Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Distributed Energy Resource Management”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

189 records · Page 11

Accelerating Resilience of the Community through Holistic Engagement and use of Renewables (ARCHER) Planning Framework

The primary objective of the Accelerating Resilience of the Community through Holistic Engagement and Use of Renewables (ARCHER) initiative was to identify and incorporate the unique variations in energy burden, social vulnerability, living conditions, and access to essential services that differ across communities. By accounting for these localized factors—down to the neighborhood level—the project supports more targeted and effective investments in community resilience. The framework seeks to establish practical planning guidance, methods, and performance measures for community energy resilience, integrate community-level and electric utility system resilience planning, and assess its effectiveness through comparison with conventional and operational planning approaches. A key component of the project was its data exchange platform, which is used to evaluate and demonstrate the tools, methodologies, and planning approaches developed through ARCHER. This open-source platform enables developers and vendors of distribution and outage management systems to build upon the research by incorporating its concepts into their own tools and workflows. This capability is enabled by the transparent availability of data, functional requirements, and the underlying information model. The project yielded several important insights. First, meaningful engagement with communities is essential to achieving comprehensive resilience outcomes. Second, resilience planning is most effective when electric grid considerations and broader community needs are addressed in a coordinated manner. Third, the use of platforms that allow for real-time input from communities can enhance utility responsiveness during restoration activities. Fourth, a structured and systematic planning approach can successfully translate ARCHER concepts into practice. Fifth, the development of an integrated metric that reflects both grid performance and community impacts provides a more holistic basis for evaluating resilience. Finally, incorporating community engagement and equity considerations into grid operations is critical, particularly during severe weather events that result in extended outages.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

RAFT: Reconfigurable Array of High-Efficiency Ducted Turbines for Hydrokinetic Energy Harvesting

Diversifying the energy harvesting portfolio is crucial to achieving the ambitious goal of transitioning to clean energy by 2030. Marine hydrokinetic energy has garnered renewed interest due to its high harvesting potential in the U.S., and the resource's reliability and predictability—remaining relatively constant on a daily basis and available 24/7. However, there are currently few commercial devices capable of harnessing the energy from flowing water. This project aims to bridge that gap by designing and evaluating a novel hydrokinetic turbine concept that can efficiently harvest energy from both rivers and tidal streams. The RAFT (Reconfigurable Array of High-Efficiency Ducted Turbines) concept introduces a duct surrounding the turbine rotor and creates an array of small 5-kW units. The duct serves two primary purposes: (1) it enhances hydrodynamic efficiency by accelerating flow to the rotor, and (2) it functions as a structural component, facilitating the formation of modular arrays that lower costs. This project focuses on demonstrating this concept and validating these benefits through simulations and scaled prototype testing. The project team includes 8 faculty members and over 20 students from 3 universities, organized into three core areas: hydrodynamics, electrical systems, and structural analysis, with additional teams dedicated to system integration, environmental assessment and risk management, and tech-to-market strategy. The team successfully demonstrated the increased hydrodynamic efficiency of a ducted turbine compared to an unducted version using high-fidelity simulations and prototype tests. Moreover, design optimization efforts led to surpassing the SHARKS program's goal of 60% reduction of the levelized cost of energy with a significant margin.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

Power-Hardware-in-the-Loop Experiments of a Microgrid With a Grid-Forming Battery Inverter: Preprint

Microgrids continue to proliferate, and they are transitioning away from using conventional generating resources to increasingly relying on inverter-based resources (IBRs) as the voltage and frequency leaders. It is crucial to evaluate the capability of IBRs to provide microgrid stability and resilience. Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) experiments were conducted to de-risk the field deployment of the San Diego Gas & Electric Company Borrego Springs Microgrid, where a battery inverter was upgraded with grid-forming (GFM) capability to serve as the island leader. This paper presents the HIL experimental results from an HIL test bed that uses a power-hardware-in-the-loop (PHIL) interface with a power inductor that was previously developed for PHIL simulations of microgrids where the inverters need to switch modes, i.e., between grid-following and GFM as the microgrid transitions between grid-connected and islanded operation. This paper presents more details on the interface and HIL simulation results of the planned islanding and load steps in islanded operation to show the effectiveness of the inverters in managing the voltage and frequency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Critical Minerals and Materials Matchmaker-CM3

