Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “partner”

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.

At least 199 records · Page 11
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

CyDER: A Cyber Physical Co-simulation Platform for Distributed Energy Resources in Smartgrids

The CyDER project aimed at developing an open-source, modular and scalable co-simulation platform for power grids with large shares of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs). The project partners are the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Lab (LLNL), PG&E, SolarCity, and ChargePoint. The prime recipient is LBNL; SolarCity and ChargePoint were partners for the project’s first two years. Increased DER integration introduces a number of challenges in power grid operation including a more dynamic interaction between the transmission grid and distribution grids, and increased modeling complexity. Although specialized software exists to precisely model different components of the power system, it is far from trivial to integrate all various models and perform a holistic simulation. Instead of replicating all models in a common simulation program, a commonly accepted approach to tackle this model diversity is to couple third-party simulators and models through a co-simulation platform that coordinates information exchange among the various components. Following this line of research, this project’s objective was to develop a co-simulation platform based on a widely accepted industrial standard called Functional Mockup Interface (FMI). Within this process, the project developed models compliant with the FMI standard, called Functional Mockup Units (FMUs), and used them to perform various operational and planning power system analyses. Relying and building upon an industrial standard is the main differentiation of this project compared with previous or parallel efforts in the co-simulation area. Particular emphasis was put on delivering software utilities to facilitate setting up and running co-simulations by end-users. Furthermore, a strong aspect of this project is demonstrating that co-simulation techniques can be used to perform Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) simulations that couple software components (e.g., simulated models) with hardware components (e.g., real devices such PV systems and batteries). The long-term goal of CyDER project is to help establish FMI as a powerful standard for co-simulation and promote adoption by electric utilities and other interested stakeholders. The main accomplishments of the project include the development of several FMUs including distribution and transmission grid models, PV inverters with Volt/Var/Watt controllers, batteries, and predictive optimal controllers. Additionally, a unique software package was developed, called SimulatorToFMU, which is capable of exporting any Python-driven simulator or Python script as an FMU. This is an important contribution towards establishing FMI as one of the main co-simulation standards, because more and more third-party programs for sub-system modeling and simulation are delivered with Python APIs. The CyDER platform was used to perform PV hosting capacity analyses in real utility feeders with and without smart inverter controls, battery storage, and EV charging. Smart inverter controls include conventional Volt/Var/Watt controls for reactive power support and active power curtailment, but also predictive controls that optimize the charging and discharging profile of the battery connected on the DC side in order to minimize the customer’s economic benefit. Finally, an important result of this project is delivering an experimental setup that consists of residential-scale PV inverters with battery storage, a real-time grid simulator with an ideal voltage source as grid emulator, and micro Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs). All these components and additional software modules are coupled to one another using the FMI standard and can be co-simulated with the CyDER platform.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

FY2019 Technology Integration Annual Progress Report

The 2019 Technology Integration Annual Progress Report covers 30 multi-year projects funded by the Vehicle Technologies Office. The report includes information on 23 competitively awarded projects, ranging from safety training and design for maintenance facilities housing gaseous fuel vehicles, to electric vehicle community partner programs, to truck platooning with advanced driver assistance systems. It also includes seven projects conducted by several of VTO’s National Laboratory partners, Argonne National Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. These projects range from a Technical Assistance project for business, industry, government and individuals, to the EcoCar Advanced Vehicle Technology Competition, and the Fuel Economy Information Project.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Energy Intensity Baselining & Tracking Summary Guide: Better Buildings, Better Plants

The Department of Energy (DOE) Better Plants (BP) program is a voluntary energy efficiency leadership initiative for U.S. manufacturers that encourages companies to reduce their energy intensity, typically by 25% within a ten-year period. BP partners are required to report their progress to the DOE annually by establishing an energy intensity baseline and tracking their energy consumption. BP partners receive access to a Technical Account Manager (TAM), DOE resources including software tools and trainings, and recognition when they achieve their goal. This summary guide provides the basics of baselining and tracking your energy intensity. For a more information and special considerations, please see the Energy Intensity Baselining and Tracking Guidance 2020.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Energy Intensity Baselining and Tracking Guidance

