**Number range CHAPTERRenewable Energy Technologies**

**Appendix 1**

**Technology Characterizations**

**Contents**

1.  **Biomass Electric**

2.  **Biomass Transporation Fuels**

3.  **Concentrated Solar Power**

4.  **Geothermal Energy**

5.  **Hydropower (Advanced)**

6.  **Photoconversion**

7.  **Photoconversion**

8.  **Photovoltaics**

9.  **Solar Buildings**

10. **Wind Energy**

**Biomass Electric**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Biopower, also called biomass power is the generation of electric     |
| power from biomass resources ranging from agricultural and forest     |
| product residues to crops grown specifically for energy production.   |
| Biopower reduces GHG emission by substituting biomass for coal in     |
| existing power plants or using biomass alone in plants that displace  |
| new fossil plants. Since biomass absorbs CO~2~ as it grows, the       |
| entire biopower process of growing, burning, and regrowing biomass    |
| can result in very low CO~2~ emissions. Through the use of residues,  |
| biopower systems can even represent a net sink for GHG emissions by   |
| avoiding methane emissions that would result from landfilling of the  |
| un-used biomass.                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| **System Concepts**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image1.wmf)• Direct combustion systems burn biomass in a    |
| boiler to produce steam that is expanded to produce power.            |
|                                                                       |
| • Cofiring substitutes biomass for coal in existing coal-fired        |
| boilers. The highest levels of cofiring (15% on a heat input basis)   |
| require separate feed preparation and injection systems.              |
|                                                                       |
| • Gasification converts biomass to a fuel gas that can be substituted |
| for natural gas in combustion turbines.                               |
|                                                                       |
| **Representative Technologies**                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • For the near term, cofiring is the most cost-effective method.      |
| Large coal-fired plants are more efficient (33%) than typically       |
| smaller biomass-only plants ( 20%).                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Biomass gasification combined cycle plants promise comparable or    |
| higher efficiencies (\> 40%) using only biomass because they are more |
| efficient than steam cycles. Gasification also offers the possibilty  |
| for higher percentage cofiring and cofiring in natural gas combined   |
| cycles. Other technologies being developed include integrated         |
| gasification/fuel cell and biorefinery concepts.                      |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • The existing biopower industry, nearly 1000 plants, consists of     |
| direct combustion plants with a small amount of cofiring (c. 400 MW). |
| Plant size averages 20 MWe, and the biomass-to-electricity conversion |
| efficiency is about 20%. Grid-connected electrical capacity has       |
| increased from less than 200 MWe in 1978 to over 6200 MWe. More than  |
| 75% of this power is cogenerated with process heat in the forest      |
| products industries. Wood-fired systems account for more than 80% of  |
| this capacity. In addition, about 3,300 MWe of municipal solid waste  |
| and landfill gas generating capacity exists. Recent studies have      |
| revealed that, on a life cycle basis, the existing direct combustion  |
| biopower plants represent an annual net carbon sink of 4 MMTCe.       |
| Prices generally range from 8 to 12¢/kWh.                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Biomass cofiring with coal is the nearest term and least cost       |
| (\$50 - 250/kW of biomass capacity) option for large scale use of     |
| biomass for electricity generation and for increasing the efficiency  |
| of generation from biomass (coal fleet avg. efficiency = approx.      |
| 33%). Cofiring also results in sulfur dioxide and, if done properly,  |
| nitrogen oxide emissions from coal plants. When cofiring residues,    |
| GHG emissions are also reduced by a percentage greater than the       |
| cofiring level (23% GHG reduction with 15% cofiring for e.g.) The DOE |
| biopower program is conducting research and field verifications to    |
| address specific technical and non-technical barriers to cofiring.    |
| Including of cofiring and the use of residues in the renewable energy |
| tax credits would likely fuel explosive growth of this pathway.       |
|                                                                       |
| • Biomass gasification for large-scale (20 - 100MWe) power production |
| is being commercialized. It will be an important technology for       |
| cogeneration in the forest products industries, as well as for new    |
| base load capacity. Gasification also is useful for high percentage   |
| cofiring with coal and with natural gas as well as a potential        |
| platform for a biorefinery. The projected cost of electricity from a  |
| gasification plant of 50 MWe or more is 3.5 - 7¢/kWh depending on     |
| technology maturity, financing, feedstock cost and incentives.        |
|                                                                       |
| • Small biopower systems have been used for years in the developing   |
| world for electricity generation. These systems have not always been  |
| reliable and clean however. DOE is developing systems for village     |
| power applications and for developed world distributed generation     |
| that are efficient, reliable and clean. These systems range in size   |
| from 3kW to 5MW and will begin field verification in the next 1-3     |
| years.                                                                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| By 2005:                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Develop cost-effective residue collection/crop harvest equipment    |
| and systems                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Resolve issues surrounding NSR, ash use and SCR issues associated   |
| with cofiring.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Begin field verification of competitively selected gasifier systems |
| with commercial IGCC and CHP potential.                               |
|                                                                       |
| By 2010:                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Reduce delivered cost of energy crops by 30%.                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Expand cofired capacity to 5% of operating coal capacity            |
|                                                                       |
| • Extend biomass gasifier cofiring to 1% of natural gas capacity.     |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstrate integrated operation of biomass gasifier with advanced  |
| power generation (turbines and/or fuel cells).                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Complete field verification of a commercially viable suite of small |
| biopower systems for village power and distributed generation.        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration (Cont'd)**         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| By 2020:                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Establish 10 million acres of sustainable energy crops.             |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstrate biomass--fuel cell power technology                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Expand biomass/coal cofired capacity to 10% of operating coal       |
| capacity.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Reduce delivered cost of energy crops by 50%.                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Extend biomass gasifier cofiring to 5% of natural gas combined      |
| cycle capacity.                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Research on advanced concepts such as combined thermochemical and   |
| biological processes for multiple products.                           |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Resolve ash chemistry and deposition issues in cofiring             |
| applications, and establish cofired ash as an acceptable material for |
| coal ash markets.                                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Determine mechanisms of and the best methods to achieve NO~x~       |
| reduction in cofiring.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstrate long-term operation of gas turbines on cleaned biomass  |
| synthesis gas.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Enhance crop yields and properties while minimizing inputs (water,  |
| fertilizer).                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • Resolve materials issues for increasingly severe environments for   |
| combustion and gasification/gas turbine systems.                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Foster successful energy crop business structures.                  |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Community-based demonstrations of small systems in collaboration    |
| with U.S. Forest Service                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Solicitation for novel ideas and projects to develop gasifier       |
| technologies for cofiring, IGCC and co-product use.                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Field verification of 200 tpd indirect biomass gasifier in          |
| Burlington, Vermont                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Supporting research in system integration and system performance    |
| and emission profiling and improvement                                |
|                                                                       |
| • Feedstock development effort focused on increased yields, reduced   |
| inputs and business model developement sharted with DOE Biofuels      |
|                                                                       |
| • On-going field verifications (c. 12 sites) and supporting research  |
| to resolve cofiring issues and complete field verification            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Past Successes and Benefits**                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Identifying the fouling mechanisms in commercial combustion         |
| equipment provided a way to mitigate the problem and has resulted in  |
| innovative approaches to alternative combustion technologies.         |
|                                                                       |
| • R&D 100 award for FERCO Vermont gasifier                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Successfully demonstrated NOx reductions from cofiring in excess of |
| cofired percentage                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Completed suite of life cycle assessments verifying and quantifying |
| environmental benefits of biopower systems                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Successful switchgrass harvesting and cofiring in Ottumwa, IA and   |
| Gadsden, LA.                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • Successful demonstration of village-scale gasifier/engine system    |
| integrated wtih PV and village mini-grid in the Philippines.          |
|                                                                       |
| • Public release of BIOCOST model to allow evaluation of energy crop  |
| production cost scenarios.                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Annual switchgrass yields of \> 10 tons/acre obtained from best     |
| test plots in three southern states.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Biopower capacity in the United States is 9.5 GW; 2/3 is           |
| grid-connected, and the remaining facilities offset power purchases.  |
| Capacity in the rest of the world is about 20--25 GW. U.S. investment |
| in equipment is \$300M to \$500M/year. At least six major engineering |
| procurement and construction companies and several multinational      |
| boiler manufacturers are active. Competing technologies include       |
| low-cost subsidized fuels abroad and biomass technologies developed   |
| in Scandinavia. Guarantees and warranties are a significant issue,    |
| giving established technologies an advantage despite their lower      |
| efficiency and higher carbon emissions compared with advanced IGCC    |
| and other advanced modular technologies. The critical challenge to    |
| widespread deployment is cost and reliability of the fuel supply,     |
| especially outside industries such as sugar and pulp and paper. Lack  |
| of well-demonstrated performance of advanced technologies continues   |
| to be a barrier to implementation.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • The existing industry (non-MSW or LFG) represents GHG sink of 4     |
| MMTCe.                                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • PURPA-driven biopower expansion between 1980 and 1990 resulted in   |
| 66,000 jobs and \$15 billion in private investment.                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • 2010: 10--20 MtC/year; 2020: 15--25 MtC/year; 2030: 25--40 MtC/year |
| (not including landfill gas).                                         |
|                                                                       |
| • This assumes significant RD&D investment in crop and infrastructure |
| development, optimizing cofiring benefits and costs, and              |
| demonstrating gasification-based technologies.                        |
|                                                                       |
| • It is assumed that cofiring will directly replace coal power        |
| generation and gasification systems will replace the average power    |
| system carbon emissions.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE Biomass Power Program funding: \$32.5M in FY 2000, \$40M in FY |
| 2001 and \$50M in FY2002; no other significant federal funding        |
| directly for biopower. USDA has extensive research in crop production |
| and is beginning to fund community based small system demos with DOE. |
| The largest non-U.S. effort is within the European Union. Total       |
| public and private investment in R&D is about \$50M.                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Estimated federal funding required to achieve the target market     |
| penetrations is \$80M/year in 2003--2010, \$100 M/year in 2010--2020, |
| and \$127M/year in 2020--2030.                                        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs (Cont'd)**                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • The estimated cofiring cumulative capacity is 15,000 MW in 2010 and |
| 30,000 MW in 2020 and beyond including 400 MW of existing capacity    |
| and assumes including of cofiring and residue use in tax credit       |
| legislation as well as resolution of RD&D issues. The estimated       |
| direct combustion capacity is about 6,200MW currently and may expand  |
| modestly depending on the speed of cofring deployment and biomass     |
| gasifier development. The estimated IGCC capacity is 1,950 in 2010,   |
| 7,100 in 2020, and 16,350 in 2030 again assuming successful           |
| resolution of RD&D issues and favorable tax treatment.                |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Rural economic development due to employment in feedstock           |
| production and transportation. Major export potential (cumulative 3   |
| trillion kWh demand growth in non-OECD Asia through 2010).            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Biomass Transportation Fuels**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Biomass transportation fuels, or biofuels, are liquid transportation  |
| fuels made from cellulosic plant biomass (fibrous materials, as       |
| opposed to starch such as corn) that can be used to displace          |
| petroleum used in internal combustion engines. In the future,         |
| biofuels such as ethanol and hydrogen will play a role as energy      |
| storage media in fuel cells.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image2.wmf){width="2.7083333333333335in"                    |
| height="3.3472222222222223in"}**System Concepts**                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Biomass feedstock supply systems need to be widely available across |
| the United States, but must be locally optimized for climate, soil    |
| conditions, and end-use requirements. The feedstock supply systems    |
| must be environmentally sustainable, available year-round, profitable |
| to farmers, and affordable for bioenergy and biobased products        |
| production. Quantities must be sufficient to support large-scale      |
| processing facilities.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • The cellulose and hemicellulose in biomass are pretreated using     |
| dilute acid and steam (in order to facilitate the subsequent          |
| hydrolysis operation) and hydrolyzed into different types of sugars.  |
| Yeasts or bacteria are used to ferment sugars into ethanol, much like |
| the production of alcoholic beverages. The ethanol product stream     |
| contains much water and some impurities. It is processed into a more  |
| concentrated and purified ethanol stream via distillation and other   |
| techniques.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Biomass for conversion to liquid fuels can be obtained from wastes, |
| agricultural residues such as corn stover or from energy crops such   |
| as switchgrass.                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  • The residual products from manufacturing biofuels (mainly       |
