Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Collection 7”

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.

221 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

TaZr_BCC_SolidSolution_128atoms_VASP6

We performed density functional theory (DFT) calculations for body-centered-cubic (BCC) structures with 128 lattices sites of solid solution binary alloys tantalum-zirconium (Ta-Zr). The electronic structures of alloys have been calculated using Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (VASP). Within this package the DFT approach is used to reduce many-body Schrodinger equation to set of single particle Kohn-Sham (KS) equations. The generalized electronic exchange-correlation functional is described by generalized gradient approximation with the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof parametrization. The electron-ion interactions is described by pseudopotentials developed within the plane-wave basis projector augmented-wave (PAW) approach \cite{PAW}. These pseudopotentials are available at the VASP portal (http://cms.mpi.univie.ac.at/vasp/). Our calculations have been run with the pseudopotentials treating s and p semi-core states as valence in case for the elements Ta and Zr. The electronic densities and potentials are expanded over plane-waves with energy cutoff of 350 eV. 2x2x2 k-mesh and normal precision were used. The alloys were modeled by supercell containing 128 randomly distributed atoms. At initial step the atoms occupy perfect bcc lattice cites. This initial structure was optimized until energy changes less than 1e-6 eV, while forces acting on atoms don't exceed 1e-2 eV/angstrom. The electron-ion interaction is described by PAW pseudopotentials. The calculations have been collected by sampling chemical compositions across the entire compositional range. The chemical compositions have been sampled by progressively changing the number of atoms per constituent by 4. For each chemical composition of binaries and ternaries, the first-principle calculations have been run for 100 randomized arrangements of the constituents on the BCC lattice sites. We collected data for a total of 3,100 randomized atomic structures over 31 chemical compositions. The calculations have been collected on NERSC-Perlmutter and OLCF-Summit using the VASP 6.3.2. The VASP calculations for every atomic structure have been performed in 2 main steps: 1. Starting from an ideal body-centered-cubic (BCC) structure, geometry optimization with low precision has been executed to perform a preliminary optimization of the atomic structure. The output for this calculations is available in the files 0.CONTCAR, 0.OUTCAR, rlx1.out. 2. Using the atomic structure resulting from the preliminary geometry optimization, a second geometry optimization has been performed using normal precision. The output for this calculations is available in the files CONTCAR, OUTCAR, rlx2.out, vaspout.h5, and vasprun.xml. Cases 1-10 have been run without generating the file 'vaspout.h5'. Every chemical composition sampled across the composition range in the dataset has its own directory. The convention used to name the directories for binary alloys is AXBY, where A and B refer to the constituents, whereas X and Y are positive integers that represent the number of atoms for each constituent and their values still sum up to 128. Each atomic structure associated with a specific chemical composition has its own sub-directory within the directory of the corresponding chemical composition. The sub-directories for each atomic structure for each chemical composition are named 'case-*', where * is a positive integer that spans all the values from 1 through 100, extremes included. The files contained in each sub-directory 'case-*' for each atomic structure are as follows: FILES contained in each subdirectory with name "case-N" where N ranges between 11 and 80, extremes included: 1. INCAR: input file that contains various parameters and settings for controlling the behavior of the electronic structure calculations 2. KPOINTS: input file that specifies the Bloch vectors (k points) used to sample the Brillouin zone 3. 0.POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system 4. 0.CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters after the first geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 5. 0.OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the first geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 6. rlx1.out: file with diagnostic information about the execution of the first geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 7. POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system after the first geometry optimization has been run at low precision. This represents the input for the second geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 8. CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters after the second geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 9. OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the second geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 10. rlx2.out: file with diagnostic information about the execution of the second geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 11. vaspout.h5: hierarchical HDF5 file containing the inputs and outputs of a VASP calculation. To analyze the data in this file we recommend using py4vasp. This file is only produced if the VASP version used is compiled with HDF5 support 12. vasprun.xml: contains similar information to OUTCAR, but in an xml format. 13. CHGCAR: contains the charge density data of a system. This data is crucial for analyzing electronic structures, calculating electrostatic potential, and studying the distribution of charge in a crystal or molecular system FILES contained in each subdirectory with name "case-N" where N ranges between 1 and 10 and between 81 and 100, extremes included: 1. INCAR: input file that contains various parameters and settings for controlling the behavior of the electronic structure calculations 2. KPOINTS: input file that specifies the Bloch vectors (k points) used to sample the Brillouin zone 3. {ID}.POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system at the beginning of ID execution of geometry optimization with PREC=LOW 4. {ID}.CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters at the end of ID execution of geometry optimization with PREC=LOW in the INCAR file 5. {ID}.OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the ID execution of geometry optimization that has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 6. rlx1.{ID}.out: file with diagnostic information about the execution of the ID execution of the geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 7. N{ID}.POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system after the geometry optimization run at low precision. This represents the input for the ID execution of the second geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 8. N{ID}.CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters after the ID execution of the geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 9. N{ID}.OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the ID execution of the geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 10. rlx2.{ID}.out: file with diagnostic information about the ID execution of geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 11. vaspout.h5: hierarchical HDF5 file containing the inputs and outputs of a VASP calculation. To analyze the data in this file we recommend using py4vasp. This file is only produced if the VASP version used is compiled with HDF5 support 12. vasprun.xml: contains similar information to OUTCAR, but in an xml format. 13. CHGCAR: contains the charge density data of a system. This data is crucial for analyzing electronic structures, calculating electrostatic potential, and studying the distribution of charge in a crystal or molecular system This research is sponsored by the Artificial Intelligence Initiative as part of the Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the US Department of Energy under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725. This work used resources of the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725, under Directorate Discretionary awards MAT025 (Materials Science) and LRN026 (Machine Learning), and INCITE award MAT201. This work also used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, under award ERCAP0025216. REFERENCES (1) Kresse, G. & Hafner, J. Ab initio molecular dynamics for liquid metals. Phys. review B 47, 558 (1993). (2) Kresse, G. & Hafner, J. Ab initio molecular-dynamics simulation of the liquid-metal–amorphous-semiconductor transition in germanium. Phys. Rev. B 49, 14251 (1994) (3) Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set. Comput. materials science 6, 15–50 (1996) (4) Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys. review B 54, 11169 (1996) (5) Kresse, G. & Joubert, D. From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented-wave method. Phys. review b 59, 1758 (1999)

