Sonoma Landfill 6 Exxon 54 Monticello 12 North Coast and North Bay Area Total 1,619 Pit River 752 Battle Creek 17 Cow Creek 5 North Feather River 736 South Feather River 123 PG&E - West Feather River 26 North Valley Black Butte 11 CPV 717 Hatchet Ridge Wind 103 QFs 353 North Valley Area Total 2,843 California ISO/MID A-3 2012-2013 ISO Transmission Plan March 20, 2013 Planning Area Generating Plant Maximum Capacity Wadham 27 Woodland Biomass 25 UC Davis Co-Gen 4 Cal-Peak Vaca Dixon 49 Wolfskill Energy Cener 60 Lambie, Creed and Goosehaven 143 EnXco 60 Solano 100 High Winds 200 Shiloh 300 Bowman Power House 4 PG&E - Camp Far West (SMUD) 7 Central Valley Chicago Park Power House 40 Chili Bar Power House 7 Colgate Power House 294 Deer Creek Power House 6 Drum Power House 104 Dutch Plat Power House 49 El Dorado Power House 20 Feather River Energy Center 50 French Meadow Power House 17 Green Leaf No.
    [Show full text]
  • A Site Assessment Study on Potential Land Use Options at the Salem Harbor Power Station Site
    A SITE ASSESSMENT STUDY ON POTENTIAL LAND USE OPTIONS AT THE SALEM HARBOR POWER STATION SITE JANUARY 2012 PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF SALEM BY: Jacobs 343 Congress Street Boston, Massachusetts 02210 617.242.9222 Sasaki Associates 64 Pleasant Street Watertown, Massachusetts 02472 617.926.3300 LaCapra Associates One Washington Mall 9th Floor Boston, Massachusetts 02108 617.778.5515 Robert Charles Lesser Co. 7200 Wisconsin Avenue 7th Floor Bethesda, Maryland 20814 214.644.1300 JANUARY 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The consultant team would like to recognize the following participants for their contributions during this study which was funded by a grant from the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center. City of Salem Kimberley Driscoll, Mayor Jason Silva, Chief Administrative Aide Lynn Duncan, Director, Department of Planning & Community Development (DPCD) Frank Taormina, Staff Planner/Harbor Coordinator, DPCD Kathleen Winn, Deputy Director, DPCD Captain Bill McHugh, Harbormaster Stakeholders State Senator Fred Berry State Representative John Keenan Charles Payson, District Director for US Congressman John Tierney Joanne McBrien, Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources Richard Chalpin, Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection James Bowen, Massachusetts Clean Energy Center Robert McCarthy, City Councilor Ward 1 Lamont Beaudette, Dominion Energy at Salem Harbor Station Malia Griffin, Dominion Energy at Salem Harbor Station James Smith, Dominion Energy at Salem Harbor Station Cynthia Carr, Derby Street Neighborhood Association Fred Atkins, Harbor Plan Implementation Committee (HPIC) Barbara Warren, Salem Sound Coastwatch & HPIC Patricia Gozemba, Salem Alliance for the Environment (SAFE) Marjorie Kelly, SAFE Jeffrey Barz-Snell, Renewable Energy Task Force & SAFE William Luster, North Shore Alliance for Economic Development Additionally, the consultant team would like to thank the citizens of Salem and other attendees who participated at the public meetings.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of Duquesne Light Company Filed Pursuant to 52 Pa
    BEFORE THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION Application of Duquesne Light Company filed Pursuant to 52 Pa. Code Chapter 57, Subchapter G, for Approval of the Siting and : Docket No. A-20 19 - Construction of the 138 kV Transmission Lines Associated with the Brunot Island - Crescent Project in the City of Pittsburgh, McKees Rocks Borough, Kennedy Township,RobinsonTownship,Moon Township, and Crescent Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania APPLICATION OF DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TO THE PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION: Duquesne Light Company ("Duquesne Light" or the "Company") hereby files, pursuant to 52 Pa. Code § 57.72, this Application requesting Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission ("Commission") approval to site and construct approximately 14.5 miles of overhead double - circuit 138 kV transmission lines in the City of Pittsburgh, McKees Rocks Borough, Kennedy Township, Robinson Township, Moon Township, and Crescent Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania (Hereinafter called the " Brunot Island - Crescent Project" or "BI -Crescent Project"). The proposed Project is required to replace aging transmission system infrastructure. The BI - Crescent corridor has some of Duquesne Light's oldest in-service steel lattice towers. Structural evaluations have determined that the structures are approaching end of useful life. Based on current condition, structure deterioration, and Power Line Systems - Computer Aided Design and Drafting ("PLS-CADD")' modeling at current design codes, all results indicate these 'PLS-CADD is an industry
    [Show full text]
  • (2019) EPA's Final