|     lignin) can be used to generate electricity or to make other      |
|     gasoline additives as coproducts.                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Biorefineries that convert biomass into a range of bioenergy and    |
| biobased products are the key to commercial success. Fuel production  |
| provides a large volume product to achieve economies of scale, while  |
| lower volume bio-based co-products can improve the economic           |
| competitiveness of biomass as a sustainable source of energy.         |
|                                                                       |
| • Natural oils from biomass can be converted into fuels and chemicals |
| through a variety of chemical and biological processes.               |
|                                                                       |
| **Representative Technologies**                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • *Sugar Based Biorefinery*. Biological production of biofuels        |
| involves hydrolysis of fibrous biomass to form soluble sugars, using  |
| enzymes or acid catalysts, followed by microbial conversion of sugars |
| to ethanol and other products.                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • *Syngas Based Biorefinery*. Thermochemical production of biofuels   |
| involves gasification to form synthesis gas, from which alcohols and  |
| diesel fuel substitutes.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • *Renewable Diesel from Fats and Oils*. The use of natural oils has  |
| both biological and thermochemical routes that need to be explored.   |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • *Acid Hydrolysis Pioneer Plants.* Over a century worth of research  |
| has led to the development of acid hydrolysis technology for          |
| producing sugars and fermenting them to ethanol. DOE's industrial     |
| partners are applying this technology to produce competitively priced |
| ethanol using low or even negative cost sources of biomass. These     |
| first plants will supply ethanol to the fuel additive market, which   |
| currently values ethanol at around \$1.20 per gallon.                 |
|                                                                       |
| • *Enzymatic Hydrolysis Technology*. Enzymes now under development    |
| could reduce the cost of sugar production from biomass, leading to    |
| the first large scale biorefineries using considerably larger (but    |
| more costly) supplies of biomass.                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Future R&D advances have clear potential to lower the cost of       |
| biofuels, with commensurately larger fuel markets becoming            |
| accessible. The central technological challenge is to advance biomass |
| processing to a level of maturity comparable to that of the existing  |
| petroleum industry. Development of a large biomass resource basis is  |
| another important challenge.                                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • By the year 2003, DOE's industrial partner, BC International, will  |
| start up a 20 million gallon ethanol plant, based on dilute acid      |
| hydrolysis technology using sugar cane processing waste as a          |
| feedstock.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • By the year 2003, Masada Resources Group will deomonstrate          |
| concentrated acid hydrolysis technology for conversion of municipal   |
| solid waste                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • By the year 2004, our two industrial enzyme partnerships will       |
| provide new cellulase enzymes that are ten-fold more cost effective   |
| than what is commercially available today.                            |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2004, BCI will start up a rice straw to ethanol facility based   |
| on dilute acid technology                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2006, industry partners will start up a demonstration scale (20  |
| to 100 tons per day) facility to prove the enzyme sugar platform      |
| technology.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • By the year 2010, large scale production of ethanol from corn       |
| stover will begin to produce ethanol as a fuel additive.              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration (Cont'd)**         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Biological processing: low-cost production of cellulases,           |
| microorganism development for consolidated processing, advanced       |
| pretreatment and hydrolysis process, coproduct production and         |
| recovery.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Thermochemical processing: improved understanding of reaction       |
| fundamentals, reaction engineering to improve performance, new        |
| catalyst *development.*                                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Biomass production: improved stover collection technolog,           |
| understanding of the environmental impacts of stover collection and   |
| use, crop development for improved productivity and robustness;       |
| improved cultivating, harvesting, and collection technologies;        |
| analysis of long-term land availability and crop economics.           |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Industrial partnerships for demonstrating waste biomass-to-ethanol  |
| technology.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Feedstock production research (primarily on corn stover collection  |
| and switchgrass production and harvesting).                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Technology for converting cellulosic materials to sugars for        |
| subsequent production of ethanol and other higher value products (R&D |
| on chemical pretreatment, genetic engineering of new enzymes and      |
| organisms, and process development).                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Recent Success**                                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Breakthroughs in genetically engineered microorganisms capable of   |
| fermenting the broad range of sugars found in biomass. These advances |
| have led to patents and licensing of organisms to the corn ethanol    |
| industry to enable fermenting of the cellulosic waste portions of the |
| corn plant, and other potential cellulosic ethanol producers, as well |
| as an "R&D 100" award.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • Successful continuous operation of a pilot-scale ethanol process    |
| using low-value residual biomass. This testing was done with an       |
| industrial partner at DOE's one-of-a-kind user facility for           |
| pilot-scale production of ethanol.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Engaging of two major industrial enzyme companies in the            |
| development of a new generation of cellulase enzymes to support an    |
| enzyme sugar platform.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • Discovery of novel thermotolerant cellulase enzymes and their genes |
| from Acidothermus cellulolyticus, a bacterium isolated by DOE         |
| researchers from the hot springs in Yellowstone National Park         |
|                                                                       |
| • Pilot demonstration of novel countercurrent acid hydrolysis         |
| technology for pretreatment of total hydrolysis of biomass.           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Fuel-grade ethanol from cellulosic biomass is not yet commercial.   |
| Fuel-grade ethanol from corn is a 1.5-billion-gal/year industry       |
| (\$2B/year in sales) in the United States. Ethanol is used primarily  |
| as a fuel extender (gasohol) and secondarily as an oxygenate and an   |
| additive for reformulated gasoline.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Large-scale displacement of petroleum will rely primarily on        |
| cellulosic materials. Starch crops such as corn will play an          |
| important transitional role.                                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions and Oil Displacement**                            |
|                                                                       |
| • The relatively high capital investment costs of a commercial        |
| ethanol production plant and the first-of-a-kind nature of such a     |
| plant may cause investors to be overly cautious in terms of           |
| commitment. Nevertheless, niche markets offer opportunities for       |
| technology developers who want to commercialize in the near future.   |
| With a vigorous RD3 program and appropriate national policy support,  |
| our cost reduction target would result in the market penetration and  |
| associated benefits shown below:                                      |
|                                                                       |
| Year 2010 2015 2020 2025                                              |
|                                                                       |
| Billion gallons of ethanol per year                                   |
|                                                                       |
| from cellulosic biomass, 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0                              |
|                                                                       |
| Oil displaced (million barrels per year) 31 62 93 124                 |
|                                                                       |
| Carbon emissions reduction (million metric tones C per year) 3.2 6.4  |
| 9.6 12.8                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **Job Creation**                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2015, 80,000 domestic jobs would result from the biomass ethanol |
| market shown above                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Funding from 1996 to 2001 has ranged from a low of \$21MM to a high |
| of \$36MM. This year (FY 2001), funding is around \$31MM. This        |
| including funding for research on conversion technology and feedstock |
| development, as well as for regional biomass outreach activities.     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potenital Benefits and Costs (Cont'd)**                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions and Oil Displacement**                            |
|                                                                       |
| • The relatively high capital investment costs of a commercial        |
| ethanol production plant and the first-of-a-kind nature of such a     |
| plant may cause investors to be overly cautious in terms of           |
| commitment. Nevertheless, niche markets offer opportunities for       |
| technology developers who want to commercialize in the near future.   |
| With a vigorous RD3 program and appropriate national policy support,  |
| our cost reduction target would result in the market penetration and  |
| associated benefits shown below:                                      |
|                                                                       |
| Year 2010 2015 2020 2025                                              |
|                                                                       |
| Billion gallons of ethanol per year                                   |
|                                                                       |
| from cellulosic biomass, 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0                              |
|                                                                       |
| Oil displaced (million barrels per year) 31 62 93 124                 |
|                                                                       |
| Carbon emissions reduction (million metric tones C per year) 3.2 6.4  |
| 9.6 12.8                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **Job Creation**                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2015, 80,000 domestic jobs would result from the biomass ethanol |
| market shown above                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Funding from 1996 to 2001 has ranged from a low of \$21MM to a high |
| of \$36MM. This year (FY 2001), funding is around \$31MM. This        |
| including funding for research on conversion technology and feedstock |
| development, as well as for regional biomass outreach activities.     |
|                                                                       |
| • Achieving the economical carbon reduction costs described above     |
| requires significant funding increases. The technology improvements   |
| required call for quickly ramping up the research program from its    |
| current level, averaging \$75M/year during 2000--2010. During         |
| 2010--2020, an average of \$100M/year would be needed for work on     |
| biomass production to ensure a large and cost-effective resource base |
| for fuel production by 2020. Fuel production technologies must close  |
| the cost gap between petroleum and biomass-derived fuels. During      |
| 2020--2030, \$50M/year would be required.                             |
|                                                                       |
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Biofuels can provide renewable substitutes for both gasoline and    |
| diesel fuel, supporting the energy needs of both the light-duty and   |
| the heavy-duty market. Diesel fuel usage is expected to grow at a     |
| faster rate than gasoline usage. These two uses represent almost a    |
| quarter of total energy consumption in the United States.             |
|                                                                       |
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Biofuels can provide renewable substitutes for both gasoline and    |
| diesel fuel, supporting the energy needs of both the light-duty and   |
| the heavy-duty market. Diesel fuel usage is expected to grow at a     |
| faster rate than gasoline usage. These two uses represent almost a    |
| quarter of MTBE is a chemical compound that is used as a fuel         |
| additive in gasoline. Refiners have primarily added MTBE to gasoline  |
| to meet Clean Air Act requirements when producing reformulated        |
| gasoline (RFG) for use in areas with severe ozone problems. MTBE      |
| provides oxygen and helps meet the requirement that RFG contains 2    |
| percent oxygen by weight. Many states have also voluntarily chosen to |
| use RFG as a means of addressing less severe ozone problems. Some     |
| refiners use MTBE to boost gasoline octane. However, MTBE dissolves   |
| and spreads readily in the groundwater underlying a spill site,       |
| resists biodegradation, and is difficult to remove from the           |
| groundwater. With California, New York and a number of other states   |
| phasing down or eliminating MTBE as an oxygenate (additional states   |
| are considering similar measures), the demand for ethanol as a        |
| replacement is expected to grow rapidly.                              |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Biofuels provide opportunities for agriculture and rural America.   |
| Export of U.S. biofuels technology provides a lever for maintaining   |
| U.S. economic and technological leadership in the global marketplace. |
| Biofuels will also address problems of urban air pollution.           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Expand funding and focus on core technology improvement.            |
|                                                                       |
| • Enhance collaboration among national laboratories, academia, and    |
| other government research sponsor.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Focus industry partnerships on common technical obstacles for       |
| biomass-derived fuels and chemicals.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Stabilize federal tax policies that recognize benefits of           |
| alternative fuels.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Seek to resolve key analytical uncertainties (long term costs, land |
| availability, life cycle benefits and impacts).                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Concentrating Solar Power**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) systems concentrate solar energy 50   |
| to 5000 times to produce high-temperature thermal energy, which is    |
| used to produce electricity for distributed or bulk generation        |
| process applications.                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image3.emf){width="2.145138888888889in"                     |
| height="2.588888888888889in"}**System Concepts**                      |
|                                                                       |
| • In CSP systems, highly reflective sun-tracking mirrors produce      |
| temperatures of 400 to 800C in the working fluid of a receiver; this  |
| heat is used in conventional heat engines (steam or gas turbines or   |
| Stirling engines) to produce electricity at system solar-to-electric  |
| efficiencies of up to 30%. Systems using advanced photovoltaics (PV)  |
| cells may achieve efficiencies greater than 35%.                      |
|                                                                       |
| **Representative Technologies**                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • A parabolic trough system focuses solar energy on a linear          |
| oil-filled receiver to collect heat to generate steam to power a      |
| steam turbine. When the sun is not shining, steam can be generated    |
| with fossil fuel to meet utility needs. Plant sizes can range from 10 |
| to 100 MWe.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • A power tower system uses many large heliostats to focus the solar  |