Each company joining the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program (Better Plants) commits to establishing an energy consumption and energy intensity (EI) baseline and to tracking its energy performance over a 10-year period against that baseline. The baseline must reflect a company’s energy consumption over a 12-month period, covering all its U.S.-based operations. Energy consumption is calculated by fuel type in terms of primary energy (also known as source energy). EI is broadly defined as the amount of energy consumed per unit of output produced. For this guidance document and for the program, the term energy performance represents an evaluation of a facility’s capacity to use energy efficiently. Metrics used to assess a facility’s energy performance can include EI, energy consumption, improvements in EI, etc. Establishing an energy baseline and tracking system is a critical first step in effectively managing energy use. Developing a baseline can help a company understand energy use within the corporation and give it a point of comparison to evaluate future efforts to improve energy performance. It can also support efforts to validate a company’s energy management activities, improve comparative analyses when using benchmarks, and help in predicting future energy needs. In addition, a company that normalizes its performance data can determine highly defensible measures of energy savings generated through implemented energy efficiency projects. Establishing a baseline and tracking energy performance is also a requirement for ISO 50001 certification. Although basic energy data can be collected through utility bills, most manufacturers will have to perform additional analyses to develop accurate and robust energy baselines and tracking systems. Energy is consumed in many ways within the manufacturing sector and can come from multiple sources. Energy is sometimes generated and sold to other parties or captured and reused on-site. External events can exert a significant impact on a facility or company’s energy use independent of any purposeful efforts to improve energy efficiency. Operational changes, such as production shifts—which may be inevitable for some companies over the 10-year period covered by the program—can also make a big difference in energy use. Since Better Plants asks companies to account for all their U.S.-based operations, mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures can also have significant implications for a company’s energy metrics. This document aims to demystify the sometimes complex baselining process. It devotes special attention to the task of normalizing and adjusting energy consumption to account for external factors, such as weather and production changes. A key recommendation is that companies use regression analysis to normalize their energy consumption data whenever possible. Regression analysis is a statistical technique that estimates the dependence of a variable (i.e., energy use in the context of Better Plants) on one or more independent variables such as ambient temperature, while controlling for the influence of other variables at the same time. A properly developed regression analysis can provide a reliable estimate of energy savings resulting from energy improvement strategies and projects by accounting for the effects of variables such as annual production levels and weather. DOE has developed a companion Energy Performance Indicator software tool (EnPI) to simplify the baselining process. This tool can run regression models, calculate changes in EI at the facility level, and automatically compile facility-level data into a corporate-wide metric. Note that although the relevant equations used to calculate EI are provided in this document, the EnPI tool will automatically perform most calculations for the user. Additionally, Better Plants Partners (Partners) can call on their Technical Account Manager (TAM) to help them establish a baseline and assist with the necessary calculations to track progress.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Materials response under hypersonic flow conditions probed by multi-modal diagnostics in a benchtop wind tunnel

In this LDRD “Materials response under hypersonic flow conditions probed by multi-modal diagnostics in a benchtop wind tunnel” a peer-reviewed lab-scale hypersonic wind tunnel (WT) was planned to be assembled in-house, along with time and space resolved and related flow and materials diagnostics to derive high quality measurements and the science that is able to inform the development of our modeling and simulation codes for the hypersonic regime. The baseline capability to achieve Mach 3 flow was scheduled to be completed in Q4 2020, in the first year of the LDRD. However due to the COVID-19 delays and travel restrictions starting in March, 2020 this task could not be completed to carry out the materials response studies in-house, or those planned with external partners that were engaged during this LDRD (NASA Langley, NASA Ames, Texas A&M university, and Virginia Tech). Still, using our hypersonic computational fluid simulation codes, many of the hypersonic components have been designed (for Mach 3, 5, and 7) and procured (or in procurement phase), and a new dedicated hypersonic laboratory was facilitized, 2 WT test sections have been manufactured, and a Mach 3 nozzle was 3D printed for prototyping. In parallel, unique materials diagnostics have been tested under static conditions and fully specified and awaiting validation in our partner facilities. Due to the new hypersonic initiative announced in January, 2020 we proposed a related scope increase in hypersonics research requiring energy interactions and new diagnostics well beyond what could be supported by an LDRD ER. A decision was made to end the current LDRD ER and formally propose a new LDRD SI that leverages the current effort, which will be starting in FY21. As a result of the uniqueness of this LDRD work, our early efforts have been encouraged and well received in the hypersonic research community, and is now part of multiple unsolicited internal and external project proposals expected to be funded in the coming years, which is encouraging to make LLNL a leader in experimentally probing extreme physics of local energetics critical to hypersonics.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2020