    Attachment to Part B Comments of Earthjustice et al., EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0173 Assessment Monitoring Outcomes (2019) EPA’s Final Coal Ash Rule, 40 C.F.R. § 257.94(e)(3), requires the owners or operators of existing Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) units to prepare a notification stating that an assessment monitoring program has been established if it is determined that a statistically significant increase over background levels for one or more of the constituents listed in appendix III of the CCR Rule has occurred, without an alleged alternate source demonstration. This table identifies the CCR surface impoundments known to be in assessment monitoring and required to identify any constituent(s) in appendix IV detected at statistically significant levels (SSL) above groundwater protection standards and post notice of the assessment monitoring outcome per 40 C.F.R. § 257.95. The table includes the surface impoundments that were required to post notice of appendix IV exceedance(s), as applicable, or elected to do so as of the time of this assessment monitoring outcomes review (summer 2019). To the best of our knowledge, neither EPA nor any other entity has attempted to assemble this information and make it public. Note that this document is not confirming that the industry notifications or assessments were compliant with the CCR Rule or that additional units may not belong on this list. Assessment Monitoring Outcome # of Surface Impoundments Appendix IV Exceedance(s) 214 Appendix IV Exceedance(s), alleged Alternate Source Demonstration 16 No Appendix IV Exceedance Reported 64 Total 294 Name of Plant Appendix IV Operator CCR Unit or Site Exceedance(s) Healy Power Plant GVEA AK Unit 1 Ash Pond Yes Healy Power Plant GVEA AK Unit 1 Emergency Overflow Pond Yes Healy Power Plant GVEA AK Unit 1 Recirculating Pond Yes Charles R.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Impact of Coal and Coal-Fired Power Generation in West Virginia
    THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COAL AND COAL-FIRED POWER GENERATION IN WEST VIRGINIA WINTER 2021 The Economic Impact of Coal and Coal-Fired Power Generation in West Virginia is published by: Bureau of Business & Economic Research West Virginia University College of Business and Economics PO Box 6527, Morgantown, WV 26506-6527 (304) 293-7831; [email protected] bber.wvu.edu WRITTEN BY Christiadi PhD Research Associate Eric Bowen PhD Research Assistant Professor John Deskins PhD Director Priscila Borges Marques Dos Santos Research Scholar Funding for this research was provided by the West Virginia Coal Association. The opinions herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the West Virginia Coal Association or the West Virginia University Board of Governors. © Copyright 2021 WVU Research Corporation ii Bureau of Business & Economic Research Table of Contents List of Figures and Tables ............................................................................................................................. iv Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... v 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 2 Coal and the West Virginia Economy: Recent Trends ......................................................................... 2 3 West Virginia Coal Exports ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Photovoltaic Plus Storage
    Photovoltaic plus Storage – Part 2, Projects By John Benson February 2019 1. Introduction Part 2 will describe recent major U.S. PV and storage projects and some new twists on residential PV plus storage. Part 1 of this paper (linked below) is on new technologies for utility-scale PV, utility-scale storage and PV plus storage systems, and the evolution of missions. https://www.energycentral.com/c/cp/photovoltaic-plus-storage-%E2%80%93-part-1- technology 2. Projects The projects described below include PV plus storage, PV-only and storage only. 2.1. Arizona Public Service and First Solar A 65 megawatt (MW) project is making news by coupling PV with battery energy storage systems (BESS), a first for utility Arizona Public Service, which solicited proposals in 2017 for generation sources to provide electricity during peak demand hours.1 The solar-plus-storage bid beat out other generation sources, including multiple proposals for natural gas plants. The utility has an agreement with an existing natural gas-fired plant for a total of 570 MW for the summers of 2020 through 2026. A dramatic drop in the cost of BESS, driven in large part by an increase in lithium-ion battery production to satisfy growing demand for electric vehicles allows a PV + storage project to be competitive with gas peakers plus offer more capabilities. Storage is capable of providing services like frequency regulation, which maintains the grid’s electric frequency on a second-to-second basis, and reactive power support, which supports the voltage that must be controlled for grid reliability.
    [Show full text]