| energy onto a tower-mounted central receiver filled with a            |
| molten-salt working fluid that produces steam. The hot salt can be    |
| stored extremely efficiently to allow power production to match       |
| utility demand even when the sun is not shining. Plant size can range |
| from 30 to 200 MWe.                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • A dish/engine system (see photo) uses a dish-shaped reflector to    |
| power a small Stirling or Brayton engine/generator or a               |
| high-conentrator PV module mounted at the focus of the dish. Dishes   |
| are 2 to 25 kW in size and can be used individually or in small       |
| groups for distributed, remote or village power, or in larger (1to 10 |
| MWe) clusters for utility applications, including end-of-line         |
| support. They are easily hybridized with fossil fuel.                 |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Nine parabolic trough plants, with a rated capacity of 354 MWe,     |
| have been operating in California since 1985. Trough system costs of  |
| about 12 to 14¢/kWh have been demonstrated commercially.              |
|                                                                       |
| • Solar Two, a 10-MWe pilot power tower with 3 hours of storage,      |
| provided all the information needed to scale up to a 30-100 MW        |
| commercial plant, the first of which is now being planned in Spain.   |
|                                                                       |
| • A number of prototype dish/Stirling systems are currently operating |
| in Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and Spain. High levels of performance    |
| have been established; durability remains to be proven, although some |
| systems have operated for over 10,000 hours.                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • RD&D goals are to reduce costs of CSP systems to 5 to 8¢/kWh with   |
| moderate production levels within 5 years, and below 5c/kWh at high   |
| production levels in the long term.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • RD&D efforts are targeted to improve performance and lifetime,      |
| reduce manufacturing costs with improved designs, provide advanced    |
| designs for long-term competitiveness, and address barriers to market |
| entry.                                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • Improved manufacturing technologies are needed to reduce the cost   |
| of key components, especially for first-plant applications where      |
| economies of scale are not yet available.                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstration of Stirling engine performance and reliability in the |
| field are critical to the success of dish/engine systems.             |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Key DOE program activities are targeted to support the next         |
| commercial opportunities for these technologies, demonstrate improved |
| performance and reliability of components and systems, reduce energy  |
| costs, develop advanced systems and applications, and address         |
| non-technical barriers and champion CSP.                              |
|                                                                       |
| • FY 2001 DOE funding levels were about \$14M. Several European       |
| countries and Israel have programs comparable in size.                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Recent Success**                                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Improved operation of 25-kW dish engine systems have led to         |
| initiation of a 1-MW demonstration project in Nevada, scheduled to    |
| start in FY02.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • The 10-MW Solar Two pilot power tower plant operated successfully   |
| near Barstow, California, leading to the first commercial plant being |
| planned in Spain.                                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Operations and maintenance costs have been reduced through          |
| technology improvements at the commercial parabolic trough plants in  |
| California by 40%, saving plant operators \$50M.                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Parabolic troughs have been commercialized and nine plants (354 MW  |
| total) have operated in California since 1985. New commercial plants  |
| are being considered for California, Nevada, and Arizona.             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Successful operation of Solar Two has provided the basis for a      |
| partnership to provide the first 30-100 MW power tower plant.         |
|                                                                       |
| • Dish/Stirling systems are expected to be available by 2005, after   |
| deployment and testing of 1 MW (40 systems) over the next 2 years.    |
|                                                                       |
| • The World Bank's Solar Initiative is pursuing CSP technologies for  |
| less-developed countries. The World Bank considers CSP as a primary   |
| candidate for Global Environment Facility funding, which could total  |
| \$1B to \$2B for projects over the next 2 years.                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Carbon reductions are estimated to be 1 to 5 MtC/year in 2010, 5 to |
| 15 MtC/year in 2020, and 15 to 30 MtC/year in 2030.                   |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Federal R&D funds for CSP of \$13.7M in FY 2001 have been matched   |
| by industry cost sharing of about \$90M/year.                         |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE support of RD&D has been required because of the specialized    |
| technology development, the need for reducing costs and for reducing  |
| barriers to market penetration. The federal CSP program provides      |
| expert technical support as well as serving as a catalyst/facilitator |
| for participation of utilities and manufacturers to assist in driving |
| down system costs.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Required incremental RD&D expenditures for CSP are estimated to be  |
| \$30M/year through 2010 and \$10M/year through 2030.                  |
|                                                                       |
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • CSP technologies provide firm, nonintermittent electricity          |
| generation (peaking or baseload capacity) when coupled with storage.  |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Solar thermal technologies are environmentally benign with          |
| essentially no emissions.                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • A near term to mid-term opportunity exists to build production      |
| capacity in the United States for both domestic use and international |
| exports.                                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Federal support of the first few plants (through buy-downs, power   |
| purchase contracts, production credits) would overcome the problem of |
| building the first plants to get costs down until production goes up. |
| The Million Solar Rooftops and ReCAST initiatives are examples.       |
|                                                                       |
| • Federal support of utility deregulation that would encourage the    |
| marketing of green power could enhance early CSP generation.          |
|                                                                       |
| • Tax code changes that would not penalize capital intensive projects |
| (which are currently taxed several times higher than fuel-intensive   |
| projects) have the potential to dramatically enhance the financial    |
| viability of early plants.                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Geothermal Energy**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Geothermal energy is energy from within the earth. Hot water and      |
| steam are used to produce electricity or applied directly for space   |
| heating and industrial processes. There is the potential to use       |
| geothermal energy to reduce carbon dioxide by driving industrial      |
| processes such as the mining of minerals and metals that may be       |
| present in the geothermal brine.                                      |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image4.emf){width="2.729861111111111in"                     |
| height="2.0694444444444446in"}**System Concepts**                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Geophysical, geochemical and geological exploration locate          |
| reservoirs to drill, including highly permeable hot reservoirs,       |
| shallow warm groundwater, hot impermeable rock masses, highly         |
| pressured fluids, and magma.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • Well fields and distribution systems allow the hot fluids or        |
| secondary fluids to move to the point of use, and possibly back to    |
| the earth.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Utilization systems apply the heat directly, convert it to another  |
| form of energy such as electricity, or cool efficiently via advanced  |
| cooling cycles. **Representative Technologies**                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Exploration technologies for the identification of fractures and    |
| geothermal reservoirs; drilling, reservoir testing and modeling to    |
| optimize production and predict useful lifetime; electric turbines    |
| using natural steam or hot water flashed to steam, or binary          |
| conversion systems to produce electricity from water not hot enough   |
| to flash.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Direct applications to use the heat from geothermal fluids without  |
| conversion to electricity.                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Geothermal heat is beginning to be used for cooling and             |
| refrigeration applications via advanced absorption cooling systems.   |
|                                                                       |
| • Solution mining, i.e. the recovery of minerals and metals from      |
| geothermal brine                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • The United States has a resource base capable of producing up to 40 |
| GW of electricity at 3.0--15.0¢/kWh.                                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Hydrothermal reservoirs are being used to produce electricity with  |
| an on-line availability of 97%; advanced energy conversion            |
| technologies are being implemented to improve plant thermal           |
| efficiency.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Direct-use applications are successful, but require co-location of  |
| a quality heat source and need.                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Research applications are underway to validate and to provide a     |
| basis for widespread use of geothermal energy for cooling             |
| applications, which have the advantage of year around use of          |
| geothermal resource.                                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2010, make geothermal cost-effective so that it provides about   |
| 10 GW on line, enough electricity for 12 million homes; by 2020,      |
| develop new approaches to utilization that increase the domestic      |
| reserve base by a factor of 10; have an installed electricity output  |
| of 20,000 MW from hydrothermal plants and 20,000 MW from Enhanced     |
| Geothermal Systems.                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2020, displace 100,000 barrels of oil (equivalent; 0.5 quads)    |
| per year with direct heat use. Ensure continued growth in use.        |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Develop improved methodologies for predicting reservoir performance |
| and lifetime.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| • Find and characterize underground permeability and develop low      |
| cost, innovative drilling technologies.                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Reduce capital and operating costs and improve the efficiency of    |
| geothermal conversion systems.                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstrate heat recovery methods that allow the use of geothermal  |
| areas that are deeper, less permeable, or dryer than those currently  |
| considered as reserves.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE EERE spends \$25-30M per year, promoting collaborations of      |
| laboratories, universities, states, and industry. Industry provides   |
| access to data, equipment and geothermal materials, and matching      |
| funds. Related studies are supported by FE and Basic Energy Sciences, |
| although the amounts have not been estimated. The international       |
| research budget is much higher, involving Japan, Iceland, Italy,      |
| Mexico, New Zealand, France, Germany, and others.                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Recent Success**                                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Completion---with industry and federal, state, and local            |
| agencies---of an injection research project and water replacement     |
| pipeline that will increase production and extend the lifetime of the |
| Geysers Geothermal Field. Injection has already increased output by   |
| 70 MW.                                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • New equipment increasing thermal efficiency and reducing operating  |
| and maintenance costs of geothermal power plants, including           |
| demonstrations of metastable turbine expansion, improved condenser    |
| packing materials, off-stream gas compressor, new materials, and the  |
| rolling float meter.                                                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Hydrothermal reservoirs produce about 2100 MW in the United States  |
| and about 8000 MW worldwide. Direct-use applications produce about    |
| 600 MW~t~ in the United States. United States companies generate 200  |
| to 300 new MW overseas each year.                                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Costs are marginally competitive at today's natural gas prices, and |
| investment is limited by uncertainty in prices, long-term viability   |
| of production systems, and lag time between investment and return.    |
|                                                                       |
| • Improvements in cost and accuracy of resource exploration and       |
| characterization can lower the electricity cost; demonstration of new |
| resource concepts, such as heat mining, low-temperature use, or deep  |
| systems, would allow a large expansion of U.S. use of hydrothermal    |
| when economics become favorable. Direct applications can be expensive |
| unless users are located above a geothermal reservoir.                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Hydrothermal electric displaces the average electric power          |
| generating mix, which typically generates 160 gram carbon/ kWh.       |
| Direct use also displaces a mix of electric and gas-thermal,          |
| including inefficient local heating units that produce \>14 MtC/quad. |
| All of these methods have on-line records of 95% or more, reducing    |
| the use of carbon-producing backup generation and storage facilities. |
| In total, geothermal energy is expected to reduce GHG emissions by    |
| 5--10 MtC/year in 2010, 5--20 MtC/year in 2020, and 5--30 MtC/year in |
| 2030.                                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • To achieve the RD&D progress described, RD&D expenditures need to   |
| increase from the current \$25-30M/year to an average \$50M/year in   |
| 2000--2010, \$60M/year in 2010--2020.                                 |
|                                                                       |
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Geothermal will continue production of existing plants (2.1 GW) and |
| be used for new construction (40 GW by 2020). Direct heat will        |
| replace existing systems and will be new systems in a huge market.    |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • The energy production per land area is high for a low-carbon        |
| technology. Byproducts are limited to relatively benign steam plumes, |
| waste water, and sludge. Fluid effluents may be mined for minerals or |
| injected back into the reservoir. Some plants using injection have    |
| zero emissions. Geothermal plants spend more for personnel and less   |
| for fuel than do conventional plants.                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Support incremental and longer-term R&D as outlined above.            |
|                                                                       |
| • Ensure that environmental externalities are included in the costs   |
| of energy production and use.                                         |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstrate nonelectric geothermal technologies, and educate        |
| planners, homeowners, regulators, and suppliers about their merits.   |
|                                                                       |
| • Develop approach to support U.S. industries that compete with       |
| government-supported consultants and developers overseas.             |
|                                                                       |
| • Continue to allow access to federal lands for geothermal            |
| development                                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Advance Hydropower**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  **Technology Description**

