skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: 2017 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB): Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies

Abstract

Each year since 2015, NREL has presented Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) in a spreadsheet that contains detailed cost and performance data (both current and projected) for renewable and conventional technologies. The spreadsheet includes a workbook for each technology. This spreadsheet provides data for the 2017 ATB. In this edition of the ATB, offshore wind power has been updated to include 15 technical resource groups. And, two options are now provided for representing market conditions for project financing, including current market conditions and long-term historical conditions. For more information, see https://atb.nrel.gov/.

Authors:
; ; ; ; ;
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory - Data (NREL-DATA), Golden, CO (United States); National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
OSTI Identifier:
1375637
Report Number(s):
71
DOE Contract Number:
FY17 AOP 2.4.0.3
Resource Type:
Data
Data Type:
Specialized Mix
Country of Publication:
United States
Availability:
datacatalog@nrel.gov
Language:
English
Subject:
13 HYDRO ENERGY; 14 SOLAR ENERGY; 15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY; 17 WIND ENERGY; 37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY; 58 GEOSCIENCES; NREL; energy; data; wind; PV; photovoltaic; concentrating solar power; LCOE; geothermal; hydropower; CAPEX; overnight capital cost; cost and performance; projection; RE; US; renewable energy

Citation Formats

Hand, Maureen, Augustine, Chad, Feldman, David, Kurup, Parthiv, Beiter, Philipp, and O'Connor, Patrick. 2017 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB): Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.7799/1375637.
Hand, Maureen, Augustine, Chad, Feldman, David, Kurup, Parthiv, Beiter, Philipp, & O'Connor, Patrick. 2017 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB): Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies. United States. doi:10.7799/1375637.
Hand, Maureen, Augustine, Chad, Feldman, David, Kurup, Parthiv, Beiter, Philipp, and O'Connor, Patrick. 2017. "2017 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB): Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies". United States. doi:10.7799/1375637. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1375637.
@article{osti_1375637,
title = {2017 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB): Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies},
author = {Hand, Maureen and Augustine, Chad and Feldman, David and Kurup, Parthiv and Beiter, Philipp and O'Connor, Patrick},
abstractNote = {Each year since 2015, NREL has presented Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) in a spreadsheet that contains detailed cost and performance data (both current and projected) for renewable and conventional technologies. The spreadsheet includes a workbook for each technology. This spreadsheet provides data for the 2017 ATB. In this edition of the ATB, offshore wind power has been updated to include 15 technical resource groups. And, two options are now provided for representing market conditions for project financing, including current market conditions and long-term historical conditions. For more information, see https://atb.nrel.gov/.},
doi = {10.7799/1375637},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2017,
month = 8
}

Dataset:

Save / Share:
  • Life cycle analysis (LCA) is an environmental assessment method that quantifies the environmental performance of a product system over its entire lifetime, from cradle to grave. Based on a set of relevant metrics, the method is aptly suited for comparing the environmental performance of competing products systems. This file contains LCA data and results for electric power production including geothermal power. The LCA for electric power has been broken down into two life cycle stages, namely plant and fuel cycles. Relevant metrics include the energy ratio and greenhouse gas (GHG) ratios, where the former is the ratio of system inputmore » energy to total lifetime electrical energy out and the latter is the ratio of the sum of all incurred greenhouse gases (in CO2 equivalents) divided by the same energy output. Specific information included herein are material to power (MPR) ratios for a range of power technologies for conventional thermoelectric, renewables (including three geothermal power technologies), and coproduced natural gas/geothermal power. For the geothermal power scenarios, the MPRs include the casing, cement, diesel, and water requirements for drilling wells and topside piping. Also included herein are energy and GHG ratios for plant and fuel cycle stages for the range of considered electricity generating technologies. Some of this information are MPR data extracted directly from the literature or from models (eg. ICARUS – a subset of ASPEN models) and others (energy and GHG ratios) are results calculated using GREET models and MPR data. MPR data for wells included herein were based on the Argonne well materials model and GETEM well count results.« less
  • The goal of this project was to compare and contrast utility scale power plant characteristics used in data sets that support energy market models. Characteristics include both technology cost and technology performance projections to the year 2050. Cost parameters include installed capital costs and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Performance parameters include plant size, heat rate, capacity factor or availability factor, and plant lifetime. Conventional, renewable, and emerging electricity generating technologies were considered. Six data sets, each associated with a different model, were selected. Two of the data sets represent modeled results, not direct model inputs. These two data setsmore » include cost and performance improvements that result from increased deployment as well as resulting capacity factors estimated from particular model runs; other data sets represent model input data. For the technologies contained in each data set, the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) was also evaluated, according to published cost, performance, and fuel assumptions.« less
  • The goal of this project was to compare and contrast utility scale power plant characteristics used in data sets that support energy market models. Characteristics include both technology cost and technology performance projections to the year 2050. Cost parameters include installed capital costs and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Performance parameters include plant size, heat rate, capacity factor or availability factor, and plant lifetime. Conventional, renewable, and emerging electricity generating technologies were considered. Six data sets, each associated with a different model, were selected. Two of the data sets represent modeled results, not direct model inputs. These two data setsmore » include cost and performance improvements that result from increased deployment as well as resulting capacity factors estimated from particular model runs; other data sets represent model input data. For the technologies contained in each data set, the levelized cost of energy (LCOE) was also evaluated, according to published cost, performance, and fuel assumptions.« less
  • Current and future cost and performance data for electricity generating technologies, including both renewable and conventional technologies.
  • This Energy Commission staff draft report presents preliminary levelized cost estimates for several generic central-station electricity generation technologies. California has traditionally adopted energy policies that balance the goals of supporting economic development, improving environmental quality and promoting resource diversity. In order to be effective, such policies must be based on comprehensive and timely gathering of information. With this goal in mind, the purpose of the report is to provide comparative levelized cost estimates for a set of renewable (e.g., solar) and nonrenewable (e.g., natural gas-fired) central-station electricity generation resources, based on each technology's operation and capital cost. Decision-makers and othersmore » can use this information to compare the generic cost to build specific technology. These costs are not site specific. If a developer builds a specific power plant at a specific location, the cost of siting that plant at that specific location must be considered. The Energy Commission staff also identifies the type of fuel used by each technology and a description of the manner in which the technology operates in the generation system. The target audiences of this report are both policy-makers and anyone wishing to understand some of the fundamental attributes that are generally considered when evaluating the cost of building and operating different electricity generation technology resources. These costs do not reflect the total cost to consumers of adding these technologies to a resources portfolio. These technology characterizations do not capture all of the system, environmental or other relevant attributes that would typically be needed by a portfolio manager to conduct a comprehensive ''comparative value analysis''. A portfolio analysis will vary depending on the particular criteria and measurement goals of each study. For example, some form of firm capacity is typically needed with wind generation to support system reliability. [DJE-2005]« less