Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Policy Making”

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 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Unlocking Synergistic Benefits of Colocation of Data Centers at Airports

This white paper evaluates the potential of a new energy system configuration: Strategic colocation of data centers - on airport property or adjacent to airports - in order to realize significant operational, economic, and environmental benefits to airports, data centers, and the communities they serve. While increasing demand from both airports and data centers requires both parties to make significant infrastructure investments, colocation can mitigate some of the energy, land use, permitting, and connectivity challenges of siting and powering these industries.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Cost Benefit Analysis of Solar PV for the City of Oldsmar, FL

The City of Oldsmar is in the early stages of exploring renewable energy opportunities as a part of their initiative to reduce energy costs, improve backup power capacity, and begin the transition to more sustainable operations. The city is particularly interested in deploying a floating or ground-mounted solar PV system at its wastewater treatment plant. Currently, there are no solar PV installations in Oldsmar and there has been hesitancy to implement such a project due to the possible capital costs and limited technical capacity. Despite this the initiative has gained internal buy-in among staff working for the city. To assist with gaining more buy-in and making future decisions the city sought technical assistance (TA) from the Energy to Communities (E2C) Expert Match Program. Through the Expert Match Program, the city received TA provided by the Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL) to evaluate the cost effectiveness of several solar options. This report details the analysis and results of the work performed for TA.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

SCRES Energy Quest Workshop (Technical Report)

Energy Quest: Sitka’s Path to 2050 is a game based public engagement tool developed as part of the Sitka Community Renewable Energy Strategy and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Transitions Initiative Partnership Project Cohort 3. Designed for Sitka’s isolated island microgrid, which is powered primarily by hydropower and depends on imported diesel for backup, the game translated complex long term energy planning questions into an interactive format. In facilitated workshops, residents built energy roadmaps to 2050, explored tradeoffs, and expressed priorities around four themes: affordability, reliability, self sufficiency, and innovation. Across sessions, participants showed strong support for increasing local self sufficiency and resilience, even when this required balancing near term affordability with long term investments. They emphasized reducing dependence on imported diesel, making better use of existing hydropower, and considering new renewable generation such as solar, wind, and additional hydropower. Survey and game responses also highlighted interest in using surplus hydropower to support new industries, expanding electrification of heating and transportation, and exploring emerging technologies and green fuels. The report organizes these findings into four scenario themes to guide Sitka’s 2050 energy planning. Affordability focuses on managing rate impacts, efficiency, and conservation. Reliability addresses diversified generation, backup power, and energy security. Self sufficiency emphasizes distributed generation and reduced reliance on imported fuels. Innovation explores new technologies, marine based energy solutions, and low carbon fuels. By grounding future planning in these community derived themes, Energy Quest shows how a game based approach can make technical energy planning more accessible and inclusive for remote communities. For questions about the game board and piece production email Dr. Sarah Troise (sarah.troise@pnnl.gov)

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

The Baltimore Community Weather Station Network: Filling the Urban Measurement Desert

Quantification and understanding of how heat, rainfall, and air quality vary within cities are needed to identify the area with the worst conditions, develop solutions to extreme weather, and assess the impact of proposed policies. However, neighborhood-level variability is not well quantified because there are few environmental measurement stations within cities. In Baltimore City, a community-based network of weather stations to address this issue has been developed through a partnership between universities, state agencies, and Baltimore residents. The weather stations are hosted by community partners, and the data collected are enabling the mapping of urban weather across the city and the testing of models and proposed mitigation strategies. In addition, the network provides direct community involvement, with resulting benefits of increased community engagement, education, and empowerment. Researchers have an opportunity to democratize the scientific process and ensure that local knowledge and lived experiences of city residents inform future decision-making. The approach could be used as a model for other cities that apply similar monitoring instruments for other environmental exposures.

community↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data-Informed Evaluation Framework for Integrated Energy Systems: Insights from Power, Process Heat, and Hydrogen Production Applications

The multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework provides a systematic evaluation of the diverse preferences and performance metrics associated with alternative solutions. This approach is advantageous over a single-criterion methodology, which are only valid under conditions that assume ceteris paribus or an "apples-to-apples" comparison. However, selecting suitable technologies for integrated energy systems (IES) can be likened to an "apples-to-oranges" comparison, given the heterogeneous factors at stake. These factors include economics and performance parameters, geological compatibility, and environmental impacts. Consequently, past research has often employed a mixture of qualitative and quantitative criteria tailored to the specific interests of each study. While the method proves effective in handling the intricate interplay of criteria, the resulting rankings and scores can vary from study to study. This inconsistency is introduced from the use of subjectively defined thresholds and weights. As a result, decision-makers frequently find it challenging to establish clear connections between specific criteria and the resulting scores, as the transformation of criteria into ordinal scores results in a substantial loss of information. To address this challenge, we introduce a data-informed IES evaluation framework that offers comprehensive, interpretable, and traceable evaluations backed by quantifiable rationale. First, we identified key IES evaluation criteria from a decade of literature, focusing on relevant IES applications in power, process heat, and hydrogen production. We leveraged state-of-the-art cost estimates from the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and technical data from 78 reactor designs from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development - Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD-NEA). Lastly, we established thresholds by analyzing the mean, variance, root mean square, and slope of values across alternatives, categorizing the preferences of decision-makers into distinct utility functions, such as linear, saturating, exponential, and stepwise. Our approach yielded two main outcomes: (1) it provided consistent assessments across different stakeholder groups and (2) it visualized uncertainties in the decision-making context via comprehensive sensitivity analysis. To demonstrate the impact of our framework, we conducted case studies on 6 reactor designs (AP1000, NuScale, BWRX-300, Xe-100, eVinci, iMSR) for the three applications. Our data-driven framework proved to be highly effective in addressing heterogenous uncertainties faced by varied decision-makers? preferences and IES applications, as well as cost and technical estimates of advanced reactors.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data-Informed Evaluation Framework for Integrated Energy Systems: Insights from Power, Process Heat, and Hydrogen Production Applications

The multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework provides a systematic evaluation of the diverse preferences and performance metrics associated with alternative solutions. This approach is advantageous over a single-criterion methodology, which are only valid under conditions that assume ceteris paribus or an "apples-to-apples" comparison. However, selecting suitable technologies for integrated energy systems (IES) can be likened to an "apples-to-oranges" comparison, given the heterogeneous factors at stake. These factors include economics and performance parameters, geological compatibility, and environmental impacts. Consequently, past research has often employed a mixture of qualitative and quantitative criteria tailored to the specific interests of each study. While the method proves effective in handling the intricate interplay of criteria, the resulting rankings and scores can vary from study to study. This inconsistency is introduced from the use of subjectively defined thresholds and weights. As a result, decision-makers frequently find it challenging to establish clear connections between specific criteria and the resulting scores, as the transformation of criteria into ordinal scores results in a substantial loss of information. To address this challenge, we introduce a data-informed IES evaluation framework that offers comprehensive, interpretable, and traceable evaluations backed by quantifiable rationale. First, we identified key IES evaluation criteria from a decade of literature, focusing on relevant IES applications in power, process heat, and hydrogen production. We leveraged state-of-the-art cost estimates from the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and technical data from 78 reactor designs from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development - Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD-NEA). Lastly, we established thresholds by analyzing the mean, variance, root mean square, and slope of values across alternatives, categorizing the preferences of decision-makers into distinct utility functions, such as linear, saturating, exponential, and stepwise. Our approach yielded two main outcomes: (1) it provided consistent assessments across different stakeholder groups and (2) it visualized uncertainties in the decision-making context via comprehensive sensitivity analysis. To demonstrate the impact of our framework, we conducted case studies on 6 reactor designs (AP1000, NuScale, BWRX-300, Xe-100, eVinci, iMSR) for the three applications. Our data-driven framework proved to be highly effective in addressing heterogenous uncertainties faced by varied decision-makers? preferences and IES applications, as well as cost and technical estimates of advanced reactors.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Priorities, opportunities, and challenges for integrating microorganisms into Earth system models for climate change prediction

ABSTRACT Climate change jeopardizes human health, global biodiversity, and sustainability of the biosphere. To make reliable predictions about climate change, scientists use Earth system models (ESMs) that integrate physical, chemical, and biological processes occurring on land, the oceans, and the atmosphere. Although critical for catalyzing coupled biogeochemical processes, microorganisms have traditionally been left out of ESMs. Here, we generate a “top 10” list of priorities, opportunities, and challenges for the explicit integration of microorganisms into ESMs. We discuss the need for coarse-graining microbial information into functionally relevant categories, as well as the capacity for microorganisms to rapidly evolve in response to climate-change drivers. Microbiologists are uniquely positioned to collect novel and valuable information necessary for next-generation ESMs, but this requires data harmonization and transdisciplinary collaboration to effectively guide adaptation strategies and mitigation policy.