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Advanced hydropower is new technology for producing hydroelectricity  |
| more efficiently, with improved environmental performance. Current    |
| technology often has adverse environmental effects, such as fish      |
| mortality and changes to downstream water quality and quantity. The   |
| goal of advanced hydropower technology is to maximize the use of      |
| water for hydroelectric generation while eliminating these adverse    |
| side effects -- in many cases both increased energy and improved      |
| environmental conditions can be achieved.                             |
|                                                                       |
| **System Concepts**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Conventional hydropower projects use either impulse or reaction     |
| turbines to convert kinetic energy in flowing or falling water into   |
| turbine torque and power. Source water may be from free-flowing       |
| rivers/streams/canals or released from upstream storage reservoirs.   |
|                                                                       |
| • Improvements and efficiency measures can be made in dam structures, |
| turbines, generators, substations, transmission lines, and systems    |
| operation that will help sustain hydropower's role as a clean,        |
| renewable energy source.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **Representative Technologies**                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • New turbine designs that minimize entrainment mortality of fish     |
| during passage through the power plant.                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Autoventing turbines to increase dissolved oxygen in discharges     |
| downstream of dams.                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Reregulating and aerating weirs used to stabilize tailwater         |
| discharges and improve water quality.                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Adjustable-speed generators producing hydroelectricity over a wider |
| range of heads and providing more uniform instream flow releases      |
| without sacrificing generation opportunities.                         |
|                                                                       |
| • New assessment methods to balance instream flow needs of fish with  |
| water for energy production.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • Advanced instrumentation and control systems that modify turbine    |
| operation to maximize environmental benefits and energy production.   |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • According to EIA, hydropower provided 12.6% of the nation's         |
| electricity generating capability in 1999 and 80% of the electricity  |
| produced from renewable energy sources.                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Existing hydropower generation is declining because of a            |
| combination of real and perceived environmental problems, regulatory  |
| pressures, and changes in energy economics (deregulation, etc.);      |
| potential hydropower resources are not being developed for similar    |
| reasons.                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Some new, environmentally friendly technologies are being           |
| implemented (e.g., National Hydropower Association's awards for       |
| Outstanding Stewardship of America's Rivers).                         |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE\'s Advanced Hydropower Turbine System (AHTS) program is also    |
| demonstrating that new turbine designs are feasible, but additional   |
| support is needed to fully evaluate these new designs in full-scale   |
| applications.                                                         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2003: Develop a quantitative understanding of the responses of   |
| fish to multiple stresses inside a turbine and produce biological     |
| performance criteria for use in advanced turbine design.              |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2005: Complete environmental mitigation studies on topics such   |
| as instream flow needs to produce more efficient and less             |
| controversial regulatory compliance; also, complete pilot-scale       |
| testing of new runner designs, evaluating environmental performance.  |
|                                                                       |
| • By 2010: Complete full-scale prototype testing of AHTS designs,     |
| verifying biological performance in the field.                        |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • There is insufficient understanding of how fish respond to          |
| turbulent flows in draft tubes and tailraces to support biological    |
| design criteria for those zones of powerplants.                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Fish resource management agencies do not recognize that the route   |
| through turbines is acceptable for fish -- this perception could be   |
| overcome if field testing continues to show mortality through         |
| turbines is not greater than other passage routes.                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Regulatory trends in relicensing are to shift operation from        |
| peaking to baseload, effectively reducing the energy value of         |
| hydroelectricity; higher instream flow requirements are also reducing |
| total energy production to protect downstream ecosystems, but         |
| scientific justification is weak.                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Frequent calls for dam removal is making relicensing more costly to |
| dam owners.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE funding was \$5M in FY 2001, significantly less than            |
| recommended by PCAST.                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE's AHTS program constructed a pilot-scale test facility for new  |
| turbines to evaluate energy and environmental performance of new      |
| turbine designs -- testing at this facility will proceed into FY      |
| 2003.                                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Regional efforts by Army Corps of Engineers and Bonneville Power    |
| Administration are producing some site-specific new understanding,    |
| especially in the Columbia River basin, but commercial applications   |
| are unlikely because of pressures from industry deregulation and      |
| environmental regulation.                                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Past Successes and Benefits**   |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| 1.  TVA's Lake Improvement Plan   |                                   |
|     has demonstrated that         |                                   |
|     improved turbine designs can  |                                   |
|     be implemented with           |                                   |
|     significant economic and      |                                   |
|     environmental benefits.       |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Field testing of the Minimum    |                                   |
| Gap Runner (MGR) designs for      |                                   |
| Kaplan turbines indicate that     |                                   |
| fish survival up to 98% is        |                                   |
| possible, if conventional         |                                   |
| turbines are modified.            |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • FERC instituted a short-term    |                                   |
| reduction in regulatory barriers  |                                   |
| on the West Coast in 2001 -- this |                                   |
| resulted in more than 100,000 MWh |                                   |
| of additional and a significant   |                                   |
| shift from non-peak to peak       |                                   |
| production, without significant   |                                   |
| adverse environmental effects.    |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and           |                                   |
| Deployment**                      |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Voith-Siemans Hydro and TVA     |                                   |
| have established a limited        |                                   |
| partnership to market             |                                   |
| environmentally friendly          |                                   |
| technology at hydropower          |                                   |
| facilities. Their products were   |                                   |
| developed in part by funding      |                                   |
| provided by DOE and the Corps of  |                                   |
| Engineers, as well as private     |                                   |
| sources.                          |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Flash Technology is developing  |                                   |
| strobe lighting systems to force  |                                   |
| fish away from hydropower intakes |                                   |
| and to avoid entrainment          |                                   |
| mortality in turbines.            |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**  |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**             | **RD&D Expenditures**             |
|                                   |                                   |
| • The current trend is to replace | • DOE budgets would have to       |
| hydropower with electricity from  | increase from the current level   |
| fossil fuels. This trend leads to | of \$5M/year to more than         |
| increases in GHG and should be    | \$10M/year and remain at that     |
| reversed.                         | level through at least 2010.      |
|                                   | Thereafter, through 2030,         |
| • Hydropower generation produces  | \$5M/year would be needed.        |
| zero carbon emissions and, if     |                                   |
| fossil fuels were used as the     |                                   |
| alternative energy source, would  |                                   |
| displace 5--10 MtC/year in 2010,  |                                   |
| 10--15 MtC/year in 2020, and      |                                   |
| 15--30 MtC/year in 2030.          |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Market**                        |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Advanced hydropower products    |                                   |
| can be applied at more than 80%   |                                   |
| of existing hydropower projects   |                                   |
| (installed conventional capacity  |                                   |
| is now 78 GW); the potential      |                                   |
| market also includes 15--20 GW at |                                   |
| existing dams without hydropower  |                                   |
| facilities (i.e., no new dams     |                                   |
| required for development) and     |                                   |
| about 30 GW at undeveloped sites  |                                   |
| that have been identified as      |                                   |
| suitable for new dams.            |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**  |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • There would be significant      |                                   |
| environmental benefits from       |                                   |
| installing advanced hydropower    |                                   |
| technology, including enhancement |                                   |
| of fish stocks, tailwater         |                                   |
| ecosystems, and recreational      |                                   |
| opportunities. These benefits     |                                   |
| would occur because the advanced  |                                   |
| technology reverses adverse       |                                   |
| effects of the past.              |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Additional benefits would come  |                                   |
| from the protection of a wide     |                                   |
| range of ancillary benefits that  |                                   |
| are provided at hydropower        |                                   |
| projects but are at extreme risk  |                                   |
| of becoming lost in the new       |                                   |
| deregulated environment.          |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**           |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+
| • Reverse declining research      |                                   |
| investments in industry and       |                                   |
| federal government caused by      |                                   |
| industry deregulation and other   |                                   |
| economic/regulatory pressures on  |                                   |
| the hydropower industry;          |                                   |
| currently, the inability to build |                                   |
| up program funding is delaying    |                                   |
| full implementation of new        |                                   |
| technology.                       |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Take a leadership role in       |                                   |
| technology transfer to ensure     |                                   |
| that new hydropower technologies  |                                   |
| reach commercial applications and |                                   |
| are accepted by environmental     |                                   |
| regulators, natural resource      |                                   |
| managers, and the public.         |                                   |
|                                   |                                   |
| • Build partnerships among        |                                   |
| industry, regulators, and natural |                                   |
| resource agencies to minimize     |                                   |
| local environmental effects of    |                                   |
| hydropower while realizing global |                                   |
| benefits of increased GHG-free    |                                   |
| generation.                       |                                   |
+-----------------------------------+-----------------------------------+

