Engineering topics

McCollum, David

Publications and source records attributed to McCollum, David.

8 records

DOE OSTI2024

2023 Southeast Decarbonization Workshop

Decarbonization refers to a large-scale shift away from fossil fuel sources for energy production and toward energy sources, energy end-use practices, and land management approaches that do not result in a net increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Decarbonization in the Southeastern United States is distinguished from that of other regions in the country by its potential impact on historically underserved populations and the ways this region’s human–environmental systems are predicted to fare in a climate-altered world. In parallel, ensuring a clean energy transition requires the ability to engage entire communities that are motivated to learn, build, and encourage the spread of so-called clean tech. In contrast to other technology trends from the past century, the foundation of clean tech is a shared sense of purpose—a collective strategy to mitigate the threats of climate change and support a better environment for everyone. As seen in the Office of Science and Technology Policy’s (OSTP’s) Net-Zero Technology Action Plan (2023), decarbonization is best accelerated by simultaneous investments in Innovation, Demonstration, and Deployment of technology in tandem with intentional policy and community-based solutions. The 2023 Southeast Decarbonization Workshop, hosted by the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), aimed to bring together members of our communities and a group of regional experts to strategize about opportunities in this important area, as well as to incorporate the important pillar of System Interactions to bridge the gap between clean tech’s intent and its impact.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

MultiSector Dynamics: 2023 Inaugural Workshop Report

Preface The MultiSector Dynamics (MSD) Community of Practice (CoP) hosted an inaugural workshop on October 3-5, 2023 at the University of California, Davis, to bring together members of the MSD community of practice to advance understanding of the co-evolution of human and natural systems, and to build the next generation of tools that bridge sectors, scales, and systems to realize a more resilient and equitable future. The theme of the workshop was "Advancing Complex Adaptive Human-Earth Systems Science in a World of Interconnected Risks". This document outlines the motivation for the workshop, its goals and objectives, the application process, the agenda, overviews of the training sessions offered to the workshop participants and a summary of each breakout session. The MSD workshop report further discusses the feedback from workshop participants and presents some reflections and next steps. The MSD Workshop organizers thank the DOE Office of Science, Earth and Environmental System Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics program area for financial support of its activities through the Integrated Multisector Multiscale Modeling (IM3) project. For more information related to the broader DOE MultiSector Dynamics Program please see https://climatemodeling.science.energy.gov/program-area/multisector-dynamics. D.L.M. and C.M.B. acknowledge support from the Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the US Department of Energy (DOE). Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither theUnited States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, complete- ness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name,trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory operated by Battelle for the United States Department of Energy Available from:Office of Scientific and Technical Information http://www.OSTI.gov multisectordynamics.org This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4 Suggested citation: Monier, E., Reed, P.M., Vernon, C.R., Hadjimichael, A., Brelsford, C.M., Burleyson, C.B., Dyreson, A.R., Fletcher, S.M., Giang, A., Gupta, R.S., Jackson, N.D., Jones, A.D., Lamontagne, J.R., McCollum, D.L., Morris, J.F., Moss, R.H., Peng, W., Saari, R.K., Srikrishnan, V., Szinai, J.K., Yoon, J. (2024) MultiSector Dynamics: 2023 Inaugural Workshop Report. MSD-LIVE Data Repository. doi:10.57931/2371710.

Monier, Erwan↗

DOE OSTI2024

MSD CoP Webinar: Applied Science for Decision-Making at the Water-Energy Nexus

Context: This webinar was hosted by the MultiSector Dynamics Community of Practice (MSD CoP; https://multisectordynamics.org). Abstract: The energy transition is a game-changer across multiple sectors, requiring researchers and practitioners to re-evaluate the evolving connections between climate, water, and power systems, as well as the associated co-management of resources and decision-making. In anticipation of new technologies, policies, business models, and other solutions, applied science for decision-making at the climate-water-energy nexus is needed to support transitions with the expected climate resilience, maintained and enhanced energy security, thriving economies, and equity considerations. Through panelists' applied research and operational experience, the webinar will provide lesson-learnt in how to increase the readiness of water-energy research and become actionable in the context of energy transitions. A number of themes will be discussed, including the connection between growing computational resources and complexity of models, and the implications on the intended users, the actual actionable products, the availability of data for validation of the models, uncertainty characterization and decision-making under uncertainty, and the communication of the novelty to decision-makers and the public. Presenters : David McCollum (Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Co-Chair), and Gokul Iyer (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory; Co-Chair), Curt Jawdy (Tennessee Valley Authority), Nathalie Voisin (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory), and Andrew D. Jones (Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory) Moderator: Pat M. Reed (MSD CoP Facilitation Team) This webinar was held on: April 30, 2024 from 1-2 PM ET

Energy↗

DOE OSTI2022

Which “second-best” climate policies are best? Simulating cost-effective policy mixes for passenger vehicles