Microbiology↗
DOE OSTI2025

2024 Buildings Technology Baseline: Dataset Documentation

The Buildings Technology Baseline is a curated and regularly updated dataset of current and projected performance, retail, and installed price data for all major building energy technologies needed to enable cost/benefit analyses. Building technology analyses require an up-to-date understanding of installation costs and cost-effectiveness of key building energy efficiency technologies. The dataset was assembled by Guidehouse during fiscal year 2024. Data was gathered from the 2024 National Residential Efficiency Measures Database (NREMDB), the 2023 Energy Information Administration Updated Buildings Sector Appliance and Equipment Costs and Efficiencies ("EIA Building Data Report"), DOE Lighting Market Model, the 2023 RSMeans database, and the 2020 Grid-Interactive Efficient Building Technology Cost, Performance, and Lifetime Characteristics ("GEB Data Report"), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, various literature, as well as new data from online retailers, stakeholder interviews, and contractor databases in 2023 and 2024. The dataset has been reviewed by subject matter experts at NREL and DOE. The 2024 dataset release is intended to be a starting point for interested users to provide feedback. This database is not intended to provide specific cost estimates for a specific project. The cost estimates do not include any rebates or tax incentives that may be available for the measures. Rather, it is meant to help determine which measures may be more cost-effective. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) makes every effort to ensure accuracy of the data; however, NREL does not assume any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Knowledge-Based Hazardous Waste Determinations for Solar Photovoltaic (PV) Modules: A Foundational Study

This report explores using "generator knowledge" to determine whether a solar photovoltaic (PV) module must be managed as hazardous waste prior to recycling or landfilling. Generator knowledge is a legal term and existing regulatory pathway for making a hazardous waste determination that has been used by other industries but is a relatively unknown option to the PV industry. In the United States, a hazardous waste determination often acts as a pre-requisite to recycle or landfill a PV module. The results of the hazardous waste determination dictate whether the PV module must be managed as hazardous waste or nonhazardous solid waste. Managing a PV module as hazardous waste requires compliance with stringent U.S. federal and state hazardous waste law. In addition to increased management costs, which can be ten times higher, legal liability for PV modules regulated as hazardous waste is also heightened with both civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance which includes making an inaccurate or faulty hazardous waste determination. The most common reason a PV module would be regulated as hazardous is if it contains a regulated metal in an amount that equals or exceeds the toxicity characteristic limits. To determine whether a PV module exhibits a hazardous characteristic, the regulated person/entity must "apply knowledge...in light of the materials and processes used." In the absence of adequate knowledge to determine whether the PV module is hazardous, it must be tested using Test Method 1311 Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) or an equivalent EPA-approved method. Although TCLP is the predominant method used to today to make a hazardous waste determination for PV modules, evidence from this study concludes it is not practical to TCLP test every PV module even in a single utility-scale installation, and a scalable solution is needed. This study finds that knowledge-based hazardous waste determinations may allow a regulated person/entity to make a hazardous waste determination for more than one PV module at one time - making this regulatory pathway a potential scalable solution. Through legal analysis and interviews with 44 experts, the authors explore what it means to make an accurate knowledge-based hazardous determination for PV modules considering sources and forms of information as well as potential limitations. The work aims to provide a foundation for building consensus on whether knowledge-based hazardous determinations are a viable, scalable industry approach for solar.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

New Energy Infrastructure Outlook [Slides]

This report provides a perspective on energy infrastructure under development in the continental U.S. as of the end of 2025, focusing on those making significant progress toward achieving commercial operation. Infrastructures covered in this report include power plants, electric transmission, natural gas pipelines, liquefied natural gas terminals, and datacenters. Additionally, this report includes a section on stockpiled volumes of coal, natural gas, and petroleum.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Demand response event simulator and risk-aware bidding tool for industrial customers