**Photoconversion**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Photoconversion technology encompasses sunlight-driven                |
| quantum-conversion processes (other than solid-state PVs) that lead   |
| to the direct and potentially highly efficient production of fuels,   |
| materials, chemicals, and electrical power from simple renewable      |
| substrates such as water, CO~2~, and nitrogen. This technology has    |
| the potential to eliminate the need for fossil fuels by substituting  |
| renewable sources and conversion processes that are either carbon     |
| neutral (any carbon generated is reused during plant growth) or       |
| carbon free (e.g., hydrogen from water). These technologies also can  |
| convert CO~2~ into liquid and gaseous fuels via processes that are    |
| often termed biomimetic or artificial photosynthesis.                 |
|                                                                       |
| **System Concepts**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Photoconversion processes directly use solar photons to drive       |
| biological, chemical, or electrochemical reactions to generate        |
| electricity, fuels, material, or chemicals.                           |
|                                                                       |
| • System components include biological organisms or enzymes,          |
| semiconductor structures (photoelectrochemical cells, colloids,       |
| nanocrystals, certain plastics or polymers, quantum dots or           |
| nanoparticles, or superlattices), biomimetic molecules, dye           |
| molecules, synthetic catalysts, or combinations of the above.         |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image5.emf)**Representative Technologies**                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Elements of this future solar technology include photobiological,   |
| photochemical, photoelectrochemical, photocatalytic, and dark         |
| catalytic processes for energy production.                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Photoconversion technologies can result in electrical power         |
| production; hydrogen production and utilization; biodiesel, organic   |
| acid, methane, and methanol production; bioplastics; the removal of   |
| CO~2~ from the atmosphere as a consequence of photoreduction of CO~2~ |
| to fuels, materials, and chemicals production; atmospheric nitrogen   |
| fixation (independent of natural gas); and waste or biomass           |
| utilization upon photoconversion to fuels, materials, or chemicals.   |
| Most of these technologies are at early stages of research, but some  |
| are at the development level, and a couple are commercial (those that |
| produce high-value products).                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Power production: dye-sensitized, nanocrystalline, titanium dioxide |
| semiconductor solar cells are at the 8--11% efficiency level and are  |
| potentially very cheap. In contrast to solid-state PV solar cells,    |
| light is absorbed by dye molecules in contact with a liquid rather    |
| than solid-state semiconductor materials. Novel photoelectrochemical  |
| cells with integrated fuel cells and in situ storage for 24-h solar   |
| power have been demonstrated at 6--7% efficiency in 4  8 ft panels   |
| (Texas Instruments system), and photochargeable batteries that        |
| include electrochemical storage have been demonstrated with 24-h      |
| power output. Hot-carrier photoconversion technology for increasing   |
| solar conversion efficiencies (theoretical efficiency limits of       |
| 65-86%, depending on the solar concentration) is making progress. The |
| term "hot carrier" refers to electrons initially excited by light,    |
| when they have energy higher than their equilibrium levels. This      |
| excess energy is given off in the first fraction of a second as heat, |
| and hot-carrier technology attempts to capture this lost heat as      |
| useful electricity.                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Fuels production: Photoelectrochemical and photobiological          |
| processes that will lead to hydrogen production from water or         |
| gasified biomass are at the early stages of research and making good  |
| progress; biodiesel, methane, and methanol production from water,     |
| waste, and CO~2~ are at various stages of R&D; and fuels, such as     |
| methanol, produced by the direct electrocatalytic or photocatalytic   |
| reduction of CO~2~, are at the early fundamental research stage.      |
| Electrocatalytic concentration of CO~2~ from the atmosphere is being  |
| studied as well; it is of interest to persons involved in atmospheric |
| controls in small spaces (i.e., submarines) and has potential for     |
| removing CO~2~ from the atmosphere in the future.                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Materials and chemicals production: producing materials and         |
| chemicals from CO~2~ and/or biomass, as well as producing fertilizer  |
| from atmospheric nitrogen instead of natural gas, will reduce CO~2~   |
| emissions compared with the fossil fuels used currently.              |
|                                                                       |
| • Photobiological production of pigments (e.g., astaxanthin), health  |
| foods, nutritional supplements (e.g., omega-3 fatty acids), protein,  |
| and fish food is commercial. Production of biopesticides and          |
| pharmaceuticals is under development. Production of commodity         |
| chemicals such as, but not limited to, glycerol, hydrogen peroxide,   |
| and bioemulsifiers is possible. Photocatalytic production of          |
| specialty or high-value chemicals has been demonstrated.              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Most photoconversion technologies are at the fundamental research   |
| stage where technical feasibility must be demonstrated before cost    |
| and performance goals can be assessed. Minimum solar conversion       |
| efficiencies of 10% are generally thought to be necessary before      |
| applied programs can be considered. Cost goals need to be competitive |
| with projected costs of current technologies.                         |
|                                                                       |
| • Electrical power and high-value chemicals applications are either   |
| currently commercial or will see dramatic growth over the next 5 to   |
| 10 years. Large-scale power production should begin about the year    |
| 2010. Materials and fuels production will begin in the 2010--2020     |
| time frame and commodity chemicals production in the 2020-2030 time   |
| frame.                                                                |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration (Cont'd)**         |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Develop the fundamental sciences in multidisciplinary areas         |
| involving theory, mechanisms, kinetics, biological pathways and       |
| molecular genetics, natural photosynthesis, materials (semiconductor  |
| particles and structures), catalysts and catalytic cycles, and        |
| artificial photosynthesis components. The fundamental science is      |
| needed to underpin the new photoconversion technologies.              |
|                                                                       |
| • Maintain critical mass research groups in vital areas long enough   |
| for sustained progress to be made.                                    |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Basic research activities are currently being funded at a level of  |
| \$10--\$15M/year from the DOE Office of Science.                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Past Successes and Benefits**                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Prototype dye-sensitized nanocrystalline semiconductor solar cells  |
| have been demonstrated as power sources in small niche markets.       |
| Commercial interest is very high since they also can be configured to |
| produce hydrogen.                                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Scientific breakthroughs over the past 7 years have been made in    |
| microbial and enzymatic R&D, natural photosynthesis, semiconductor    |
| nanostructure and superlattice understanding, CO~2~ catalysis, and    |
| energy and electron transfer in artificial donor/acceptor molecules.  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Large-scale algal ponds are producing high-value chemicals on a     |
| commercial basis using photobiological processes. As an example, the  |
| current astaxanthin market is \$180M per year and will rise to \$1B   |
| in 5 years. Astaxanthin, a pigment synthesized from petroleum, is     |
| used as a coloring agent in the poultry and salmon industries. Algal  |
| production of the pigment just started in Hawaii and is replacing the |
| fossil version for health and environmental reasons.                  |
|                                                                       |
| • SMH Corporation (a European company) has just started to sell       |
| dye-sensitized, nanocrystalline cell-powered watches. The market is   |
| estimated to be 100 million units.                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Photoconversion processes can ultimately replace (or displace) all  |
| fossil fuels as a source of energy, materials, and chemicals. The     |
| time scale is uncertain, but significant impacts on reduction of      |
| CO~2~ release could begin in the next 30 to 50 years. It should be    |
| emphasized that solar photoconversion produces no CO~2~ and can in    |
| fact remove CO~2~ from the atmosphere.                                |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • A significant level of basic research activities in solar           |
| photoconversion is currently being funded by OS (chemical sciences,   |
| material sciences, and energy biosciences) (estimated level:          |
| \$10--15M); some exploratory R&D is being funded by EE PV (estimated  |
| \$400K).                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Some basic research support by NSF and USDA is complementary.       |
|                                                                       |
| • Federal R&D expenditures must be at a sufficient level to fund      |
| critical-mass groups to address fundamental problems in key areas,    |
| and the support must be consistent over the next 20--30 years to      |
| ensure successful R&D efforts. Suggested levels are a minimum of      |
| \$50M/year for improvements that will help reduce carbon emissions;   |
| substantially higher levels will be required to reap benefits that    |
| are outside of the scope of a budget driven by carbon reductions.     |
| Also, additional funds will be required for applied and production    |
| research for technology thrusts that prove worthy of                  |
| commercialization; given the fundamental nature of the current        |
| research, it is not possible at this time to estimate what those      |
| requirements might be.                                                |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Many spin-off technologies are possible. These include              |
| opto-electronics, biosensors, biocomputers, bioelectronics, and       |
| nano-scale devices.                                                   |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Federal R&D support enhances the scientific and technology base at  |
| the fundamental level where risk is too great for private sector      |
| support.                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| • The critical factor for success is critical-mass support for a      |
| sufficient period of time to develop key understanding and technology |
| without large fluctuations in research funding.                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Photovoltaics**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Photovoltaic (PV) arrays convert sunlight to electricity without      |
| moving parts and without producing fuel wastes, air pollution, or     |
| greenhouse gases (GHGs). Using solar PV for electricity and           |
| eventually transportation (from hydrogen production) will help reduce |
| CO~2~ worldwide.                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image6.emf){width="2.263888888888889in"                     |
| height="2.816666666666667in"}**System Concepts**                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Flat-plate PV arrays use global sunlight; concentrators use direct  |
| sunlight. Modules are mounted on a stationary array or on single- or  |
| dual-axis sun trackers. Arrays can be ground-mounted or on all types  |
| of buildings and structures (e.g., see semi-transparent solar canopy, |
| right). PV dc output can be conditioned into grid-quality ac          |
| electricity, or dc can be used to charge batteries or to split water  |