This is the Critical Minerals and Materials Matchmaker (CM3) survey form. CM3 is an online information resource created to help connect users across the critical minerals and materials supply chain. The survey is designed to allow organizations to self-identify their critical minerals and materials-aligned activities and interests, and an interactive map that displays those on-going activities in a dynamic way. To include your critical minerals management activity or activities in CM3, please open and fill out the Critical Minerals and Materials Survey. If your organization has many ongoing or planned activities that would be onerous to enter in the form, or if your activities are difficult to geolocate (such as a transport network), please email the team at edxspatial@netl.doe.gov. This initiative is aligned with the approach of DOE’s H2 Matchmaker and Carbon Matchmaker. Read more information on H2 Matchmaker and Carbon Matchmaker. Below are some questions to help understand if you should fill out the CM3 survey: Does your company work with elements such as lithium, cobalt, copper, graphite, nickel, rare earth minerals, or platinum group metals? Does your organization have research and development activities related to critical materials or their supply chains? Does your company currently work in the critical minerals or materials supply chain? Do you have prospective work in critical minerals or materials in the next 5 years? Does your company mine, process, refine or distribute critical minerals or materials? Do you want to network with other facilities or organizations working in the same areas? Are you curious about the critical mineral and material activity in your surrounding area? Are you interested in aligning your potential needs across the supply chain to different geographic areas within the U.S? For more information, please see the CM3 website (https://www.energy.gov/fecm/articles/critical-minerals-materials-matchmaker-cm3) or email our team at edxspatial@netl.doe.gov.

CM3↗

Managing Subsurface Pressure Buildup and Interference in Commercial-Scale CO 2 Storage Project with Proximal Injection Wells

Large-scale decarbonization using carbon capture and storage (CCS) is likely to involve many commercial-scale CO 2 storage projects located in close proximity to each other. This close proximity raises concerns over pressure interference among the storage projects. Pressure interference between injection and storage efforts can reduce the practicable CO 2 storage resource and force wells to inject CO 2 at a lower rate to avoid the fracture pressure thresholds per United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Class VI well regulations to preserve injection and confining zone integrity and potentially mitigate against inducing seismic activity. These analyses employ numerical full-physics reservoir modeling to evaluate how pressure buildup fronts and CO 2 plumes evolve under commercial-scale injection volumes of CO 2 in which multiple storage sites located in close proximity occur in tandem. The simulation models mimic injection at pseudo basin-scale and assume homogeneous saline formation(s) as storage targets with a pair of upper and lower homogeneous seal layer/s. These analyses specifically investigate the efficacy of two basin-wide reservoir pressure management strategies in addressing the technical challenges associated with pressure buildup and CO 2 plume commingling. The strategies explored include: 1) enlarging the area of injection well spacing (WS) and 2) storing CO 2 in a stacked sequence (SSS) of saline formations compared to a single formation. The storage and confining zones properties assumed were held common across the scenarios, unless specified otherwise. Analyses results show that after injecting 4 million tons per year for 30 years using 4 separate wells (each injecting 1 million metric tons per year), the radius of CO 2 plume extends to a mere 3 km or less from injection wells. Meanwhile, the radius of pressure buildup ranges on the order of tens to a few hundreds of kilometers, depending on the magnitude of pressure buildup threshold that one would use to define the front. CO 2 plume commingling from different injection wells appears to occur 50 years post-injection, especially under scenarios with narrowly spaced (i.e., < 5 km apart) injection well locations. Findings from sensitivity cases on the well spacing suggest that storage formations modeled would require different well spacing to avoid fracture pressure thresholds. For instance, modeled storage formations with high fracture gradients (i.e., 0.8 psi/ft) would need less than 5–km well spacing, whereas those with lower fracture gradients (i.e., 0.7 psi/ft) would need approximately 20–km well spacing, based on assumed modeling parameters. Under stacked injection, the pressure challenges (described above) still exist but are more alleviated due to distributing the same injection volume across more available reservoir volume. These analyses demonstrate that stacked-sequence storage can effectively address the challenges, while still providing the same target CO 2 storage volumes and allowing a large number of storage projects to be deployed in the same basin by better utilizing the available storage resource across different reservoir depths. Among cases modeled, the resulting pressure buildup front is most suppressed when each storage project distributes injection volumes over several wells, each of which injects a portion of the total CO 2 across the stacked sequence. This strategy results in the smallest CO 2 aerial footprint amongst scenarios evaluated but also shows the largest reduction in the pressure buildup at the top of perforation at the injection wells (upwards of approximately 42 percent compared to the commercial-scale single-formation storage), the result of which is crucial to maintain caprock integrity. The findings presented by this research draw attention to the importance of greater coordination among storage operators and regulatory stakeholders to foster the upscaling and deployment of CCS. These analyses provide insights into required decision-making when considering multi-project deployment in a shared basin. Because these analyses evaluate a very specific geologic situation, they bear further investigations across other geologic situations.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Techno-Economic Analysis and Market Potential of Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) Charged With Solar Thermal and Heat Pumps

