The Experts below are selected from a list of 11607 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Robert H Socolow - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
Jeffery B Greenblatt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
Robert H Williams - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
David Denkenberger - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
Samir Succar - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.
-
baseload wind energy modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation
Energy Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Jeffery B Greenblatt, Samir Succar, David Denkenberger, Robert H Williams, Robert H SocolowAbstract:Abstract The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a Cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (“wind+gas”), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (“wind+CAES”). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (“gas”) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p NGeff , being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p NGeff =$5/GJ (lower heating value), 650 W/m 2 wind resource, 750 km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p NGeff =$9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least Dispatch Cost (short-run marginal Cost) is Dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total Cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is one-fourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest Dispatch Cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC equiv. , with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total Cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel Costs. This ability to compete in economic Dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.