In the real-world of political opposition and complex market failures, carbon pricing alone will not achieve deep GHG mitigation targets. Hence, in this study, we search for the most cost-effective “second-best” policies. Focusing on the light-duty vehicle sector in the case of Canada, we compare several policies in terms of effectiveness (regarding 2030 GHG goals) and mitigation costs, namely: (i) a carbon tax; (ii) a vehicle emission standard (or VES); (iii) a zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) mandate, and (iv) combinations of all three at various stringencies. In this effort, we apply the AUtomaker-consumer Model (AUM), which endogenously simulates consumer and automaker decisions and technological change. Comparing individual policies, the regulations are about three times more expensive than the carbon tax. Among “second-best” policies, the VES is cheaper than a ZEV mandate at lower stringencies, but at higher stringencies the two are similarly efficient (both incentivize widespread ZEV deployment). In policy mixes, cost-effectiveness is improved by a carbon tax. Specifically, inclusion of a CDN$100–150/tonne tax can achieve targets while being 30–40% less costly than a regulation alone. We suggest that policymakers implement carbon pricing as stringently as politically feasible (for efficiency), complemented by regulations as needed (for efficacy) to meet GHG targets.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2021

How to design a zero-emissions vehicle mandate? Simulating impacts on sales, GHG emissions and cost-effectiveness using the AUtomaker-Consumer Model (AUM)

We report although numerous studies investigate the impacts of policy on zero-emissions vehicle (ZEV) sales, few address the impacts of a ZEV sales mandate and its particular design features. We use the AUtomaker-consumer Model (AUM) to simulate varying designs of a ZEV mandate in Canada's light-duty vehicle sector, requiring 30% ZEV sales by 2030. Design features include: different penalties for non-compliance, different allocations of credits per ZEV type, and the allowance of banking credits across years. For each policy design, we consider impacts on ZEV adoption, GHG emissions, consumer surplus, automaker profits, and overall policy cost-effectiveness. Results demonstrate trade-offs among the policy designs. Generally, ZEV mandate designs that are more effective at increasing ZEV adoption and decreasing GHG emissions also induce larger reductions in consumer surplus and automaker profits. To achieve the ZEV sales goal, simulations show that a higher non-compliance penalty (CDN$ 10k per credit) is needed. ZEV adoption and GHG reductions are also improved by a “One credit per ZEV” scheme, rather than a “California-style” scheme that gives multiple credits per battery-electric vehicle. Further, allowing automakers to bank credits softens the policy impact on profit and increases automaker compliance in initial years. Across these different design combinations, we find that the most cost-effective design ($CDN/tonne mitigated, including consumer surplus and automaker profits impacts) utilizes a $10k non-compliance penalty and “One credit per ZEV” system that allows banking. Our analysis demonstrates the importance of various ZEV mandate design features, and the complex trade-offs involved among various policy goals.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Techno-Economic Analysis of Product Diversification Options for Sustainability of the Monticello and Prairie Island Nuclear Power Plants

The objective of this work was to perform techno-economic analysis (TEA) of hybrid options that could be integrated with light water reactor (LWR) nuclear power plants (NPPs) in order to improve the viability and sustainability of existing LWRs through product diversification by utilizing nuclear energy not only to produce grid electricity but to also produce carbon free products such as hydrogen, ammonia or synthetic fuels. Much of the analysis herein could be generally applied to any LWR (high temperature steam electrolysis- HTSE design), but hydrogen demand and the optimization of the HTSE was completed with specific collaboration and data from Xcel Energy’s Prairie Island and Monticello nuclear generating stations and the surrounding market and logistics potential in the greater Minneapolis region. Xcel Energy has set aggressive goals with regards to decarbonization, including an 80% reduction in CO 2 emissions from 2005 levels, by 2030 and 100% carbon free by 2050. Other TEAs regarding hydrogen production with nuclear energy have been completed in collaboration with other utility companies previously. Besides being the first TEA in this regard specific to Xcel Energy and the surrounding markets and logistics, this TEA adds to the previously completed TEAs by providing the most up to date and state of the art analysis and optimization of the hydrogen production plant integrated with nuclear power (NPP-HTSE).

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2018

Mitigation scenarios must cater to new users

Climate change mitigation scenarios are being utilized by an ever-wider user base, including companies and financial institutions. Increased collaboration between scenario producers and these new communities will be mutually beneficial, educating companies and investors on climate risks while helping to ground climate science in practical real-world needs.

finance, scenarios, TCFD↗

DOE OSTI2018

Energy investment needs for fulfilling the Paris Agreement and achieving the Sustainable Development Goals

Investments are often recognized as the ‘lifeblood’ of the global energy system. Low-carbon investments can provide the means for initiating a system transformation, as called for by the Paris Agreement and Sustainable Development Goals. Improving our understanding of the scale and nature of these investments under diverging technology and policy futures is therefore of great importance to decision makers. Here we show that the pronounced reallocation of the investment portfolio needed for transforming the energy system will not be instigated by the current suite of Nationally Determined Contributions. Charting a course toward ‘well below 2 °C’ instead requires that low-carbon investments overtake fossil investments globally before 2025 and then continue to grow from there. Pursuing the 1.5 °C target demands a marked up-scaling in low-carbon capita beyond that demanded by 2 °C. The investment needs for making progress on certain other SDG targets are small relative to those for energy.

McCollum, David↗