In this project, we developed a techno-economic analysis (TEA) model that can be used to evaluate the viability of a proposed Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) design. This MATLAB-based model integrates distinct subsystem models for the reservoir, wells, power cycle, and solar field to capture their distinct characteristics. It applies this approach in simulating GeoTES storage and dispatch operations for durations ranging from hourly to seasonal. Using cases studies based on GeoTES designs provided by industry partners - Premier Resource Management (PRM) and EarthBridge Energy - we validated the TEA model estimations of system performance and costs (such as thermal and electrical power/energy inflow and outflow, capital costs, and levelized costs of energy and storage) for both concentrating solar thermal (CST) and Carnot Battery (CB) pairings with GeoTES (CST-GeoTES and CB-GeoTES). For the CST-GeoTES case, the model was validated against the proposed system designed by PRM. It showed good agreement with PRM's estimations when well and pump costs derived from PRM's estimations were used. When GETEM-based costs were used, there was a slight overprediction due to GETEM's project/site agnostic assumption of these costs. From a sensitivity analysis perspective, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of the CST-GeoTES case was most sensitive to well flow rate and the charging temperature. An optimal design scenario resulted in an LCOE of 0.11 $\$$/kWhe. CST-GeoTES can also provide a source of heat to meet seasonal demands. With 12-hour and 24-hour levelized cost of heat (LCOH) of 0.018 $\$$/kWhth and 0.022 $\$$/kWhth, respectively, CST-GeoTES could be competitive in the California market with an average industrial price of natural gas in California between 0.041-0.047 $\$$/kWhth. The levelized cost of storage (LCOS) for CST-GeoTES depends on the energy storage duration. Although the LCOS is relatively higher for shorter durations (e.g., ~0.50 $\$$/kWhe for 1 hour of storage), it is an order of magnitude lower (0.06 $\$$/kWhe) for longer storage durations and competitive with lithium-ion batteries (beyond 12 hours of storage) and molten-salt thermal energy storage (beyond 32 hours). Energy. Three options were explored and applied to the EarthBridge case study: (1) A Carnot Battery design using R125 working fluid with both hot and cold storage; (2) A Carnot Battery design using R125 working fluid with only hot storage; (3) A Carnot Battery using a commercially available heat pump with carbon dioxide (CO2) working fluid and hot storage only. The CB-GeoTES with cold storage only had a slight (round-trip) efficiency advantage over the system without (43.4% vs. 42.8%). This is because the cold storage is limited by the freezing point of water, so the cold storage is not much colder than the environment. The system using commercially available technologies was the least efficient - partly because different cycles were used in the heat pump (CO2) and heat engine (binary cycle) which leads to some inefficiencies. Using the commercially available design, the levelized cost of energy (LCOS) from the model (0.10 $\$$/kWhe) was higher than that estimated by EarthBridge (0.068 $\$$/kWhe). This is because of the low round-trip (38.7%) efficiency of the commercially available design. Sensitivity analysis reveals that the model is most sensitive to electricity price. Including electricity price in the TEA for CB-GeoTES leads to an increase in LCOS from the base value to 0.25 $\$$/kWhe. To determine storage sites suitable for GeoTES, we gathered and analyzed geological, petrophysical, and geophysical data of oil and gas reservoir and aquifers in California and Texas. We down-selected possible sites based on cut-off values for site characteristics (e.g., reservoir temperature, formation thickness, permeability, porosity, depth, and brine salinity) and preliminary costs. Using this approach, the Carrizo-Wilcox, Yegua-Jackson, and Dockum brackish aquifers in Texas were identified as having the highest suitability. Similarly, in the central California region, the White Wolf, Belridge South Tulare, and Belridge South Reef Ridge were the most suitable. Going further, we assessed the storage potential in the selected sites. To do this we developed distributions of reservoir characteristic data and applied a Monte Carlo-based analysis to account for intrinsic uncertainty in the acquired data. The analysis revealed that the Carrizo-Wilcox aquifer had the highest storage potential with a mean capacity of 554 TWhth (i.e., 63 TWhe). The estimated capacity serves as an upper limit of storage potential given that not all fields in the basin will be developed. We participated in multiple outreach activities including conference presentations, panel session discussions, and the facilitation of a GeoTES workshop at the NREL Golden campus.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