PLATFORM for Product Launch

Pecan Street Inc. (PSI) and its partners set out in 2017 to validate the PLATFORM for Product Launch, a new model for improving the effectiveness of investments in clean energy technologies and accelerating market entry of disruptive technologies. In partnership with a newly formed Innovation Advisory Council, PSI recruited fourteen companies with new hardware-based technologies that enable or create clean energy opportunities. Pecan Street carried out product evaluations and conducted market research with stakeholders and target customers to develop recommendations on product optimization opportunities for all companies, and created third party performance evaluation reports that include environmental metrics, such as water and energy savings potential, to assist in creating investment confidence and to unlock additional sources of funding, such as impact investments. Pecan Street set-up the product testing environment, performed small-batch field testing, and provided a verified third-party performance report on the product of twelve companies. PSI Street and its partners leveraged the performance evaluations and insights from the newly formed PRI toolkit to raise over $1.5M across five companies, and garner interest for private sector adoption of the PLATFORM for Product Launch.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Systems Level Understanding of Interconnected Methane and Nitrogen Cycles Using Complex Synthetic Communities

The main goal of this project was to follow up on prior discovery of the communal nature of methane utilization by the aerobic methanotrophic bacteria, resulting in carbon transfer along a food chain. This goal was approached via manipulation of specially designed, synthetic bacterial communities, fed exclusively by methane, under a variety of simulated environmental conditions. Using (meta)genomics, metatranscriptomics, stable isotope probing and mutant generation, we obtained solid evidence for the nature of the core microbiota involved in collaborative methane consumption, the major players (true methanotrophs) being the members of the family Methylococcaceae, their major partners (non-methanotrophic methylotrophs) being members of the family Methylophilaceae, and minor but persistent partners in the communities being members of the orders Burkholderiales and Bacteroidetes. Metabolic reconstruction from single genomes and metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs), along with metatranscriptomics results delineated major pathways for carbon metabolism, suggesting that the methanotrophs share different organic compounds with different functional guilds: methanol with Methylophilaceae, acetate with Burkholderiales, and polymeric substances with Bacteroidetes. Overall, the results of this project expand our understanding of microbial metabolism of methane and, thus, provide basis for strategies for microbial methane mitigation, with obvious benefits to the society of the United States and worldwide.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Substation Secondary Asset Health Monitoring and Management System (SSHM)

Electric Power Group, LLC (EPG) was awarded DOE OE0000850 to design, develop, and demonstrate a real-time software application for substation secondary equipment health monitoring and management at host utility American Electric Power (AEP), a cost share partner. This project addresses the need for monitoring substation equipment health and providing operators with tools to identify and take pre-emptive action to avoid catastrophic equipment failure. By monitoring synchrophasor data in real time, data anomalies that indicate potential asset failure can be detected and alerts can be sent to operators in time to take corrective actions. EPG developed two data driven algorithms to identify abnormal equipment signature patterns as well as a method using substation linear state estimation (SLSE). The software has been deployed on hardened PC’s and tested and validated for cost share partner AEP’s substations - 138kV and 765 kV. The SSHM software has been accepted by AEP and final demonstration of DOE - OE0000850 for AEP and DOE was successfully completed on March 17th, 2020. EPG developed the Substation Secondary Asset Health Monitoring (SSHM) Platform to analyze equipment failure signatures in PMU data and alert substation personnel when pre-emptive inspection, repairs and other actions are warranted to prevent potential catastrophic failures. This is the first system that automatically monitors the health of substation secondary assets and alerts users to emerging failures using synchrophasor measurements. SSHM uses high resolution PMU data from PTs, CTs, and CCVTs to analyze equipment signatures and identify anomalies that are precursor indicators of potential equipment failure. When an anomaly is detected, there is a likelihood of potential failure of monitored equipment, the system alerts the user with visual alarms including alarm trend charts and indicator lights on a oneline diagram of the substation.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Better Plants Resources for Achieving Science Based Targets