| to produce H~2~.                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • PV systems are expected to be used in the United States for         |
| residential and commercial buildings, peak power shaving, and         |
| intermediate daytime load following; and with electric storage and    |
| improved transmission, for dispatchable electricity and H~2~          |
| production.                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Almost all locations in the United States and worldwide have enough |
| sunlight for PV (e.g., US sunlight varies by only about 25% from an   |
| average in Kansas).                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| 1.  Land area is not a problem for PV. Not only can PV be more easily |
|     sited in a distributed fashion than almost all alternatives       |
|     (e.g., on roofs or above parking lots), a PV-generating station   |
|     140 km by 140 km sited at an average solar location in the United |
|     States could generate all of the electricity needed in the        |
|     country (2.5  10^6^ GWh/year), assuming a system efficiency of   |
|     10% and an area packing factor of 50% (to avoid self-shading).    |
|     This area (0.3% of US) is less than one third of the area used    |
|     for military purposes in the US.**Representative Technologies and |
|     Status**                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • Wafers of single-crystal or polycrystalline silicon (best cells:    |
| 24% efficiency; commercial modules: 13%--15%). Si modules dominate    |
| the PV market and currently cost about \$2-\$3/W~p~ to manufacture.   |
|                                                                       |
| • Thin-film semiconductors (e.g., amorphous silicon, copper indium    |
| diselenide, cadmium telluride, polycrystalline silicon, and           |
| dye-sensitized cells) (best cells: 12%--19%; commercial modules:      |
| 5%--11%). A new generation of thin-film PV modules is going through   |
| the high-risk transition to first-time and large-scale manufacturing. |
| If successful, market share could increase rapidly.                   |
|                                                                       |
| • High-efficiency single-crystal Si and multijunction GaAs-alloy      |
| cells for concentrators (best cells: 25%--34% efficient; commercial   |
| modules: 15%--17%); prototype systems are being tested in the US      |
| desert SW.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Grid-connected PV systems currently sell for about \$5--\$10/W~p~   |
| (20 to 35¢/kWh), including support structures, power conditioning,    |
| and land.                                                             |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Challenges and Goals**                                         |
|                                                                       |
| • Improve fundamental understanding of materials, processes, and      |
| devices to provide a technology base for advanced PV options.         |
|                                                                       |
| • Optimize PV cell materials, cell designs, and modules; scale up     |
| laboratory cell results to product size (10^4^ increase in area).     |
|                                                                       |
| • Validate new module technologies outdoors and in accelerated        |
| testing ( goal: 30 years outdoors).                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Improve and invent new low-cost processes and technologies; reduce  |
| module and balance-of-systems manufacturing costs.                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Address substantial technical issues associated with high-yield,    |
| first-time and large-scale (\>100 MW/yr) manufacturing for advanced   |
| technologies.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| • Develop and validate new, lower-cost systems hardware and           |
| integrated applications.                                              |
|                                                                       |
|  Meet long-term cost-competitive goal of manufacturing and           |
| installing PV systems at under \$1/W~p~.                              |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE maintains through NREL/NCPV a robust RD&D program in the United |
| States, with funding levels during the 1990s between \$60 and \$90M;  |
| FY 2001 was \$76M.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| > -National lab and university centers of excellence capabilities     |
| > have been developed, both expertise and unique facilities           |
| >                                                                     |
| > -Funding is split 50-50 between national labs and external          |
| > contracts with universities and industry                            |
| >                                                                     |
| > -Public-private R&D partnerships including extensive National R&D   |
| > Teams, have been the favored approach                               |
| >                                                                     |
| > -All subcontracts have been awarded via competitive solicitations   |
| > to select the best and most committed                               |
| >                                                                     |
| > -DOE/NCPV has worked with state regulatory agencies and affected    |
| > direction of state programs                                         |
| >                                                                     |
| > -Focus has been on key advanced PV technologies that have the most  |
| > potential for cost reductions                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • DOD has some funding through special programs in which PV has a     |
| role supplying power for military systems.                            |
|                                                                       |
| • NASA has some research funds for PV used for space power. This      |
| program has dwindled over the last decade, but advanced PV has become |
| even more important for space missions (e.g., the high-performance    |
| GaAs cells on the Sojourner on Mars).                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Japan and Europe have significant funding for PV. The Japanese      |
| level is about \$200 million annually.                                |
|                                                                       |
| • US states have individual subsidy and utility portfolio programs    |
| (e.g., CA to address its natural gas supply issue).                   |
|                                                                       |
| • U.S. PV businesses are marginally or not yet profitable and are     |
| unable to fund their own advanced research for low-cost PV.           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Past Successes and Benefits**                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Because of public/private DOE/NREL partnerships, such as the Thin   |
| Film Partnership with its National Research Teams, U.S. PV technology |
| leads the world in measurable results such as record efficiencies for |
| cells and modules. Another partnership, the PV manufacturing research |
| program, has resulted during the last decade in industry cost         |
| reductions of over 40% and facilitated a doubling of manufacturing    |
| capacity.                                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • A new generation of potentially lower-cost technologies (thin       |
| films) is entering the marketplace. Two multi-megawatt amorphous      |
| silicon thin-film plants by United Solar and BP Solar reached full    |
| production in 2001. Three plants using even newer thin films (CdTe    |
| and CuInSe~2~-alloys) are entering shakedown tests on major           |
| manufacturing plants and a larger (25 MW) amorphous silicon plant is  |
| under construction. Thin-film PV has been the focus of the DOE/NREL   |
| efforts of the last decade because it appears to hold the most        |
| promise for module cost reductions.                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • During the last 2 years, *world record* solar cell                  |
| sunlight-to-electricity conversion efficiencies were set by federally |
| funded universities, national laboratories, or industry in copper     |
| indium gallium diselenide (19% cells and 12% modules) and cadmium     |
| telluride (16% cells, 11% modules). Cell and module efficiencies for  |
| these technologies have increased over 50% in the last decade.        |
|                                                                       |
| A unique multijunction GaAs-alloy cell developed at NREL was spun off |
| to the space power industry, leading to a record cell (34%) and a     |
| shared R&D100 Award for NREL/Spectrolab in 2001. This device          |
| configuration is expected to dominate future space power for          |
| commercial and military satellites. Since PV emits nothing during     |
| use, the only pollution from PV comes from conventional electricity   |
| used during manufacture; these 'total life cycle' amounts are very    |
| small fractions of the comparable levels from burning conventional    |
| fuels - in fact, they are similar or less than *non-generation*       |
| energy inputs (for mining/drilling, transportation, and equipment)    |
| required for conventional sources.                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • About 250 MW of PV were sold in 2000 (over \$2 billion worth);      |
| total installed PV is over 1 GW. The U.S. world market share is about |
| 30%. Annual market growth for PV has been about 25% as a result of    |
| reduced prices and successful global marketing. In recent years,      |
| sales growth has accelerated to almost 40% per year. Hundreds of      |
| applications are cost-effective for off-grid needs. Almost two-thirds |
| of U.S.-manufactured PV is exported. However, the fastest growing     |
| segment of the market is grid-connected PV, such as roof-mounted      |
| arrays on homes and commercial buildings in the US. CA is subsidizing |
| PV systems because it is considered cost-effective to reduce their    |
| dependence on natural gas, especially for peak daytime loads for      |
| air-conditioning, which matches PV output.                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • A GW~p~ of PV produces about 1600 GWh/year of electricity in an     |
| average U.S. solar location (Kansas). Assuming the same carbon        |
| content as the U.S. utility mix (160 metric tons C/GWh), a 1-GW~p~ PV |
| system would avoid 8 MtC (million metric tons carbon) during its      |
| 30-year lifetime. PV grew at a 25% rate in the last decade. At an     |
| assumed steady 20% growth rate, about 50 GW~p~ would be installed in  |
| the United States by 2030; assuming a higher early rate ramping down  |
| to a much lower, sustainable rate, over 200 GW~p~ would be installed  |
| by 2030. This projected range of PV installations would save up to 2  |
| MtC/year in 2010, 5--10 MtC/year in 2020, and 15--55 MtC/year in      |
| 2030, depending on the actual growth rate.                            |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE PV budgets were \$65M in 2000 and \$76M in FY 2001. FY2002 DOE  |
| requested budget was \$39M. The estimated U.S. budget needed to       |
| accelerate PV would be about \$100M/year for R&D during the next      |
| decade. R&D activities include improvements in materials, cell and    |
| modules; film depositions; manufacturing yield; outdoor stability;    |
| and associated electronic components needed to make a complete        |
| system.                                                               |
|                                                                       |
| **Markets**                                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • Electricity for remote locations, especially for billions of people |
| worldwide who do not have electricity.                                |
|                                                                       |
| • U.S. markets: retail electricity for residential and commercial     |
| buildings; distributed utility systems for grid support; peak-shaving |
| and other daytime uses.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Future electricity and H~2~ storage for dispatchable electricity,   |
| electric car charging stations, and hydrogen production for portable  |
| fuel.                                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| **Non-energy Benefits and Costs**                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • PV provides power during critical daylight hours when electricity   |
| demand is usually highest, thus ameliorating natural gas shortages    |
| (which are often the result of daytime peaks, especially during       |
| summer air-conditioning).                                             |
|                                                                       |