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2026

First observation of a high-𝐾 band structure in 162 Er and implications in the context of the identical bands phenomenon

The first ever identification of a high-𝐾 band structure in 162 Er is reported. Based on a 𝐾 𝜋 = 7 (−) isomer, it is found to be identical in nature to the corresponding 𝐾 𝜋 = 7 − sequence in 164 Er up to its highest observed spin. Furthermore, the phenomenon of identical high-K bands built on a two-quasiparticle configuration in an isotopic chain is reported here for the first time. While this is a notable addition to the systematics of known identical bands in nuclei at normal deformation, a satisfactory global understanding of the phenomenon remains elusive.

150 ≤ A ≤ 189↗
DOE OSTI2024

GeoThermalCloud: Cloud Fusion of Big Data and Multi-Physics Models using Machine Learning for Discovery, Exploration, and Development of Hidden Geothermal Resources

The primary goals of this project are exploring hidden geothermal resources in the U.S.A. and designing profitable enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Many processes and parameters control geothermal exploration and energy production from geothermal fields. Diverse datasets (e.g., geology, geochemistry, geophysics, satellite, airborne geophysics) are available to help characterize subsurface geothermal conditions. Sparse and multi-scale characteristics of these datasets prohibit properly leveraging these datasets for geothermal exploration and profitable EGS design. Recent advancements in machine learning (ML) promise to resolve these issues. The tremendous challenges and risks of geothermal exploration and production bring the demand for novel ML methods and tools that can (1) analyze large field datasets, (2) assimilate model simulations (large inputs and outputs), (3) process sparse datasets, (4) perform transfer learning (between sites with different exploratory levels), (5) extract hidden geothermal signatures in the field and simulation data, (6) label geothermal resources and processes, (7) identify high-value data acquisition targets, and (8) guide geothermal exploration and production by selecting optimal exploration, production, and drilling strategies. To address these necessities, ML-based geothermal resources exploration and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) design tools have been developed. The exploration tool is called GeoThermalCloud and EGS design tool is called GeoDT-ML. GeoThermalCloud (https://github.com/SmartTensors/GeoThermalCloud.jl) utilizes a LANL unsupervised ML platform called SmartTensors (https://tensors.lanl.gov/) to automate data analyses and interpretations by extracting hidden signatures to identify geothermal prospects. Also, it enables the identification of critical measurements needed to identify geothermal resource signatures. Alternatively, GeoDT-ML (https://github.com/SmartTensors/GeoThermalCloud.jl/tree/master/EGS) is an ML-based alternative to GeoDT (https://github.com/GeoDesignTool/GeoDT.git), a fast, simplified multi-physics solver to evaluate EGS project designs in uncertain geologic systems. GeoDT-ML leverages recent advances in deep learning and high-performance computing. It is a faster and simpler version of GeoDT. To make this project a success, we used capabilities of LANL, PNNL, Google, Stanford, and Julia Computing. We analyzed eight datasets of the U.S.A. using GeothermalCloud and demonstrated potential highly prospective geothermal resources and identified key factors defining highly prospective sites. The first data set includes 44 locations in southwest New Mexico and 18 geological, hydrogeological, geophysical, geothermal, geochemical attributes. We defined low- and medium-temperature hydrothermal systems and discovered a new highly prospective site. The second data set analyzed 18 shallow water chemistry attributes at 14,342 locations in the Great Basin. It demarcated modestly, moderately, and highly prospective sites including key attributes for each type of prospectivity. The third data set analyzed Utah FORGE data including satellite (InSAR), geophysical (gravity, seismic), geochemical, and geothermal attributes. Here, we performed prospectivity analysis to identify future drilling locations using geological, geochemical, and geophysical attributes. Maps of temperature at depth and heat flow are