The Transactive Energy Network Template Metamodel

While transactive energy, which is defined as an allocation of electricity based on dynamically discovered values or prices, has been extensively studied, its uptake and use has been slow. This report describes a tool, the transactive network template, which should hasten the creation and uptake of transactive energy networks. Some basic principles of transactive energy are familiar from existing wholesale electricity markets. Locational prices are calculated today for zones within bulk electric transmission systems. Locational prices differ while accounting for the locational costs of electricity generation and the losses and constraints incurred when electricity is transmitted from generators and distributed to consumers. A transactive energy network might include these transmission zones. However, current research strives to apply transactive energy also in electricity distribution circuits, buildings, and even for individual generating and consuming devices. At the same time, researchers explore how to apply transactive energy in real time during increasingly shorter time intervals. Automated computational agents become necessary as transactive energy becomes applied to smaller circuit zones and at faster dynamic timescales. A transactive energy network is an example of a multi-agent system. Each zone in the network is represented by its transactive agent, which makes decisions for and acts on behalf of a business entity that is responsible for and manages one of the circuit regions. A transactive energy network is also an example of a decentralized, distributed control system. Control decisions and responsibilities are distributed among the network’s transactive agents. The transactive agents are independent; that is, there typically is no centralized authority or oversight function. Instead, transactive agents exchange transactive signals and thereby negotiate the prices and quantities of electricity that they will exchange. Initially, the circuit regions and responsibilities of transactive agents appear to be very dissimilar. Each circuit region may comprise transmission, distribution, or building-level circuits. Each has a unique position and electrical connectivity within the transactive energy network. Each possesses unique assets that either generate or consume electricity, and these (e.g., renewable energy generator, diesel generator, aggregate utility load, building load, space conditioning, refrigerator, etc.) may further differ in their price flexibility and in their strategies for responding to dynamic electricity prices. Given such diversity, an implementer’s first inclination might be to start from scratch to define all these devices and to engineer their seemingly unique interactions. Given that each implementer’s perspective may be narrow within a transactive energy network, it is unlikely that uniquely engineered systems would interact well. This is where the transactive network template is applicable. The transactive network template is a metamodel that has been developed to guide implementers as they configure their own transactive agent within a network of such agents. The object-oriented design of the transactive network template provides basic code object types that may be used and extended by implementers to represent each of the assets in their circuit region. These objects further facilitate the transactive agent’s necessary computations, which are divided among responsibilities to schedule power usage, balance electric supply and demand, and coordinate the exchange of electricity with the other transactive agents. This report addresses the conceptual transactive network template design. Implementers are directed to more formal design documents and reference implementations. A Python™-based1 reference implementation of the transactive network template has been coded, and three implementations have been configured to represent a national laboratory and two university campuses. Version 2 of the transactive node template generalizes the market class and its methods to facilitate multiple, and more diverse market coordination mechanisms than were facilitated by and demonstrated using Version 1. Version 3 includes new Appendix B, which addresses the designs of methods that would make dynamic prices track approved electricity rates. In the future, the author wishes to make the transactive network template more generally applicable to networks that require more accurate power flow. Development of the transactive network template is jointly funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy and the DOE Office of Electricity. In late 2015, one of the first projects to be funded by the DOE Grid Laboratory Modernization Laboratory Consortium was the Clean Energy and Transactive Campus project, led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. DOE funds were matched by an investment by the Washington Department of Commerce through its Clean Energy Fund. The transactive network template was developed to guide the implementation of transactive energy networks within this project’s scope.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP): A Metadata Framework for Advancing Interoperability and AI Readiness Across Scientific Repositories