| • PV systems operate with zero emissions. PV is modular: installation |
| can be sized from a few watts to many gigawatts. Maintenance needs    |
| are low because of the lack of moving parts and the durable           |
| components, which is good for uses in developing countries. It will   |
| improve the standard of living for millions who lack electricity,     |
| contributing to reduced rural-to-urban population shifts. The         |
| taxpayer's investment in RD&D will be recouped through job creation,  |
| expanded tax revenues, economic development (including improved       |
| balance of payments with our international competitors), improved     |
| environmental quality, and reduced dependence on natural gas          |
| (avoiding the local price spikes that occured in California in 2001). |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Support R&D to improve PV module performance and reduce PV module   |
| manufacturing costs.                                                  |
|                                                                       |
| • Build a scientific base for advanced PV technologies to reduce the  |
| high risk of transition to first-time and very large-scale            |
| manufacturing.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Provide R&D funding to develop, improve, and automate manufacturing |
| processes for large-scale manufacturing.                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Level the regulatory playing field and work with the states to      |
| ensure sustained market growth to catalyze private investment.        |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Solar Buildings**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Solar building technologies deliver heat, light, and cooling to       |
| residential and commercial buildings. By combining solar building     |
| technologies with solar electric generation and very energy-efficient |
| building envelopes, lighting, and appliances, it is possible to       |
| create "Zero Energy Buildings" (see photo for an example              |
| demonstration home). Zero Energy Buildings have a zero net need for   |
| offsite energy on an annual basis and also have no carbon emissions.  |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image7.emf){width="3.0097222222222224in"                    |
| height="2.2576388888888888in"}**System Concepts**                     |
|                                                                       |
| • In solar heating systems, solar thermal collectors convert solar    |
| energy into heat at the point of use, usually for domestic hot water  |
| and space heating.                                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • In solar cooling systems, solar thermal collectors convert solar    |
| energy into heat for absorption chillers or desiccant regeneration.   |
|                                                                       |
| • In solar lighting systems, sunlight is transmitted into the         |
| interior of buildings using glazed apertures, light pipes, and/or     |
| optical fibers.                                                       |
|                                                                       |
| **Representative Technologies**                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Active solar heating systems use pumps and controls to circulate a  |
| heat transfer fluid between the solar collector(s) and storage.       |
| System sizes can range from 1 to 100 kW.                              |
|                                                                       |
| • Passive solar heating systems do not use pumps and controls but     |
| rather rely on natural circulation to transfer heat into storage.     |
| System sizes can range from 1 to 10 kW.                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Transpired solar collectors heat ventilation air for industrial and |
| commercial building applications. A transpired collector is a thin    |
| sheet of perforated metal that absorbs solar radiation and heats      |
| fresh air drawn through its perforations.                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Hybrid solar lighting systems focus concentrated sunlight on        |
| optical fibers in order to combine natural daylight with conventional |
| illumination.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Typical residential solar systems use glazed flat-plate collectors  |
| combined with storage tanks to provide 40% to 70% of residential      |
| water heating requirements. Typical systems generate 2500 kWh of      |
| energy per year at a cost of about 8¢/kWh.                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Typical solar pool heating systems use unglazed polymer collectors  |
| to provide 50% to 100% of residential pool heating requirements.      |
| Typical systems generate 1,600 therms or 46,000 kWh of energy per     |
| year and have 25% of the market.                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Near-term solar heating and cooling RD&D goals are to reduce the    |
| costs of solar water and space heating systems to 4¢/kWh from their   |
| current cost of 8¢/kWh using polymer materials and manufacturing      |
| enhancements.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| • Near-term zero energy building RD&D goals are to reduce the annual  |
| energy bill for an average size home to \$600 by 2004.                |
|                                                                       |
| • Near-term solar lighting RD&D goals are to reduce the costs of      |
| solar lighting systems to 5¢/kWh.                                     |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Solar heating and cooling RD&D efforts are targeted to reduce       |
| manufacturing and installation costs, improve durability and          |
| lifetime, and provide advanced designs for system integration. One    |
| key R&D issue is durability. Polymer materials in solar heating       |
| systems must survive harsh service environments that include exposure |
| to elevated temperatures, moisture, and ultraviolet irradiance.       |
|                                                                       |
| • Zero energy building RD&D efforts are targeted to optimize various  |
| energy efficiency and renewable energy combinations, integrate solar  |
| technologies into building materials and the building envelope, and   |
| incorporate solar technologies into building codes and standards.     |
|                                                                       |
| • Demonstration of hybrid lighting system performance and reliability |
| in the field are critical to the success of solar lighting.           |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Key DOE program activities are targeted to demonstrate lower cost   |
| and improved reliability of components and systems, develop advanced  |
| systems and applications, and to support the next commercial          |
| opportunities for these technologies.                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • FY 2001 DOE funding level was about \$4M. Several European          |
| countries have programs 200 to 500% of this size.                     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Past Successes and Benefits**                                       |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • More than 1,000 MW of solar buildings are operating successfully in |
| the U.S., generating over 3 million MW-hrs per year.                  |
|                                                                       |
| • The energy cost of solar thermal systems have been reduced through  |
| technology improvements by over 50%, saving more than 5 million       |
| MW-hrs per year in U.S. primary energy consumption.                   |
|                                                                       |
| • A few demonstration Zero Energy Homes have been built (see photo)   |
| without subsidy and with a positive cash flow when financed in the    |
| mortgage; however, they have not been widely publicized or            |
| replicated.                                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • About 1.2 million solar water heating systems have been installed   |
| in the United States; however, due to relatively low energy prices,   |
| there are approximately 8,000 installations per year.                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Several hundred transpired solar collector systems have been        |
| installed, including installations for Ford Motor Company, General    |
| Motors, Federal Express, the U.S. Army, and the Bureau of             |
| Reclamation.                                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • 4 multi-disciplinary homebuilding teams have begun the initial      |
| phase of designing and constructing "Zero Energy Homes" for various   |
| new construction markets in the U.S. One homebuilder -- Shea Homes in |
| San Diego -- is currently building, and quickly selling, 300 houses   |
| with Zero Energy Home features -- solar electric systems, solar water |
| heating, and energy-efficient construction.                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Carbon reductions are estimated to be 1 MMTC/year in 2010, 2.5      |
| MMTC/year in 2020, and 10--20 MMTC/year in 2030.                      |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Federal R&D funds for solar buildings were \$1.96M in FY 2000,      |
| \$3.95M in FY 2001, and \$5.0M (requested) in FY 2002.                |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE support of RD&D has been required because solar manufacturers   |
| are generally small businesses with limited resources and expertise.  |
| These manufacturers are constantly facing manufacturing and system    |
| design issues that affect the reliability, lifetime systems costs,    |
| and overall cost effectiveness of their products, yet they do not     |
| have the resources to conduct cost reduction R&D. DOE and its         |
| national laboratories, however, have extensive expertise and          |
| facilities that can be critical to the long-term success of these     |
| manufacturers.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Required incremental RD&D expenditures for solar buildings is       |
| estimated to be \$10M/year through 2010, \$20M/year through 2020, and |
| \$10M/year through 2030.                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • There are 72.5 million existing single-family homes in the U.S. A   |
| potential replacement market of 29 million solar water heating        |
| systems is based on the assumption that only 40% of the homes have    |
| suitable orientation and non-shading. (9.2 million replacement        |
| electric and gas water heaters.) In 2000, 1.2 million new             |
| single-family homes were built in the United States. Assuming 70% of  |
| these homes could be sited to enable proper orientation of solar      |
| water heating systems, this presents another 840,000 possible system  |
| installations annually.                                               |
|                                                                       |
| • The ultimate market for zero energy buildings is all new building   |
| construction; however, the near-term focus is on residential          |
| buildings and, in particular, single-family homes in the Sunbelt      |
| areas of the country. Of the 1.2 million new single-family homes      |
| built in the U.S. in 2000, 44% of these new homes were in the         |
| southern region of the country and 25% were in the western region.    |
|                                                                       |
| • Solar building technologies will reduce daytime peak electricity    |
| requirements.                                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Solar thermal building systems can enhance national security by     |
| reducing vulnerability to oil supply disruption.                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Solar thermal technologies are environmentally benign with          |
| essentially zero emissions.                                           |
|                                                                       |
| • A near-term to mid-term opportunity exists to build production      |
| capacity in the United States for both domestic use and international |
| exports.                                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Tax credits of 15% for residental solar energy property, upt to a   |
| maximum of \$2000, recommended in the National Energy Policy, would   |
| significantly reduce the greenhouse gas reduction potential of solar  |
| buildings. Coupled with tax credits for energy-efficient construction |
| and appliances, Zero Energy Buildings could play a major part in      |
| reducing greenhouse gases for the United States of America.           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