The US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program is a voluntary initiative that works with leading manufacturers to showcase leadership and drive deep energy savings in the U.S. industrial sector. Partners agree to set ambitious sustainability goals and in return receive robust technical assistance, national recognition, facilitated peer-to-peer learning opportunities, and access to innovation. Many Better Plants partners are looking to translate their energy intensity progress towards carbon reduction goals and exploring if setting a Science-Based Target (SBT) is right for their organization. This document provides an overview of the SBT initiative and compares it to the offerings of the Better Plants program. To help companies who are participating in both initiatives, DOE tools and resources are highlighted and discussed.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Guidance on Including Social, Organizational and Technical Influences in Nuclear Utility and Plant Modernization Plans

The objective of this report is to provide the nuclear power industry with guidance on including socio-technical issues in plans developed for current and future modernization efforts. Socio-technical issues of concern include social, organizational and related technical aspects of modernized systems. These can be addressed using a set of systematic analysis and design methods developed to address socio-technical issues of the sort facing the nuclear power industry. The next phase of this work will involve developing and implementing a modernization plan that includes socio-technical tools and methods identified and discussed in a report by Dainoff and colleagues (2020). The plan is expected to be developed and implemented in cooperation with a nuclear utility that has expressed interest in participating. The Dainoff et al report provides the foundation for the present effort and presents a methodological tool set for analyzing socio-technical issues applicable to many modernization efforts. The tools described by Dainoff et al are based on principles of human factors engineering, safety engineering, and systems engineering and are discussed within the specific context of nuclear utility modernization and transformation efforts. It is expected that the plan and the concepts described in the current report will be developed and implemented with a nuclear utility partner. The plan developed with the nuclear utility partner will have a substantially higher level of detail than the guidance provided in this report, particularly with regard to details of plan logistics, etc.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Nondestructive Evaluation of Concrete within Nuclear Applications

Structural defects that develop over the lifetime of nuclear power plants (NPPs) could threaten the safety and security of the concrete infrastructure. Developing a reliable nondestructive evaluation (NDE) method to evaluate the damage in NPPs and their associated structures will greatly improve the long-term operation and safety of NPPs. The purpose of the US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy’s Light Water Reactor Sustainability program is to develop technologies and other solutions that can improve the reliability, sustain the safety, and extend the operating lifetimes of NPPs beyond 60 years. This report describes the progress made toward growing NDE capabilities for NPPs. It also documents expanded collaborations with the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and future opportunities to collaborate with industry partners (i.e., vendors and utilities) and university partners. These collaborations will continue to stand as a framework to provide value to stakeholders by reducing uncertainties and potential delayed maintenance costs in NPPs.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Defending the Homeland: Growing Foreign Challenges to the U.S. Missile Defense Posture

