Search

The development of a cost structure for energy storage systems (ESS) has received limited attention. In this study, we developed data-intensive techno-economic models to assess the economic feasibility of ESS. The ESS here includes pump hydro storage (PHS) and compressed air energy storage (CAES). The costs were developed using data-intensive bottom-up models. Scale factors were developed for each component of the storage systems. The life cycle costs of energy storage were estimated for capacity ranges of 98–491 MW, 81–404 MW, and 60–298 MW for PHS, conventional CAES (C-CAES), and adiabatic CAES (A-CAES), respectively, to ensure a market-driven price can be achieved. For CAES systems, costs were developed for storage in salt caverns hard rock caverns, and porous formations. The results show that the annual life cycle storage cost is $220–400 for PHS, $215–265 for C-CAES, and $375–480 per kW-year for A-CAES. The levelised cost of electricity is $69–121 for PHS, $58–70 for C-CAES, and $96–121 per MWh for A-CAES. C-CAES is economically attractive at all capacities, PHS is economically attractive at higher capacities, and A-CAES is not attractive at all. The developed information is helpful in making investment decision related to large energy storage systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bioenergy derived from biomass provides a promising energy alternative and can reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions generated from fossil fuels. Biomass-based thermochemical conversion technologies have been acknowledged as apt options to convert bioresources into bioenergy; this bioenergy includes electricity, heat, and fuels/chemicals in solid, liquid, and gaseous phases. In this review, the techno-economic and life cycle assessment of these technologies (combustion, gasification, pyrolysis, liquefaction, carbonization, and co-firing) are summarized. Specific indicators (production costs in a techno-economic analysis, functional units and environmental impacts in a life cycle analysis) for different technologies were compared. Finally, gaps in research and future trends in biomass thermochemical conversion were identified. This review could be used to guide future research related to economic and environmental benefits of bioenergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]