constructed based on the available data. Prospectivity maps were generated, and drilling locations were proposed for future geothermal field exploration. The fourth data set analyzed 21 attributes at 120 locations in Tularosa Basin, New Mexico; data comes from past play fairway analyses in this region. ML analyses identified geothermal signatures associated with modestly, moderately, and highly hydrothermal systems. We also defined dominant attributes and spatial distribution of the geothermal signatures. The fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth datasets include Tohatchi Springs, New Mexico, Hawaii, Brady site, Nevada, and EGS Collab, respectively. Moreover, we coupled GeothermalCloud and magnetotellurics data to pinpoint drilling locations for developing geothermal projects in the Tularosa Basin, New Mexico. GeothermalCloud found potential prospective locations for geothermal resources near White Sands Missile Range and McGregor Range at Fort Bliss. Magnetotellurics data determined the potential depth (~1800m) of geothermal prospects at McGregor Range based on apparent resistivity structures/layers in the subsurface. The McGregor Range consists of three resistivity layers and two resistivity structures. Magnetotellurics data also helps identify that the western portion of the McGregor Range has thick and low-resistivity earth materials. The low resistivity to the west is most likely for a fault system. Assuming temperature is consistent with a geothermal reservoir, the west-central part of the McGregor Range has the highest geothermal potential because of the increase in porosity and associated permeability attributed to the interpreted fault system. Also, we devised a coupling strategy between a process model and GeothermalCloud to characterize hydrogeological conditions and geothermal conditions, respectively. The process model characterizes hydrogeological and geothermal conditions on highly prospective geothermal sites provided by GeothermalCloud. We developed a physics-informed neural network (PINN) version of the Burns equation that can be easily coupled with GeothermalCloud. Furthermore, we performed an optimal design decision maximizing the economic value of an EGS power plant. This study optimized the range of well spacing between injection and production wells maximizing net present value in dollars (NPV). For this task, we used the GeoDT to simulate the Utah FORGE EGS development cycle from the initial well design to the end of production. Next, we accomplished another crucial task, which is predicting permeability of geothermal reservoirs. Predicting permeability of geothermal reservoirs is a non-trivial task because of huge computational runtime of simulation and lack of measurements. To avoid these limitations, we used easy-to-measure chemical concentrations in the subsurface as measurement data and convolutional neural network based ML model of a high-fidelity model. Next, we predicted permeability using Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation. We found that Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation predicts permeability with a high certainty if the prediction zone in the simulation area has chemical concentration data. Finally, we analyzed the DOE funded INGENIOUS and GeoDAWN projects data. For discovering hidden geothermal systems in the Great Basin, the INGENIOUS project accumulated old data, collected new data, and released them in 2022. The dataset includes a total of 24 geological, geophysical, and geochemical attributes. Data resolution and scale significantly vary prohibiting an appropriate usage. To avoid such limitations, we brought all data in the same resolution and scale by applying the inverse distance weighting interpolation technique for predicting data in unsampled locations. Subsequently, we analyzed LiDAR data of the GeoDAWN project. We received data in tiles format. The DOE’s overarching goal is to use ML on LiDAR data for finding favorable geological structures (e.g., step up faults in Brady, Nevada). To serve the purpose, we need to label favorable geologic structures that correspond to LiDAR data. We wrote an algorithm to label the LiDAR data with the favorable geologic structures.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Field Validation of Thermoelectric Generation System at Holcim Cement Plant in Alpena, Michigan