Incentive Based Demand Response (IBDR) program participation delivers financial benefits to the consumers and resiliency benefits to the electricity grid. Effectively participating in these programs as an industrial consumer requires bidding strategies that balance financial risk with operational constraints. Existing bidding tools tend not to fully incorporate stochastic IBDR event modeling, program specific baseline and payment/penalty calculations, or demand reduction process control schemes that account for the cascading impacts of shutdown in complex facilities. Here, this work presents an IBDR event simulator and risk-aware bidding framework tool integrating three key components: a flexible, parameterized demand response event generator that rigorously accounts for program structures and stochasticity, a demand response operational simulation model that generates explicit control strategies for load reduction, and a Monte Carlo simulator to evaluate financial risk for varied capacity bids. A case study at a wastewater treatment plant participating in PG&E's Capacity Bidding Program demonstrates the framework's utility. In the peak capacity price month of August, optimal bidding by the wastewater treatment plant nets a mean IBDR benefit of $101,000 (67% of the August electricity bill) with 0.4% probability of a financial loss. This framework enables industrial operators to make informed bidding decisions, negotiate better program terms with demand response load aggregators, and analyze energy flexibility investments at their facilities. Ultimately, this work reduces participation barriers in IBDR programs and supports the broader goal of enhancing grid reliability and renewable energy integration.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Data-Driven Clustering and Classification of Outage Patterns with Insights into their Links to Extreme Events

At a global level extreme events have increased in both scale and impact. These events have the potential to affect the electrical grid infrastructure and cause a wide range of outages, which can lead to a disruption in daily patterns, cost millions of dollars and also the loss of life. Currently, to track these outage events there have been various approaches developed ranging from regional to national level quantifications for what defines an outage. However, this variation in methods can potentially lead to subjective decision-making and a lack of proper management in relation to the event. While previous work has made strides in determining spatio-temporal patterns, minimal attention has been given to the type and number of outages an area may be exposed to. The differences in incurred cost and the overall severity of an event between a transformer box malfunction and a hurricane are drastic, and by finding historical signals, we can allow for more efficient management, potentially saving lives and millions of dollars. Here, we leverage unsupervised machine learning techniques to delineate outage patterns among 22 counties within the United States and find that there are clear, segregated clusters (0.93 silhouette) of data which are related by event behavior and underlying cause. This finding will allow for energy stakeholders, policy makers, and researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the extent and severity of historic events and to better prepare for electrical grid infrastructure planning and management.

Koob, Benjamin [ORNL]↗
DOE OSTI2025

From Concept to Capital: How Developers Secure Private Investment

With an increased need for funding diversity in hydropower, private capital is becoming more important than ever. Investors are actively seeking opportunities, but what makes a project attractive for investment, and how can companies secure private equity or venture capital backing? This session brings together experts to discuss what capital providers look for in providing financing for hydropower projects. Panelists will explore key barriers - such as the lack of diversified portfolios and long-term revenue certainty - and strategies to overcome them through innovative financing mechanisms, partnerships, and market-driven solutions.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Clean Energy Deployment Baseline for the Energy Community and Low-Income Tax Credit Bonuses [Slides]