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) for Policy requested that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory conduct a Congressionally directed study on homeland missile defense, pursuant to Section 1692 of the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. In accordance with the statutory language, this study considers whether the security benefits obtained by deployment of homeland missile defenses of the United States are undermined or counterbalanced by adverse reactions of potential adversaries, and considers the effectiveness of homeland missile defense efforts of the United States to deter the development of ballistic missiles. Almost a half-century has elapsed since the United States and the Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, and almost two decades since the former withdrew. Since withdrawing, the United States has sought to develop and deploy a layered missile defense system to defend against regional threats to U.S. and allied interests abroad and to counter limited threats to the U.S. homeland. As such, missile defense supports key national defense policy objectives. Protecting the U.S. homeland, forces abroad, allies, and partners. Deterring attacks against the United States, its allies, and partners. Assuring allies an strengthening U.S. diplomatic activities in peacetime and crisis. We offer five key findings: 1. The primary benefit of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system is the protection it provides the U.S. homeland against a limited but evolving rogue-state missile threat. While this system has never been tested in combat, it appears thus far to have effectively paced North Korea’s development and deployment of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In the absence of such a defensive capability, the United States would likely have been more heavily exposed to North Korean actions, would have operated at a much higher-risk posture, and would have had less negotiating room with which to navigate coercive tactics and crises. Its allies would have been more concerned about U.S. willingness in time of crisis and war to run the risks of protecting them. The GMD system also serves as a hedge against Iranian breakout. 2. Potential adversaries continue to develop long-range ballistic missiles despite deployment of a U.S. homeland missile defense system. This includes both rogue states and major power rivals whose long-range missile programs predated the deployment of U.S. missile defenses. While North Korea has continued its long-range missile developments and achieved an intercontinental capability, Iran has not yet reached this threshold. The broader proliferation of long-range missiles anticipated in the late 1990s has not materialized. 3. While Russia has used the existence of a U.S. homeland missile defense system as a justification for its substantial and continuing weapon modernization program, neither Russian force modernization nor the limited U.S. homeland missile defense system has altered the strategic balance. Russia has long considered U.S. missile defenses—both theater and homeland—as directed against its strategic forces and as a capability that could rapidly advance, thereby eroding Russian confidence in its nuclear deterrent. Russia’s political and military actions appear excessive and negatively impact areas such as arms control, but they do not undermine the primary benefit of the U.S. system cited in Key Finding 1. 4. China’s expansion and diversification of nuclear and missile forces has been influenced by its concerns about U.S. homeland missile defense, but those concerns are only one of many factors in China’s force planning. Although China’s actions to preserve and expand its assured retaliation prospects have not fundamentally altered the strategic balance, its buildup and lack of transparency about its force modernization goals are troubling. Taken together, the aggregate pattern of China’s modernization activities over the past two decades strongly suggests a concerted effort to develop a modern military force commensurate with its intended geopolitical status. Whatever China’s legacy concerns over the survivability of its strategic nuclear forces, its ability to overwhelm the GMD system appears intact today and will be further strengthened in the years ahead as it continues its long-term modernization program. China’s political and military actions negatively affect U.S. security interests but do not undermine the primary benefit of the U.S. system cited in Key Finding 1. 5. The basic finding that benefits have not so far been undermined by adverse reactions is a function of circumstances that are increasingly in flux. The existing GMD-centered system is under increasing pressure from the pace and scope of North Korean missile deployments. The proposed “layered” system seeks to mitigate this impending capability gap in the near term and to complement future capabilities, such as the Next Generation Interceptor, when they come online. Given the pace of U.S. missile defense developments since 2000, it is possible that adversary advances in capability will outpace the U.S. system’s ability to adapt. Additionally, because this layered system is in principle more readily scaled, it will almost certainly be viewed skeptically by China and Russia. In a context of growing great-power security competition, the Department of Defense (DoD) should consider undertaking a broader net assessment of the U.S., Russian, and Chinese force balance.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2020

Action Plan Template: Clean Energy for Low Income Communities Accelerator

This document is provided as a planning tool for partners in the Clean Energy for Low Income Communities Accelerator (CELICA). Many partners will publish objectives, strategies, and proposed actions through more extensive reports or official recommendations. Others may choose to use an internal strategy document such as the CELICA Action Plan template to help guide progress.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Nuclear Materials on Both Sides of Regulatory Control: from IAEA Safeguards to Global Counter-Nuclear Smuggling

Global nuclear security is dependent upon the sustained and verifiable control of radiological and nuclear (R/N) materials within nuclear facilities, under the administrative purview of national governments. It is the responsibility of each country to account for their R/N materials holdings and to ensure that they do not escape regulatory control and fall into the wrong hands. The Office of Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence (NSDD) is tasked with providing support to foreign partners in developing the tools and expertise to detect, disrupt, and investigate R/N materials encountered out of regulatory control, in such circumstances as at border crossings and other checkpoints, or in the course of routine policework. Thankfully, such incidents are infrequent, and NSDD continues to work bilaterally with partner countries to strengthen their capabilities to combat nuclear smuggling and trafficking incidents in their countries. For the vast majority of R/N materials that remain under regulatory control, however, it is critical that their safe storage and use be independently verified. Even a single loss incident of R/N materials, particularly of special nuclear materials (highly-enriched uranium and plutonium) has the potential to cause a catastrophe. How can the international community be assured that R/N materials currently under national regulatory control remain there?