**Wind Energy**

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Technology Description**                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Wind turbine technology converts the kinetic energy in the wind to    |
| mechanical energy and ultimately to electricity. Grid-connected wind  |
| power reduces GHG emissions by displacing the need for natural gas-   |
| and coal-fired generation. Village and off-grid applications are      |
| important for displacing diesel generation and for improving quality  |
| of life, especially overseas.                                         |
|                                                                       |
| **System Concepts**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| ![](media/image8.emf){width="2.1881944444444446in"                    |
| height="1.8958333333333333in"}• The principle of wind energy          |
| conversion is simple: wind passing over the blade creates lift,       |
| producing a torque on the rotor shaft that turns a gearbox. The       |
| gearbox is coupled to an electric generator that produces power at    |
| the frequency of the host power system. Some new innovative designs   |
| use low speed generators, which eliminate the need for a gearbox.     |
|                                                                       |
| **Representative Technologies**                                       |
|                                                                       |
|  Two major design approaches are being used: (1) typical of historic |
| European technology---stiff, heavy machines that resist cyclic and    |
| extreme loads, and (2) lightweight, flexible machines that bend and   |
| absorb loads, primarily being developed by U.S. designers. Several    |
| alternative configurations within each approach are being pursued.    |
|                                                                       |
| **Technology Status/Applications**                                    |
|                                                                       |
| • Thirty-seven states have land area with good winds (13 mph annual   |
| average at 10 m height, wind class 4, or better).                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Current performance is characterized by levelized costs of 4 to     |
| 6¢/kWh (depending on resource intensity and financing structure),     |
| capacity factors of 30 to 40%, availability of 95 to 98%, total       |
| installed costs of \$800 to \$1000/kW, and efficiencies of 65 to 75%  |
| of theoretical (Betz limit) maximum.                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Current Research, Development, and Demonstration**                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **RD&D Goals**                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • Windfarm cost/performance varies by wind resource class, ownership  |
| type, and time. Current costs are 4 to 6¢/kWh; goals in 2004 are      |
| 3¢/kWh at sites with annual average wind speeds of 16 mph; goals in   |
| 2007 are 3¢/kWhat sites with average wind speeds of 13 mph; goals in  |
| 2030 are 1.7 to 2.8¢/kWh, depending on wind speeds.                   |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Challenges**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Optimize a wind turbine system to operate for 30 years in a         |
| fatigue-driven environment with minimal or no component replacements  |
| using knowledge of the wind inflow, operative aerodynamics, resulting |
| structural dynamics, and optimal control of the turbine and windfarm. |
| Understanding the interactions between the wind input and among       |
| components as turbine size increases is the fundamental challenge.    |
| Develop a wind turbine system which will be economically competitive  |
| at low (13 mph) wind speed sites. Understand and mitigate the         |
| operating system impacts on the electric grid for high penetrations   |
| of wind.                                                              |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Activities**                                                   |
|                                                                       |
| • Core and university research: wind characteristicsand forecasting,  |
| aerodynamics, structural dynamics and fatigue, control systems for    |
| turbines and hybrid systems.                                          |
|                                                                       |
| • Turbine research: cost-shared design and testing of next-generation |
| utility-grade turbine for low wind speed operations, improvements in  |
| existing turbine designs, verification of performance of turbine      |
| prototypes, and development of small turbines using tools and methods |
| from the larger turbine effort.                                       |
|                                                                       |
| • Cooperative research and testing: regionally targeted outreach and  |
| education through Wind Powering America, prototype testing at the     |
| National Wind Technology Center, collection of wind turbine           |
| performance data and related analysis, support of industry            |
| stakeholders such as the National Wind Coordinating Committee, and    |
| support for international consensus standards and certification for   |
| wind turbines as required in overseas markets..                       |
|                                                                       |
| • DOE appropriations were \$40M in FY 2001, and there is no other     |
| significant federal funding. The European Union and member countries  |
| spend over \$120M per year.                                           |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Recent Success**                                                    |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • In 1989 the wind program set a goal of 5¢/kWh by 1995 and 4¢/kWh by |
| 2000 for sites with average wind speeds of 16 mph. The program and    |
| the wind industry met the goals as part of dramatic cost reductions   |
| from 25--50¢/kWh in the early 1980s to 4-6¢/kWh today.                |
|                                                                       |
| • The worldwide annual market growth rate for wind technology is at a |
| historic maximum of 30% with new markets opening in many developing   |
| countries. Domestic public interest in environmentally responsible    |
| electric generation technology is reflected by new state energy       |
| policies and in the success of "green marketing" of wind power across |
| the country. Current domestic installed capacity of 2500 MW is        |
| expected to dramatically expand to 4400 MW by the end of 2001.        |
|                                                                       |
| • The National Wind Technology Center (operated by the National       |
| Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado), is recognized as a  |
| world-class center for wind energy R&D and has many facilitie,s such  |
| as blade structural test stands and a large dynamometer, not          |
| otherwise available to the domestic industry or its overseas          |
| competitors.                                                          |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Commercialization and Deployment**                                  |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Wind technology is competitive today in bulk power markets with     |
| support from the production tax credit, and in high-value niche       |
| applications or markets that recognize non-cost attributes. It's      |
| competitiveness by 2005 will be affected by policies regarding        |
| ancillary services and transmission and distribution regulations.     |
| Substantial cost reductions are expected for wind turbines designed   |
| to operate economically in low wind speed sites, which will increase  |
| the amount of economical wind resource areas by 20-fold, and will be  |
| within 100 miles of most load centers.                                |
|                                                                       |
| • For windfarm or wholesale power applications, the principal         |
| competition is natural gas for new construction. Utility              |
| restructuring is a critical challenge to increased deployment in the  |
| near term because it emphasizes short-term, low-capital-cost          |
| alternatives and lacks public policy to support deployment of         |
| sustainable technologies like wind energy.                            |
|                                                                       |
| • About 2500 MW of capacity are installed in the United States,       |
| principally in California, although projects in Minnesota, Iowa,      |
| Vermont, and Texas have recently been installed. This is projected to |
| grow to 4400 MW by the end of 2001. Worldwide, 17000 MW is installed  |
| and large growth rates illustrate the industry's ability to rapidly   |
| increase production with the proper market incentives.                |
|                                                                       |
| • In the United States, the wind industry is thinly capitalized,      |
| except for the acquisition of Zond Corporation by Enron Wind Corp.    |
| About six manufacturers and six to ten developers characterize the    |
| U.S. industry.                                                        |
|                                                                       |
| • In Europe, there are about 12 turbine manufacturers and about 20 to |
| 30 project developers. European manufacturers have established North  |
| American manufacturing facilities and are actively participationg in  |
| the U.S. market.                                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Initial lower levels of wind deployment (up to 15--20% of the total |
| U.S. electric system capacity) are not expected to introduce          |
| significant grid reliability issues. Inasmuch as the wind blows only  |
| intermittently, intensive use of this technology at larger            |
| penetrations may require additional backup capacity or ancillary      |
| services. Transmission infrastructure upgrades and expansion will be  |
| required for large penetrations of wind energy to service major load  |
| centers.                                                              |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Potential Benefits and Costs**                                      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Carbon Reductions**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Wind energy produces zero carbon emissions per kilowatt hour.       |
|                                                                       |
| • Wind energy without additional storage can reduce GHG emissions     |
| through displacing coal- and natural gas-fired power plants.          |
|                                                                       |
| > 2010: 20 GW of wind; 10-15 MtC/year;                                |
| >                                                                     |
| > 2020: 80 GW of wind; 40-60 MtC/year;                                |
| >                                                                     |
| > 2030: 200 GW of wind; 100-150MtC/year                               |
|                                                                       |
| **RD&D Expenditures**                                                 |
|                                                                       |
| • Federal funding in FY 2001 was \$40M.                               |
|                                                                       |
| • Annual average funding of \$60M is needed 2002--2010; much of this  |
| is for hardware testing in 2000--2005. For 2011--2020, about          |
| \$28M/year is needed; for 2021--2030, about \$23M/year is needed.     |
|                                                                       |
| **Market**                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • The principal market for wind energy is substitution for new        |
| natural gas combined cycle plants (expected to be 97 GW in 2010 and   |
| 696 GW in 2030) and replacement of coal-generated power plants        |
| (expected to be 315 GW in 2010 and 328 GW in 2030).                   |
|                                                                       |
| **Nonenergy Benefits and Costs**                                      |
|                                                                       |
| • Benefits include no air emissions through use of wind, low fuel     |
| risk, short construction times, modular technology, and sustainable   |
| development. For village power systems, benefits include displaced    |
| high-cost diesel fuel, carbon offsets, and improved rural qualify of  |
| life.                                                                 |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| **Key Federal Actions**                                               |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| • Support a strong RD&D program, including wind speed forecasting,    |
| power system integration, transmission, and energy storage needed for |
| high penetration.                                                     |
|                                                                       |
| • Support the development of advanced wind turbines whaich will be    |
| economically competitive at low wind speed sites, and for off-shore   |
| operation.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Support the development of hydrogen-electric wind turbines for the  |
| long-term.                                                            |
|                                                                       |
| • Provide near-term market stimulus to overcome barriers, resulting   |
| in several competitive manufacturers with domestic and international  |
| sales.                                                                |
|                                                                       |
| • Develop a restructured electric market that recognizes non-cost     |
| benefits of wind and the externalities of conventional fossil/nuclear |
| through incentives, pollution taxes, mandates, etc.                   |
|                                                                       |
| 2.  Ensure that transmission policies allow intermittant power        |
|     sources such as wind fair access to markets, and plan for         |
|     transmission infrastructure upgrades.                             |
|                                                                       |
| • Ensure U.S. technology is competitive in international market       |
| (certification, tied aid).                                            |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+