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 introduced, for the first time, place-based federal tax incentives for projects sited in “Energy Communities,” potentially changing the economic calculus of where projects are best sited. Storage projects can qualify for a 10-percentage-point bonus to the Investment Tax Credit (e.g., from 30% to 40%), while wind and solar projects may qualify for either the ITC bonus or a 10% bonus to the Production Tax Credit (e.g., from $\$27.5$ to $\$30.25$/MWh). Energy Communities are areas with historical ties to fossil fuel industries and above average unemployment levels (FFEU), with closed coal mines or power plants, or contaminated properties. They seek to identify locations across the US that could especially benefit from economic revitalization. This report explores how the new federal tax credit incentives are impacting clean energy deployment patterns and establishes historical baselines against which future changes can be compared. We include a few case studies of clean energy projects going specifically to areas that were recently impacted by coal power plant closures to provide concrete examples of investments in Energy Communities. However, this publication does not assess how much of the incentive benefits pass from clean energy developers to hosting communities, nor does it offer a comprehensive view of the economic effects of clean energy deployment on Energy Communities. Key highlights include: - As clean energy projects take multiple years to conceptualize and develop, it is likely too early to see shifts towards Energy Community locations either among newly built projects or those that entered interconnection queues in 2023. - Approximately 35% of onshore wind, 50% of solar, and 60% of storage capacity built in 2023 and the first half of 2024 are located in Energy Communities, making them likely eligible for bonus incentives. While these bonus incentives were not available to projects coming online before 2023, we used 2023 Energy Community definitions to classify whether past projects were built in what is now considered an Energy Community. The deployment levels for 2023-2024 are similar to recent years (2020-2022) for solar and storage but slightly lower for wind. - Clean energy capacity has surged in the interconnection queues over the last few years, with about 45-50% of both recently proposed and total queued capacity being located in Energy Communities. While the amount of capacity in Energy Communities has also grown, its relative share is either stable (solar and storage) or slightly lower (wind) among projects that entered the queue in 2023. - Clean energy projects can be built at lower costs in Energy Communities. The levelized cost of energy after incentives was on average $\$9$/MWh (24%) lower for solar projects and $\$2$/MWh (6%) lower for wind projects built in 2023, relative to projects not located in Energy Communities. Wholesale electricity values at Energy Community locations relative to the rest of the market vary by region. The average value was often higher for wind projects (-$\$3$ to $\$11$/MWh) but lower for solar projects (-$\$6$ to 0/MWh). - Distributed solar that is owned by commercial entities is eligible for the Energy Community bonus and also, potentially, a Low-Income Community bonus. Residential solar installations in qualifying Energy Communities that are third-party owned represent about 10% of the total residential market. Larger commercial and industrial solar installations in Energy Communities make up 17% of the total market in 2023. Nearly 2 GW of distributed solar was built in areas qualifying as Low-Income Communities in 2023, exceeding the available annual program cap of 700 MW. Continued tracking of these trends will be important for system planners, investors, and local communities.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with Mongird et al. (in prep) organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSI+RP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_ep_score_raster.tif solar_msi_ep_score_raster.tif wind_msi_ep_score_raster.tif Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, 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 LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with the Mongird et al. paper entitled "Can US power grid expansion avoid prime agricultural lands?" and is organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSIxRP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_rp_score_raster.tif solar_msi_rp_score_raster.tif wind_msi_rp_score_raster.tif Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, 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 LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2025

Resilient Communities, Maryland (RCM): A Framework for Community-Driven Energy Resilience (Final Technical Report)

The Resilient Communities, Maryland (RCM) project integrates community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches into energy resilience planning. The combination of qualitative, community-driven data and quantitative utility data improves both the effectiveness and efficiency of assessing the impacts of disruptions to energy infrastructure. Centered around a metric of critical services access, RCM created a repeatable framework for evaluating and modeling energy resilience in communities and promoted community engagement, resulting in more equitable stakeholder participation and improved decision-making processes for siting infrastructure to improve community energy resilience.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Primary material supply configurations and domestic recycling for cost-effective battery material production in the US

Battery cathode active material costs hinge on regionally concentrated, price-volatile metal supply. Here. we construct a regional facility-level cost model based on over 80 global lithium, cobalt, and nickel mines, refineries, and battery-grade material plants. Our model yields aggregated lithium, nickel, manganese, and cobalt production material costs from 392 region-based supply configurations for five different cathode active materials. Focusing on the United States, all-domestic supply is 9–34% costlier than global average, increasing by cobalt content, while these shortfalls can be overcome by selective low-cost material imports. Furthermore, we analyze costs of two U.S.-based recycling facilities from primary data and techno-economic modelling and compare resulting cathode active material-level costs to primary supply. Although it is still significantly higher on cathode active material cost-level, rising end-of-life flows and lowered black-mass prices will, however, make secondary supply cost-competitive to domestic and foreign primary supply cost floors. Facility-level benchmarks reveal targeted import, scaling, and production cost optimization as levers for a resilient, cost-effective U.S. battery-material supply chain.

Energy↗