Executive Summary Project Background The Industrial Technology Validation (ITV) program aims to identify and demonstrate the performance of new, emerging, and underutilized energy-saving technologies in the industrial sector to help inform decisions to help accelerate their commercialization and deployment, as well as to help make industries more competitive. This ITV demonstration evaluated a thermoelectric generation (TEG) technology at a cement plant, aiming to reduce energy demand in the cement industry. A median cement plant consumes 5.73 million British thermal units per ton of clinker production (resulting in 0.838 metric tons of carbon dioxide [CO₂] emissions per ton of clinker) (Boyd and Zhang 2011, EPA 2021), equivalent to approximately 6.9 trillion British thermal units (TBtu) per year in energy consumption at a cement plant producing 3,300 tons of clinker per day.¹ Collaborating with Holcim, Advanced Thermovoltaic Systems (ATS) developed and deployed a pilot-scale thermoelectric power system to efficiently capture and convert waste heat to electricity. The system leverages the Seebeck effect to convert temperature differences on two sides of semiconductor cartridges into electrical power (ScienceDirect, n.d.). This generation is realized with minimal moving parts compared to existing waste-heat-to-generation solutions and allows capture from heat sources with temperatures as low as 150°C. This project aimed to validate a scalable solution applicable for capturing medium-temperature waste heat, including ambient losses from other high-temperature processes, and high-temperature sources less suitable for other waste-heat-to-power solutions. By recovering this otherwise wasted heat, this project intends to validate improvements to overall process efficiency through reduction in purchased electricity, thereby reducing operational costs while enhancing resiliency and competitiveness. Description and Scope This study evaluated the performance of a TEG system from ATS as a solution to convert waste heat into useful power at a Holcim cement plant in Alpena, Michigan. This plant is a fully integrated cement plant that has been operating since 1907. The facility operates continuously (24/7/365) with approximately 250 employees and five long dry kilns, yielding a total production capacity of 7,852 tons of cement per day (EPA 2023). Currently, the Alpena plant uses waste heat boilers to convert waste heat from the exhaust of each kiln into steam, which drives steam turbine generators. The ATS TEG is being evaluated for its potential to supplement the steam turbines by capturing the remaining lower grade heat. This technology is also being considered for other Holcim plants where steam turbines are not a viable option. ATS installed a pilot-scale TEG unit with an array of 582 individual thermoelectric semiconductor cartridges, of which 573 were operational. The cartridges are sandwiched between 48 hot plates and 49 cold plates. Each cartridge is designed to generate 20 watts (W) of gross power at a hot-side temperature of 240°C and cold-side temperature of 20°C. As such, the total gross generation capacity of the installed system is 11.5 kilowatts (kW) at design conditions. The system configuration for the evaluation was designed to prioritize convenience of installation and minimize disruption to production at the site, while ensuring that the heat required can be obtained for evaluating the TEG system at various operational conditions. To accomplish this, a portion of the steam supplied to Alpena’s steam turbine generation system was diverted to be used as the heat source for the TEG system, while water was supplied to the cold side of the system from nearby Lake Huron. This configuration was designed for the evaluation of the pilot-scale system to assess the performance at different conditions. A commercial-scale system will likely vary from the pilot system depending on typical configurations, including both scale and application. Future commercial applications of the ATS system would involve integrating the system into the exhaust from kiln preheaters, clinker coolers, or radiant heat capture from kiln shells for the heat source. For the cold source, a range of cooling solutions can be considered, including a mechanical cooling system, depending on the location and the application. To increase the generation capacity for commercial applications, the technology provider is working toward developing a commercial-scale TEG system, which would combine multiple TEG units (each similar in design to the pilot system) together. The scope of this evaluation includes the pilot-scale TEG system and all impacted equipment including pumps, controllers, and power handling equipment. Study Objectives The evaluation's goal was to assess the potential of the ATS TEG system to generate useful electrical power by capturing waste heat from cement production kilns. The objectives of this study are to evaluate and verify the following claims made by ATS regarding the pilot-scale system installed at the Holcim Alpena plant. The following design parameters and claims are also outlined in Table ES- 1 and Table ES- 2: • Gross Power: The thermoelectric system converts heat into power to