Cost of electricity by source | EPFL Graph Search

Different methods of electricity generation can incur a variety of different costs, which can be divided into three general categories: 1) wholesale costs, or all costs paid by utilities associated with acquiring and distributing electricity to consumers, 2) retail costs paid by consumers, and 3) external costs, or externalities, imposed on society. Wholesale costs include initial capital, operations & maintenance (O&M), transmission, and costs of decommissioning. Depending on the local regulatory environment, some or all wholesale costs may be passed through to consumers. These are costs per unit of energy, typically represented as dollars/megawatt hour (wholesale). The calculations also assist governments in making decisions regarding energy policy. On average the levelized cost of electricity from utility scale solar power and onshore wind power is less than from coal and gas-fired power stations, but this varies a lot depending on location. Cost metrics Levelized

Benefit and impact of energy system aggregation

Nicolas Francois Claude Louis Oswald Jouron

During the last years, the development of photovoltaics (PV) has favored the creation of solar projects around the world. Nowadays, the majority of PV owners manage their energy independently. However, aggregation of consumers in communities could lead to higher PV self-consumption and thus reduced electricity levelized cost and payback time. This report studies the benefits for the communities according to the level of aggregation. Besides, this report evaluates the impact of the aggregation of the demand, generation and potential flexibility (storage) on the reduction of the operating costs. The results show that the aggregation of a community increases its self-consumption and self sufficiency by almost 10% each. It also increases profits and divides by 2 the duration necessary to the repayment of the investment compared to a non-aggregated community, thus passing to 6.5 years.

2020

Flexibilisation of Biogas-Based Power-to-Gas Processes: A Techno-Economic and Experimental Assessment

Andreas Gantenbein

Biogas-based power-to-X technology allows storing renewable electricity, while producing CO2-neutral products.This work investigates the conversion and upgrading of digestion-derived gas mixtures with focus on increasing the operational flexibility of the overall process. Compensation of fluctuations in the feed gases enable a better economic predictability of the processes and increase the product gas output.A techno-economic evaluation was performed on bubbling fluidised bed (BFB) methanation and biological methanation for CO2 conversion in all-year operation. Each considered process was modelled and optimised to obtain grid-ready biomethane. Rate-based models were used for the main units (BFB reactor, H2-separation membrane). For the biological methanation, simulated performance data from literature were included. The analysis revealed a 17 - 19% lower production cost for BFB methanation, mainly due to lower investment cost for the main reactor vessel. Instead of using PEM electrolysis, high temperature electrolysis (SOE) would allow for heat integration with the BFB reactor, which increases the plant efficiency from 54% to 73% (LHV). A further production cost reduction can be achieved by direct methanation of biogas, omitting prior separation of CO2.Based on gas separation experiments with a commercial biogas upgrading module (Evonik Sepuran) performed in a TRL 5 plant, a flexible upgrading concept using a permeation model was developed. It allows to swiftly switch between conventional membrane-based CO2 separation by a 2-stage membrane unit and direct methanation of biogas and subsequent H2 recycling.A techno-economic analysis was performed on the flexible upgrading concept. The operation hours of the electrolyser were determined by applying a threshold to the electricity price distribution of the past years. The sensitivity on electricity cost (i.e. PtG operation hours) is clearly reduced with the flexible processes, resulting in a better economic predictability of the overall process, compared to a pure PtG installation. System analysis shows the need to allow part load operation of the methanation.Symmetric part load operation (reduced availability of CO2 and H2) was tested in a field experiment by direct methanation of biogas with subsequent H2 recycling in the TRL 5 methanation pilot plant. Stable operation of the methanation plant could be achieved at part load levels from 45% to 100% with closed recycle loop. The BFB reactor alone was tested in a load range of 20 to 100%. A dynamic experiment demonstrated fast, successive load changes while still producing grid-ready biomethane.Asymmetric part load (only H2 limiting) operation was investigated by process simulations and field experiments. Since CO2 is present in the system in an over-stoichiometric amount, H2 recycle and CO2 separation have to be performed simultaneously. Process simulations showed that selecting a most ideal PtG configuration based on technical feasibility is difficult, as further constraints, such as overall economics and operation scheduling have to be considered in process design and evaluation. In all cases, the CO2 separation from the integrated processes leads to a loss of H2 and CH4 from the process. The introduction of an additional membrane stage with a sweep stream is proposed to reduce the loss of reactive gases via the off gas stream.

EPFL2022

Techno-Economic Evaluation of Biological and Fluidised-Bed Based Methanation Process Chains for Grid-Ready Biomethane Production

Andreas Gantenbein, Tilman J. Schildhauer

Three different power-to-methane process chains with grid injection in two scales (1 MWel and 6 MWel) were analysed regarding their investment and operation cost. The process chains were based on biological or catalytic bubbling fluidised bed methanation in combination with proton exchange membrane or solid oxide electrolyser cells. A bottom-up techno-economic analysis showed a cost benefit of around 17-19% lower biomethane production cost for the bubbling fluidised bed technology as less than a third of the reactor volumes is required for catalytic methanation. This cost benefit is only given in combination with PEM electrolysis, as the high-temperature electrolyser stacks currently result in high investment cost. Based on electricity cost of 5 euro-ct/kWh(el) and a plant size of 6 MWel, biomethane production cost of 13.95 euro-ct./kWh for catalytic and 17.30 euro-ct/kWh for biological methanation could be obtained, both including PEM electrolysis. A significant efficiency increase by integrating the heat of catalytic methanation reaction with the high-temperature electrolysis can be achieved; however investment cost have to decrease below 1000 euro/kW(el) to obtain economically feasible production cost of biomethane. Under current economic and technological circumstances, CO2 methanation using the bubbling fluidised bed technology is the most cost effective.

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA2022

Flexibilisation of Biogas-Based Power-to-Gas Processes: A Techno-Economic and Experimental Assessment

Andreas Gantenbein

EPFL2022