Staff Draft Report. Comparative Cost of California Central Station Electricity Generation Technologies.

Badr, Magdy; Benjamin, Richard

doi:10.2172/860608

Title: Staff Draft Report. Comparative Cost of California Central Station Electricity Generation Technologies.

Full Record
Other Related Research

Abstract

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 others 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 costmore »« less

Authors:: Badr, Magdy; Benjamin, Richard

Publication Date:: Tue Feb 11 00:00:00 EST 2003

Sponsoring Org.:: USDOE

OSTI Identifier:: 860608

Report Number(s):: 100-03-001SD
TRN: US200606%%632

Resource Type:: Technical Report

Country of Publication:: United States

Language:: English

Subject:: 14 SOLAR ENERGY; 03 NATURAL GAS; 20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS; CALIFORNIA; CAPITALIZED COST; ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY; SOLAR POWER PLANTS; COST ESTIMATION; POWER GENERATION; GAS TURBINE POWER PLANTS; NATURAL GAS; COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS; Geothermal Legacy

Citation Formats


                    Badr, Magdy, and Benjamin, Richard. Staff Draft Report. Comparative Cost of California Central Station Electricity Generation Technologies..  United States: N. p., 2003. 
        Web.  doi:10.2172/860608.

Copy to clipboard


                    Badr, Magdy, & Benjamin, Richard. Staff Draft Report. Comparative Cost of California Central Station Electricity Generation Technologies..  United States.  https://doi.org/10.2172/860608

Copy to clipboard


                    Badr, Magdy, and Benjamin, Richard. 2003.  
        "Staff Draft Report. Comparative Cost of California Central Station Electricity Generation Technologies.".  United States.  https://doi.org/10.2172/860608.  https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/860608.

Copy to clipboard


                    
@article{osti_860608,

  title        = {Staff Draft Report. Comparative Cost of California Central Station Electricity Generation Technologies.},

  author       = {Badr, Magdy and Benjamin, Richard},

  abstractNote = {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 others 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]},

  doi          = {10.2172/860608},

  url          = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/860608},
  journal      = {},
number       = ,

  volume       = ,

  place        = {United States},

  year         = {Tue Feb 11 00:00:00 EST 2003},

  month        = {Tue Feb 11 00:00:00 EST 2003}

}

Copy to clipboard

Technical Report:

View Technical Report (3.29 MB)

https://doi.org/10.2172/860608

Save / Share:

Export Metadata

Save to My Library

Similar records in OSTI.GOV collections:

WE-A-16A-01: International Medical Physics Symposium: Increasing Access to Medical Physics Education/Training and Research Excellence

Journal Article Bortfeld, T; Ngoma, T; Odedina, F; ... - Medical Physics

In response to a world in which cancer is a growing global health challenge, there is now a greater need for US Medical Physicists and other Radiation Oncology professionals across institutions to work together and be more globally engaged in the fight against cancer. There are currently many opportunities for Medical Physicists to contribute to alleviating this pressing need, especially in helping enhance access to Medical Physics Education/training and Research Excellence across international boundaries, particularly for low and middle-income countries (LMIC), which suffer from a drastic shortage of accessible knowledge and quality training programs in radiotherapy. Many Medical Physicists aremore »« less
https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4889368
Financial Analysis of Incentive Mechanisms to Promote Energy Efficiency: Case Study of a Prototypical Southwest Utility

Technical Report Cappers, Peter; Goldman, Charles; Chait, Michele; ...

Many state regulatory commissions and policymakers want utilities to aggressively pursue energy efficiency as a strategy to mitigate demand and energy growth, diversify the resource mix, and provide an alternative to building new, costly generation. However, as the National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency (NAPEE 2007) points out, many utilities continue to shy away from aggressively expanding their energy efficiency efforts when their shareholder's fundamental financial interests are placed at risk by doing so. Thus, there is increased interest in developing effective ratemaking and policy approaches that address utility disincentives to pursue energy efficiency or lack of incentives for moremore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/949969

Full Text Available
Roadmap for Development of Natural Gas Vehicle Fueling Infrastructructure and Analysis of Vehicular Natural Gas Consumption by Niche Sector

Technical Report Yborra, Stephen

Vehicular natural gas consumption is on the rise, totaling nearly 200 million GGEs in 2005, despite declines in total NGV inventory in recent years. This may be attributed to greater deployment of higher fuel use medium- and heavy-duty NGVs as compared to the low fuel use of the natural gas-powered LDVs that exited the market through attrition, many of which were bi-fuel. Natural gas station counts are down to about 1100 from their peak of about 1300. Many of the stations that closed were under-utilized or not used at all while most new stations were developed with greater attention tomore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/922579

Full Text Available
Policy, Permit, Perform: Using City Benchmarking Data and Building Construction Permit History to Identify Energy Performance Improvements

Technical Report Stevens, Casey; Tyler, Matt; Lee, Allen; ...

The City of Portland (City) and Multnomah County 2015 Climate Action Plan targets a 40 percent reduction in carbon emissions below 1990 levels by 2030. To reach this goal, the plan includes a key objective to reduce the total energy use of existing buildings by 25 percent. Buildings are responsible for one-half of carbon emissions in Portland, Oregon, U.S., and improving their performance is critical to achieving the City’s climate goals. As part of its climate action planning, the City passed an ordinance on April 22, 2015, requiring commercial buildings 20,000 ft2 and larger to benchmark and disclose annual energymore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/1477793

Full Text Available
Sustainable Forest Bioenergy Initiative

Technical Report Breger, Dwayne; Rizzo, Rob

In the state’s Electricity Restructuring Act of 1998, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts recognized the opportunity and strategic benefits to diversifying its electric generation capacity with renewable energy. Through this legislation, the Commonwealth established one of the nation’s first Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard (RPS) programs, mandating the increasing use of renewable resources in its energy mix. Bioenergy, meeting low emissions and advanced technology standards, was recognized as an eligible renewable energy technology. Stimulated by the state’s RPS program, several project development groups have been looking seriously at building large woody biomass generation units in western Massachusetts to utilize the woody biomassmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/1024804

Full Text Available

Similar Records