create gross power, the total measured power generated by the system. The 573 active cartridge pilot-scale system is expected to generate 11.5 kW of gross power at the designed hot-side temperature of 240°C and cold-side temperature of 20°C. Power production is dependent on the temperature difference between the heat source (ultimately from the waste heat) and cold temperature supply source. • Net Power: The net power is the total usable power provided to the site by the TEG system after deducting parasitic power loads from the gross generated power. Supplementary equipment is required to operate the TEG system including pumps, controllers, and, in certain anticipated applications, mechanical cooling, which introduce parasitic loads to system operation. After deducting the parasitic loads from the gross power generation, ATS anticipates achieving a net power generation of 7.5 kW from the pilot-scale system. • Thermal Efficiency: The thermal efficiency is the percent of the total heat transferred to the TEG system that is converted to gross power. Historically, TEGs have a thermal efficiency of 2%–5% (DOE 2008). Prior industrial-scale TEG systems, such as the E1 TEG offered by Alphabet Energy, operated at an efficiency of 2.5% (Lamonica, 2014). ATS anticipates achieving an average efficiency of 4.8% or higher in converting heat energy to usable electricity. • Cartridge Performance: The TEG system comprises 573 active individual semiconductor cartridges, each of which generates a portion of the total power. Cartridge optimization and selection is an important design consideration for potential future TEG system design performance. Therefore, understanding the distribution of gross power and efficiency within the pilot system is vital to understanding what is achievable. At a design hot-side temperature of 240°C and cold-side temperature of 20°C, ATS anticipates a cartridge performance of 20 W of gross power per cartridge at an efficiency of 4.8% per cartridge. In addition to evaluating the claimed performance of the TEG pilot-scale unit, the study estimated the potential annual impacts of a scaled-up commercial system used to capture kiln waste heat over annual operations. The evaluation estimated the gross and net annual electric generation achievable by capturing heat from the two proposed tap-in points: the kiln exhaust and the clinker cooler exhaust; see Section 2.1 for details. Two use cases were examined: • Holcim Alpena: The Holcim Alpena site consists of long dry kilns with superheater boilers, which differs from the rest of Holcim’s cement plant portfolio and results in lower waste heat temperatures. The study estimates gross and net annual generation using the superheater boiler exhaust and clinker cooler exhaust, based on 2023 operational data. • Typical Installation: Common cement plants have preheater kilns with higher exhaust temperatures than Holcim Alpena across a range of production rates. The study estimates gross and net annual generation using the preheater exhaust and clinker cooler exhaust, with a sensitivity analysis to account for the typical range of preheater exhaust temperatures, clinker cooler exhaust temperatures, and clinker production rates. Methodology The evaluation methodology followed a measurement and verification (M&V) strategy based on the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol Option B through comprehensive measurements and analyses of the affected systems. Evaluation data was collected from March 9 to March 11, 2024, the test period of the pilot TEG system. During the test period, in coordination with the ITV team, the ATS team adjusted system operations to capture the range of variability expected for each of the variables pertinent to performance of the system. The methodology consisted of two parts: evaluating the performance of the pilot unit's TEG system and estimating the annual TEG impact in terms of gross and net power based on a given waste heat profile. First, the evaluation of the thermoelectric generation performance of the pilot unit relative to the claims was performed by analyzing the collected test data. Gross power of the pilot TEG system was directly measured. Net power was determined by deducting the measured parasitic power from the gross power. The gross power generation was compared to heat transferred to the system by the working fluid (which was heated by steam generated from the kiln waste heat) to calculate the thermal efficiency achieved by the system. Performance of individual semiconductor cartridges within the pilot array was also assessed in terms of measured gross cartridge power and calculated cartridge thermal efficiency. The second part of the evaluation estimated the annual TEG impacts in terms of gross power and net power (calculated from the difference between gross power and parasitic power). This analysis comprised development of mathematical regression models for gross power and parasitic power, with assessment of each model’s goodness-of-fit characteristics to ensure satisfaction of statistical requirements. The models predicted the gross power generation, the parasitic load based on the temperature difference between the hot working fluid and the cold-side fluid (cold