The Department of Energy (DOE) funds a diverse and distributed ecosystem of repositories that steward scientific data, publications, and software across its research programs, user facilities, and national laboratories. While significant progress has been made in standardizing dataset-level metadata, the metadata describing repositories themselves (their identity, governance, access interfaces, policies, and technical capabilities) remains inconsistent and fragmented across DOE-funded systems. This variability limits discoverability, interoperability, automated validation, and AI-driven analysis, all of which are increasingly essential for modern scientific workflows. To address this gap, the DOE Data Curation Working Group (DCWG) developed the DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP). The DRMP is a practical, community-driven framework that defines how repositories can describe themselves in a consistent, machine-actionable, and scalable manner. The DRMP is not a new metadata schema. Instead, it is a mapping profile and structured element set capturing the essential characteristics of DOE repositories. It harmonizes repository-level metadata across six widely adopted community schemas: RE3Data; DCAT-US v3; Schema.org; Dublin Core; DataCite 4.6; and PREMIS 3.0. This harmonization eliminates reinvention and enables interoperability within DOE and across the broader scientific ecosystem. A core objective of the DRMP is to reduce burden on repositories by allowing them to reuse their existing metadata through a Rosetta-style crosswalk rather than redesigning local implementations. The profile introduces a three-level conformance model that supports incremental adoption: • Level 1 – Minimum Viable Record (MVR): foundational identification elements required for workflows, project registration, and basic repository presence. • Level 2 – Interoperable: structured metadata enabling alignment with national and international discovery systems. • Level 3 – AI-Ready: enhanced provenance, policy transparency, fixity, semantic context, and capabilities that support automated reasoning, model training governance, and machine-assisted curation. To support implementation, the DRMP includes JSON Schema definitions, OpenAPI patterns, and MCP templates that allow repositories to publish machine-readable metadata directly within existing platforms. These resources are modular and lightweight, enabling adoption without major architectural change. Adopting the DRMP enables repositories to: • Enhance discoverability and interoperability by aligning identifiers, classifications, and descriptive elements across widely used schema standards. • Support federated discovery and cross-registration across DOE systems, Data.gov, and international catalogs. • Enable AI agents and workflow orchestration systems to interpret repository-level metadata within the American Science Cloud (AmSC) through Model Context Protocol (MCP)-based context publication. • Demonstrate alignment with DOE’s open science, stewardship, and FAIR data priorities. This guidance represents a community-driven step forward. Through voluntary adoption and continued feedback, the DRMP advances a cohesive, machine-actionable description of DOE repositories that supports FAIR data practices, preparing the infrastructure for AI-enabled research, and strengthening the discoverability and reuse of DOE’s scientific outputs.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

The environmental impact, carbon emissions and sustainability of computing in the ATLAS experiment

ATLAS, a general-purpose experiment at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), makes use of a large internationally-distributed computing infrastructure, including over 10 6 TB of managed data on disk and tape and almost one million simultaneously running CPU cores. Upgrades for the High-Luminosity LHC (HL-LHC) will increase the required computing resources by a factor of 3–4 by the beginning of the 2030s, and by an order of magnitude before the conclusion of data taking at the beginning of the 2040s. These resources are spread over around 100 computing sites worldwide. Efforts are underway within the experiment to evaluate and mitigate various aspects of the environmental impact of the sites, with the additional long-term goal of making recommendations to the sites that will significantly reduce the total expected environmental impact in the HL-LHC era. These efforts take several forms: building awareness in the experiment community, adjusting aspects of the computing policy, and modifications of data center configurations, either in ways that take advantage of particular features of ATLAS workloads or in generic ways that reduce the environmental impact of the computing resources. This paper describes the ongoing investigations and approaches that have already provided useful and actionable outcomes.

Aad, G. [CNRS/IN2P3] (ORCID:0000000266654934)↗