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2021

Performance Analysis of PIConGPU: Particle-in-Cell on GPUs using NVIDIA’s NSight Systems and NSight Compute

PIConGPU, Particle In Cell on GPUs, is an open source simulations framework for plasma and laser-plasma physics used to develop advanced particle accelerators for radiation therapy of cancer, high energy physics and photon science. While PIConGPU has been optimized for at least 5 years to run well on NVIDIA GPU-based clusters, there has been limited exploration by the development team of potential scalability bottlenecks using recently updated and new tools including NVIDIA’s NVProf tool and the brand-new NVIDIA NSight Suite (Systems and Compute) tools. PIConGPU is a highly optimized application that runs production jobs at scale on a system Oak Ridge Leadership Facility’s (OLCF) Summit supercomputer (using the full machine at 4600 nodes; at 98% of GPU utilization on all ~28000 NVIDIA Volta GPUs). PIConGPU has been selected as one of the the eight applications for OLCF’s coveted Center for Accelerated Application Readiness (CAAR) program aimed at the facility’s Frontier supercomputer (OLCF’s first exascale system to launch in 2021), to partner with our vendors (primary vendors: AMD and Cray/HPE) ensuring that Frontier will be able to perform large-scale science when it opens to users in 2022. To this effect, performance engineers on the PIConGPU team wanted to dive deep into the application to understand at the finest granularity, which portions of the code could be further optimized to exploit the hardware on Summit at it’s maximum potential and also to elucidate which key kernels should be tracked and optimized for the CAAR effort to port this code to Frontier. Any bottlenecks that are observed via performance profiling on Summit are likely to also impact scalability on the Frontier-dev system and the Frontier Early Access (EA) system. Additionally, the engineers wanted to take a closer look at the newest NVIDIA profiling tools which allows us to identify the most useful features on these tools and will provide an opportunity to compare it to new AMD and Cray’s performance analysis tool releases and provide feedback to our vendor partners on what features are most important and mission critical for CAAR efforts. The primary goal of this report is to focus on the evaluation of PIConGPU’s most time-intensive kernels using NVProf and NSight Suite. Three kernels, Current Deposition (also known as Compute Current), Particle Push (Move and Mark), and Shift Particles are known to be some of the most time-consuming kernels in PIConGPU. The Current xi Deposition kernel and Particle Push kernel both set up the particle attributes for running any physics simulation with PIConGPU, so it is crucial to improve the performance of these two kernels. In this report, we measure single GPU metrics for the three kernels, offer high level takeaways from the conducted analysis, and compare the profiling data from NSight Compute to that of NVProf. This analysis was performed using a grid size of 240 x 272 x 224, and 10 time steps with the Mid-November Figure of Merit (FOM) run setup. The Traveling Wave Electron Acceleration (TWEAC) science case used in this run is a representative science case for PIConGPU. This execution can also be used for baseline analysis on AMD MI50/ MI60 systems. As of the time of writing, the PIConGPU application has limited use for features of NSight Systems, so this report will mainly focus on insights garnered from NSight Compute. For this analysis, we run the “full” metric set available in NSight Compute version 2020.1.2 and use NSight Systems version 2020.3.1 to generate the application timeline.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Midwestern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) Phase III (Development Phase) (Final Report)

The Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) was founded in 2003 as part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (RCSP) Initiative. The public/private consortium, funded through the MRCSP, brings together nearly 40 industry partners in 10 contiguous states in Mid-West and North-East regions. Battelle, as the project lead, oversees research & development, operations, and coordinates activities among various partners. Since its founding, MRCSP has made significant progress towards advancing CCS and CCUS technologies for participating states in the region. Between 2008 to 2020, Phase III of the MRCSP program focused on the development of large-scale injection tests. This report is part of a series of topical reports prepared under the MRCSP Phase III. The MRCSP Final Technical Report summarizes the research conducted while monitoring large-scale injection tests at a CO 2 -EOR facility in Northern Michigan. The project successfully injected more than one million metric tons of CO 2 into depleted oil fields in the Northern Niagaran Pinnacle Reef Trend (NNPRT) for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). These commercial-scale tests provided valuable real-world knowledge that has been used to refine technologies and methods, reduce uncertainties, and demonstrate safety and effectiveness of CCUS technologies to increase public acceptance. The Final Technical Report provides an overview of Phase III efforts including advancing the understanding of the regional geology, storage capacities, deployment of many monitoring and modeling techniques and its efficacy, and technical demonstration of large-scale CO 2 injection, containment, and associated storage in the NNPRT region. Specific topical reports on the subjects covered in the Final Technical Report are also available through EDX/OSTI.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

