Bibliography - Samir Succar

1. Succar, Samir, and Robert H. Williams, April 2008: Compressed Air Energy Storage: Theory, Resources, and Applications For Wind Power. Energy Systems Analysis Group, Princeton Environmental Institute, Princeton, NJ, http://www.princeton.edu/~cmi/research/Capture/Papers/SuccarWilliams_PEI_CAES_2008April8.pdf,
   [ Abstract ]

   This report reviews the literature on compressed air energy storage (CAES) and synthesizes the information in the context of electricity production for a carbon constrained world.
   
   CAES has historically been used for grid management applications such as load shifting and regulation control. Although this continues to be the dominant near-term market opportunity for CAES, future climate policies may present a new application: the production of baseload electricity from wind turbine arrays coupled to CAES.
   
   Previous studies on the combination of wind and CAES have focused on economics and emissions [1-10]. This report highlights these aspects of baseload wind/CAES systems, but focuses on the technical and geologic requirements for widespread deployment of CAES, with special attention to relevant geologies in wind-rich regions of North America.
   
   Large penetrations of wind/CAES could make substantial contributions in providing electricity with near-zero GHG emissions if several issues can be adequately addressed. Drawing on the results of previous field tests and feasibility studies as well as the existing literature on energy storage and CAES, this report outlines these issues and frames the need for further studies to provide the basis for estimating the true potential of wind/CAES.

2. Succar, Samir, September 2008: Baseload Power Production from Wind Turbine Arrays Coupled to Compressed Air Energy Storage. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Electrical Engineering, Princeton University, http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=10-04-2014&FMT=7&DID=1594486331&RQT=309&attempt=1&,
   [ Abstract ]

   An analysis is presented of compressed air energy storage (CAES) and its potential for mitigating the intermittency of wind power, facilitating access to remote wind resources and transforming wind into baseload power. Although CAES has traditionally served other grid support applications, it is also well suited for wind balancing applications due its ability to provide long duration storage, its fast ramp rates and its high part load efficiencies. In addition, geologies potentially suitable for CAES appear to be abundant in regions with high- quality wind resources. This is especially true of porous rock formations, which have the potential to be the least costly air storage option for CAES. The characteristics of formations suitable for CAES storage and the challenges associated with using air as a storage fluid are discussed. An optimization framework is developed for analyzing the cost of baseload plants comprised of wind turbine arrays backed by natural gas-fired generating capacity and/or CAES. The optimization model analyzes changes to key aspects of the system configuration such as the wind turbine rating, the relative capacities of the system components, the size of the CAES storage reservoir and the wind turbine spacing. The response of the optimal system configuration to changes in natural gas price, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, capital cost, and wind resource is also considered. Wind turbine rating is given focused attention because of its substantial impact on system configuration and output behavior. The generation cost of baseload wind is compared to that of other baseload options. To highlight the carbon-mitigation potential of baseload wind, the competition with coal power (with and without CO₂ capture and storage, CCS) is given prominent attention. The ability of alternative options to compete under dispatch competition is explored thereby clarifying the extent to which baseload wind can defend high capacity factors in the market. This analysis indicates that CAES might be well suited for balancing wind power output and enabling wind to achieve deep reductions in GHG emissions from power generation globally.

3. Greenblatt, J. B., Samir Succar, D. C. Denkenberger, Robert H. Williams, and Robert H. Socolow, 2007: Baseload wind energy: Modeling the competition between gas turbines and compressed air energy storage for supplemental generation. Energy Policy, 35(3), doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.03.023 1474-1492
   [ Abstract ]

