Utilizing the Energy Resource Potential of DOE Lands
Committee on Energy Resource Potential for DOE Lands
Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS500 Fifth Street, NWWashington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract No. DE-PI0000010, Task Order DE-DT0007283, from the U.S. Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/24825
Copyright 2017 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Utilizing the Energy Resource Potential of DOE Lands. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24825.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s and deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY RESOURCE POTENTIAL FOR DOE LANDS
PAUL A. DECOTIS, West Monroe Partners, New York, Chair
JAMES A. (JIM) AJELLO, Hawaiian Electric Industries, Honolulu
CHRISTINE EHLIG-ECONOMIDES, NAE,1 Texas A&M University
WILLIAM L. FISHER, NAE, University of Texas, Austin
SAM KALEN, University of Wyoming, Laramie
JACKALYNE PFANNENSTIEL,2 Independent Consultant, Piedmont, California
DAN REICHER, Stanford University, Stanford, California
JEAN-MICHEL M. RENDU, NAE, Independent Consultant, Santa Fe, New Mexico
STAN ROSINSKI, Electric Power Research Institute, Charlotte, North Carolina
TERRY SURLES, State of Hawaii Strategic Industries Division
Staff
ELIZABETH ZEITLER, Study Director (through September 2015)
MARTIN OFFUTT, Study Director (from September 2015)
JAMES ZUCCHETTO, Director, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems
LANITA JONES, Administrative Coordinator
ELIZABETH EULLER, Program Assistant (through June 2016)
___________________
1 National Academy of Engineering.
2 Deceased April 26, 2017.
BOARD ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
JARED COHON, NAE,1 Carnegie Mellon University, Chair
DAVID ALLEN, NAE, University of Texas, Austin
W. TERRY BOSTON, NAE, PJM Interconnection, LLC, Audubon, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM BRINKMAN, NAS,2 Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
EMILY A. CARTER, NAS/NAE, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey
BARBARA KATES-GARNICK, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts
JOANN MILLIKEN, Independent Consultant, Alexandria, Virginia
MARGO OGE, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Environmental Protection Agency, McLean, Virginia
JACKALYNE PFANNENSTIEL3, Independent Consultant, Piedmont, California
MICHAEL RAMAGE, NAE, ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company (retired), Moorestown, NJ
DOROTHY ROBYN, Consultant, Washington, D.C.
GARY ROGERS, Roush Industries, Livonia, Michigan
KELLY SIMS-GALLAGHER, The Fletcher School, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts
MARK THIEMENS, NAS, University of California, San Diego
JOHN WALL, NAE, Cummins Engine Company (retired), Belvedere, California
ROBERT WEISENMILLER, California Energy Commission, Sacramento, California
Staff
K. JOHN HOLMES, Acting Director/Scholar
JAMES ZUCCHETTO, Senior Scientist
MARTIN OFFUTT, Senior Program Officer
BEN WENDER, Program Officer
DANA CAINES, Financial Associate
LANITA JONES, Administrative Coordinator
JANKI PATEL, Program Assistant
___________________
1 National Academy of Engineering.
2 National Academy of Sciences.
3 Deceased April 26, 2017.
Preface
Department of Energy (DOE)-managed lands continue to be a valuable asset among the nations’ property holdings. The potential for energy projects has attracted the interest of the private sector, and DOE sites can now boast of projects that have generated electric power using wind turbines and solar panels. Thus DOE-managed lands present an opportunity that can result in leasing revenues or production interests payable to DOE by developers to offset the cost of maintaining such properties. Existing, idle DOE-managed lands could become income generators, transitioning such lands, currently carried as liabilities, into assets. Yet while other governmental agencies, such as the Department of the Interior, have used their own Secretary’s office to facilitate the marketing of opportunities to promote renewable resource development by examining program opportunities on public lands, DOE, by contrast, appears to have done much less.
This report from the Committee on Energy Resource Potential for DOE Lands follows from a congressional request contained in the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. DOE’s Office of Legacy Management (LM) commissioned an assessment of energy resource potential for DOE-managed lands from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), who managed the renewable energy portion, while subcontracting consideration of uranium and fossil resources to the Colorado School of Mines (CSM). LM entered into a contract with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to review the assessment by NREL/CSM. The committee found that the NREL/CSM study did not settle the question of which additional sites can be developed to take advantage of the available energy resources. Owing to budget constraints, the NREL/CSM assessment did not have the scope to engage in methodological development appropriate to the task nor to examine the roster of DOE-managed lands at the level of the individual site.
In this report, the committee provides its findings on the NREL/CSM study. These are intended constructively to help interpret the NREL/CSM study and its ability to address the important question of what potential the DOE-managed lands have for additional energy projects. The committee believes that developing energy projects on DOE-managed lands is a critical enterprise that can provide return on investment.
Paul A. DeCotis, Chair
Committee on Energy Resource Potential for DOE Lands
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Dan Arvizu, NAE,1 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (retired),
Andrew Brown, Jr., NAE, Delphi Corporation (retired),
Carlos Dengo, Texas A&M University,
Gary Dorris, Ascend Analytics,
Karen Douglas, California Energy Commission,
Charles Goodman, Southern Company Services (retired),
Gurcan Gulen, University of Texas, Austin,
Michael Hanemann, NAS,2 Arizona State University,
Bryan Long, Department of the Navy,
Karl Rabago, Pace University,
Alison Silverstein, Independent Consultant, and
Michael Telson, General Atomics.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Julia Phillips, NAE, Sandia National Laboratories (retired). She was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
___________________
1 National Academy of Engineering.
2 National Academy of Sciences.
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
Overview of Study Methodologies
2 REVIEW OF THE APPROACH TAKEN IN THE NREL/CSM STUDY
Description of DOE Lands Under Consideration
Comments on NREL and CSM Approach
Examination of the Renewable Energy Resources of the Top 17 Sites
Fossil and Uranium Energy Resource Screening
3 REVIEW OF THE NREL/CSM ANALYSIS BY RESOURCE
Solar Photovoltaic Technologies
Comments on NREL Analysis for PV and CSP
Findings and Recommendations on Solar Power
Comments on NREL Analysis for Wind Power
Findings and Recommendations for Wind Power
Geothermal Energy Resource Potential
Comments on the CSM Analysis of Geothermal Energy
Findings and Recommendations for Geothermal Energy Resource Development
Coal and Uranium Energy Resources
Benefits and Challenges of Developing Coal and Uranium Resources
Comments on CSM Analysis of Coal and Uranium Resources
Comments on the NREL Analysis of Biomass Energy
Findings and Recommendations for Biomass Energy Resource Development
Waste-to-Energy and Landfill Gas Resources
Benefits and Costs of Developing Waste-to-Energy Resources
Comments on the NREL Analysis of Waste-to-Energy Resources
Benefits and Costs of Developing Landfill Gas Resources
Comments on the NREL Analysis of Landfill Gas Resources
Findings and Recommendations about Waste-to-Energy and Landfill Gas Resources
Benefits and Challenges of Oil and Natural Gas Production
Comments on the CSM Analysis of Oil and Gas Energy Production
Findings and Recommendations about Oil and Natural Gas Production
DOE Lands Are a Valuable National Asset
Energy Resource Production on DOE Lands Requires Secretary-Level Coordination