water from Lake Huron) entering the system, the volumetric flow rate of the cold-side fluid at the inlet, and the volumetric flow rate of the hot working fluid at the inlet. The annual impact analysis considered a theoretical commercial-scale system sized to capture the available waste heat at a cement plant, consisting of linked pilot-scale units that receive heat from a theoretical gas-to-working-fluid heat exchanger. To estimate annual impacts at the Alpena plant, the gross power and parasitic power regression models were applied to the arrays in the theoretical commercial-scale system. The heat supplied to the unit was calculated based on the kiln run time, annual production, kiln exhaust waste heat, and clinker cooler waste heat derived from 2023 Holcim Alpena kiln operational data. Net power impacts were calculated by deducting the resulting parasitic power from the estimated gross power. Inputs for the model were generated from a combination of hourly data, assumed design considerations for TEG system scale-up from the pilot-scale unit, and assumptions regarding TEG system operations. This analysis was then used as the basis for estimating annual impacts of typical TEG installation at cement plants, by applying sensitivity analyses to key kiln operational characteristics including kiln preheater exhaust temperatures, cooler clinker exhaust temperatures, and plant daily production rates across a range of expected values. Project Results/Findings Table ES- 2 and Table ES- 2 provide a summary of the operating conditions and evaluation results compared to the stated claims from the technology provider. Key takeaways include: • Gross Power: The peak gross power achieved during the testing period was 10.0 kW, compared to the 11.5 kW expected for 573 active cartridges. The claimed gross power was associated with a target hot side of 240°C; however, the system only received a maximum hot-side mean plate temperature of 212°C during the testing period. • Net Power: The pilot-scale unit exceeded the claims for net power, achieving a peak of 7.7 kW net compared to a claim of 7.5 kW. One factor contributing to the higher achieved net power is the relatively high water pressure available through Lake Huron. The pilot TEG system did not require cold-side pumps during the test, whereas most installations would. This reduced the parasitic loads on the system, ultimately contributing to higher net power relative to the gross power. • Thermal Efficiency: The pilot-scale unit outperformed the claimed efficiency, achieving a peak system efficiency of 5.0% thermal efficiency compared to the stated 4.8%. • Cartridge Performance: To compare cartridge performance against claims, the study focused on the third day of testing, which aimed for conditions closest to the design specifications, with a hot side of 240°C and cold-side exit temperature of 6.4°–30°C. On this day, the mean gross power observed in the cartridges within the TEG array was 18.1 W/cartridge, and the peak performance was 34.7 W/cartridge. The estimated mean cartridge efficiency was 5.2%, and the estimated efficiency at peak gross cartridge power was 10%. The regression models developed for gross power generation and parasitic loads were used to estimate the generation impact for given heat input to the TEG from the working fluid (captured from the waste heat) and from the cold loop (Lake Huron) on an hourly basis for a year of operation. Based on this analysis, installation of a commercial-scale TEG system at the Holcim cement plant in Alpena, Michigan, with a waste heat exchanger of 0.85 effectiveness, would generate up to 391 kW of net power, translating to between 920,000 and 1,800,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) in net electricity per year. Based on typical grid emissions for Alpena, this would avoid estimated net emissions by 752 metric tons of CO₂ annually.² The sensitivity analysis estimated that typical TEG system installations at cement plants could generate an average of 56–1,040 kW of net power, or between 488,000 and 9,110,000 kWh of net energy. This generation potential is most significantly affected by plant production rates and also influenced by preheater and clinker cooler exhaust temperatures. Applying the national average emission rate, typical commercial-scale installations at Holcim plants are projected to avoid between 182 and 3,401 metric tons of CO₂ annually per site. Table ES- 3 shows a summary of the estimated annual impacts.³ While parasitic loads are significant and vary by application, this analysis assumed the use of heating loop pumps and access to Lake Huron as a cold sink. This setup assumed no need for cooling loop pumps due to the available water pressure at the test site. Applications that require cooling towers or additional equipment are likely to experience higher parasitic loads. Therefore, the study’s estimates are most applicable to scenarios with similar parasitic load configurations—namely, access to a high-pressure cold sink. Applicability to other locations may be limited, as differing conditions could necessitate additional pumps and cooling systems, potentially impacting performance significantly.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