   The economic viability of producing baseload wind energy was explored using a cost-optimization model to simulate two competing systems: wind energy supplemented by simple- and combined cycle natural gas turbines (‘‘wind+gas’’), and wind energy supplemented by compressed air energy storage (‘‘wind+CAES’’). Pure combined cycle natural gas turbines (‘‘gas’’) were used as a proxy for conventional baseload generation. Long-distance electric transmission was integral to the analysis. Given the future uncertainty in both natural gas price and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions price, we introduced an effective fuel price, p_NGeff, being the sum of the real natural gas price and the GHG price. Under the assumption of p_NGeff = $5/GJ (lower heating value), 650W/m² wind resource, 750km transmission line, and a fixed 90% capacity factor, wind+CAES was the most expensive system at ¢6.0/kWh, and did not break even with the next most expensive wind+gas system until p_NGeff = $9.0/GJ. However, under real market conditions, the system with the least dispatch cost (short-run marginal cost) is dispatched first, attaining the highest capacity factor and diminishing the capacity factors of competitors, raising their total cost. We estimate that the wind+CAES system, with a greenhouse gas (GHG) emission rate that is onefourth of that for natural gas combined cycle plants and about one-tenth of that for pulverized coal plants, has the lowest dispatch cost of the alternatives considered (lower even than for coal power plants) above a GHG emissions price of $35/tC_equiv., with good prospects for realizing a higher capacity factor and a lower total cost of energy than all the competing technologies over a wide range of effective fuel costs. This ability to compete in economic dispatch greatly boosts the market penetration potential of wind energy and suggests a substantial growth opportunity for natural gas in providing baseload power via wind+CAES, even at high natural gas prices.

4. Succar, Samir, J. B. Greenblatt, D. C. Denkenberger, and Robert H. Williams, 2006: An Integrated Optimization Of Large-Scale Wind With Variable Rating Coupled To Compressed Air Energy Storage. Proceedings of the AWEA Windpower 2006, Pittsburgh, PA, http://www.princeton.edu/~ssuccar/recent/Succar_AWEAPaper_June06.pdf,
   [ Abstract ]

   A methodology is presented for jointly optimizing the wind turbine specific rating and the storage configuration for a large-scale wind farm coupled to compressed air energy storage (CAES). By allowing the wind-storage system to be optimized in an integrated, variable rating framework the overall cost of energy (COE) can be reduced substantially. These changes also enhance the capacity factor of the wind array, reduce the storage capacity requirements of the baseload plant and reduce the greenhouse gas emission rate of the overall system relative to a separately optimized wind farm couple to CAES. The results of this analysis could have important implications for th ecompetitiveness of large-scale remote wind and the applicability of energy storage as a baseload wind strategy in a carbon constrained world.

5. Succar, Samir, J. B. Greenblatt, and Robert H. Williams, May 2006: Comparing Coal IGCC with CCS and Wind-CAES Baseload Power Options in a Carbon-Constrained World. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference on Carbon Capture & Sequestration, Alexandria, Virginia, http://www.princeton.edu/~ssuccar/recent/Succar_NETLPaper_May06.pdf,
   [ Abstract ]

   Coal integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) with carbon capture and storage (CCS) has emerged as a potentially cost-effective carbon mitigation strategy. However carbon policies that make energy systems such as IGCC with CCS competitive with conventional fossil power generators will also bring other low carbon technologies into play. In particular, two strategies for generating baseload power from wind are investigated: pairing wind with dedicated natural gas generation and coupling wind energy to compressed air energy storage (CAES). The costs and performance of these options are analyzed in comparison to coal IGCC with and without CCS. We find that wind with natural gas backup faces significant challenges in economic dispatch competition due to high fuel prices. However CAES, a commercially ready technology, makes it possible to transform wind power into a baseload power option with the low short-run marginal cost needed to compete in baseload markets. Moreover, geologies suitable for CAES seem to be reasonably well distributed in wind-rich regions of the United States (e.g., Great Plains) where much of the new capacity for coal power generation is being planned. An economic analysis indicates that costs and greenhouse gas emission levels of wind-CAES systems fired with natural gas will be comparable to those of coal IGCC with CCS, and could be strong competitors for coal IGCC with CCS in providing baseload electricity in a carbon-constrained world.

6. Succar, Samir, J. B. Greenblatt, and Robert H. Williams, April 2006: Arguing the case for storage. Windpower Monthly, 22(4), 8-10
   [ Abstract ]

   Whether or not storage is needed depends on the aspirations for wind power. Although there is a large potential for wind power expansion in serving non-base load markets, this should be regarded as a near term opportunity for expanding wind generation from its current very small base production level. If wind energy is to become a truly large player in electricity markets globally it must be able to compete with base load power, which accounts for most electricity generation. Notably, 70% of US electricity and 60% of global electricity are currently provided by coal and nuclear power, mostly via base load power plants.

Direct link to page: http://cmi.princeton.edu/bibliography/results.php?author=3655