Integrated Monitoring Volume: A Summary of Monitoring Studies Conducted in Niagaran Carbonate Pinnacle Reefs During Enhanced Oil Recovery with CO 2

The Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) was founded in 2003 as part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership initiative. Since its founding, MRCSP has made significant strides toward making CCUS a viable option for states in the region. The public/private consortium, funded through the DOE Regional Carbon Sequestration Initiative, brings together nearly 40 industry partners and 10 states. Battelle, as the project lead, oversees research, development and operations and coordinates activities among the partners. The incremental, phased approach has built a valuable knowledge base for the industry and paved the way for commercial-scale adoption of CCUS technologies. From 2008 to 2020, MRCSP Phase III focused on the development of large-scale injection projects. This report is part of a series of reports prepared under the Midwestern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) Phase III (Development Phase). These reports summarize and detail the findings of the work conducted under the Phase III project. During the MRCSP Phase III monitoring period, over 1 million metric tons of CO 2 was injected into ten Silurian-age (Niagaran) pinnacle reef reservoirs in Otsego County, Michigan that are operated by Core Energy, LLC. There are over 800 pinnacle reefs in northern Michigan, and collectively, these geologic features have sufficient capacity to store several hundred million metric tons of CO 2 . Moreover, most of the reefs are oil-bearing and went through primary production in the 1970s and 1980s; therefore, by injecting CO 2 into the reefs, there is a real opportunity to realize additional (enhanced) oil recovery (EOR) and to permanently store CO 2 after EOR. A key objective of the MRCSP Phase III project is to evaluate the effectiveness of various technologies for monitoring CO 2 that has been injected into deep geologic formations. Monitoring may be required at CO 2 storage sites for a variety of reasons, including to meet UIC Class II (EOR sites) or Class VI (storage only sites) permit requirements or EPA greenhouse gas reporting rule requirements or to qualify for tax credits under the 45Q tax credit rule. The results of this monitoring study should prove useful to operators considering using carbonate pinnacle reefs of Northern Michigan for CO 2 storage.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

Integrated Modeling Report for CO 2 Storage with Enhanced Oil Recovery in Northern Michigan

The Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) was founded in 2003 as part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership initiative. Since its founding, MRCSP has made significant strides toward making CCUS a viable option for states in the region. The public/private consortium, funded through the DOE Regional Carbon Sequestration Initiative, brings together nearly 40 industry partners and 10 states. Battelle, as the project lead, oversees research, development and operations and coordinates activities among the partners. The incremental, phased approach has built a valuable knowledge base for the industry and paved the way for commercial-scale adoption of CCUS technologies. From 2008 to 2020, MRCSP Phase III focused on the development of large-scale injection projects. This report is part of a series of reports prepared under the Midwestern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (MRCSP) Phase III (Development Phase). These reports summarize and detail the findings of the work conducted under the Phase III project. MRCSP has been investigating various reservoir characterization and modeling technologies related to Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) in conjunction with carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery (CO 2 -EOR) operations in multiple Silurian-age (Niagaran), oil-bearing, carbonate pinnacle reefs in northern Michigan, USA. This report provides a comprehensive discussion of reservoir modeling studies that were conducted for tracking oil production, forecasting CO 2 plume migration, and estimating associated storage in a number of reefs that were at different stages of their CO 2 -EOR life cycle. The modeling process for simulating oil production, CO 2 injection, and associated storage in these reefs entails two phases. The first phase, geologic framework modeling, integrates all pertinent geological and geophysical data (from logs, cores and seismic surveys) about reservoir structure, geometry, rock types, and property distributions (porosity, permeability, water saturation) into a 3-D distributed grid-based static earth model (SEM). The second phase, dynamic reservoir modeling, uses the SEM as a platform to simulate the movement of oil, gas, water, and CO 2 within the reservoir during primary hydrocarbon production, as well as during subsequent phases such as CO 2 -injection assisted EOR, plume migration, and associated storage. In addition, an assessment of coupled process effects is also carried out, where the impacts of geochemical and geo-mechanical processed induced by CO 2 injection are studied.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