SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Planned and actual accomplishments are reported for February 2020, along with planning for the next period.
A progress report for FRD-17-002 is provided.
Progress on the project for July 2020 is reported.
Both our subcontract with ISU and the one with Frontline have been finalized and the requisitions for the initiation of them have been submitted (this places defined amounts of funding available to the subcontracts, for the first allotment of work to be done, for which we already have funds from the CEC). Once the requisitions are approved, the subcontracts will be fully executed. During the month of August, further work on the Market Report was carried out, and will continue, as this is the most adaptable of the LLNL-main tasks to working remotely, so will not have any delays due to the shelter-in-place orders. Organization of our databases and sources on availability, and potential availability of all woody biomass was continued. Tables and figures for the report were begun as well, and the outline was finalized. Additionally, a parametric study for pyrolysis’ different products was done, with a metric of return on capital investment being chosen. Evaluated parameters include feedstock price, CO2 credit price, CO2 transport cost, and minimum fuel selling price, for drop-in fuels.
Abstract not provided.
A progress report for the project as of October 2020 is provided.
Abstract not provided.
Frontline has prioritized personnel safety, equipment preservation, and environmental protection throughout the design process of the autothermal pyrolysis unit. To facilitate a safe design, Frontline completed an informal hazards and operability (HAZOP) study and a formal HAZOP study, and employ management of change procedures. The result of these safety procedures is a plant that will function in a safe manner with a limited and acceptable amount of risk. Frontline took an approach it used in previous projects to execute a preliminary, internally facilitated hazards and operability (HAZOP) study. While this HAZOP study was performed without any subsequent change tracking, it enables a group of well-trained engineers to consider the safety implications of each part of the plant in a thorough and methodical manner. Frontline chose to bring in a pyrolysis consultant (Daren Daugaard of Burning Oak Energy) to participate in the review. Following the preliminary HAZOP and once the detailed design work was nearing completion, Frontline performed a formal HAZOP with a third-party facilitator, Jason Stittleburg of Novetus Engineering. Although the plant is not subject to process safety management (PSM) requirements, this formal HAZOP was performed in accordance with OSHA regulations deemed reasonable for PSM. Finally, after the formal HAZOP was conducted, Frontline maintained a safe system by implementing and following management of change procedures on each substantial change to the process. Frontline has kept a record of each subsequent change made to the formal HAZOP P&IDs. The process hazard assessment process allowed Frontline to find and correct several unacceptable configurations within the plant.
This is the first of three questionnaires that you will be asked to complete over the course of the agreement. Please type your responses directly into this document in the spaces below each question. Use as much space as you need; the form automatically creates more space within each response field. In addition, you may submit additional documents, spreadsheets, or other files. Acceptable filetypes are MS Word, MS Excel, and PDF. Additional files do not need to follow any particular format, unless specified by the particular questionnaire designed for your project.
Abstract not provided.
The January 2021 progress report is provided, including planned and actual accomplishments for the period.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The present report is intended to provide process flow diagrams (PFDs) and energy and mass balance data sheets for a U.S. industrial sector subset with which nuclear heat and power could be integrated—a subset that includes the oil refining, methanol and pulp and paper industries. Coupling options for integrating nuclear energy into these industries are quantitatively outlined for reference systems, and future work will extend this analysis in greater detail. Opportunities for integrating small modular nuclear reactors (SMNRs) were investigated for each of the industrial process configurations. Aspen HYSYS and Cycle-Tempo models for a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor were developed to evaluate the proposed integration. This introductory evaluation provides a general description and assessment of the operating principles, reactor coolant core outlet temperature, and reactor size to be integrated with industry. The industrial processes of oil refining and the production of methanol, pulp and paper were simulated by using Aspen HYSYS, Aspen Plus, and the PRELIM (Petroleum Refinery Life Cycle Inventory Model) tool to develop process details. Cycle-Tempo models then extend the process modeling results to obtain net energy demands (e.g., heat, steam, and electricity) when accounting for process steam and waste heat recovery. This information is intended to foster the analysis of integrating an SMNR to decarbonize industrial facilities. The SMNR would provide reliable, competitive, and sustainable clean energy while reducing carbon emissions and other environmental impacts, such as water withdrawals, consumption, and contamination. The refining industry, exhibited in Figure ES1, is a leading consumer of fossil -fuel-based heat, power, and hydrogen in the U.S. industrial sector, generating over 164 million metric tons (MMT) of CO 2 emissions in 2023. The overall mass and energy pertaining to a generalized complex refinery in the United States is reflected in Figure ES1, along with energy metrics regarding integration with a nuclear power plant (NPP). Data sheets were developed to indicate the energy requirements for the overall refinery and each refinery process. The data sheet for the overall refinery is shown in Table ES2.
Abstract not provided