Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “programming systems”

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 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2018

Final Report on “Influence of nucleation on ice microphysical properties of mixed-phase stratiform clouds”

This is a final report based on tasks supported by the Atmospheric System Research program (DOE Office of Biological and Environmental Research), DOE Award Number DE-SC0011690. This project has been focused on the following objectives: 1. Laboratory studies of immersion and contact nucleation of ice; 2. Investigation of the influence of time-dependence of ice nucleation on microphysical properties of Arctic and other thin, mixed-phase stratiform clouds; and 3. Theoretical and modeling studies of the conditions necessary for producing large droplets in clouds that can help initiate the collision—coalescence process.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2019

Measurements and analysis of ice nuclei relevant to west coast U.S. precipitation

Improved understanding of the interactions of natural and human produced aerosols with clouds, and ultimately their influences on precipitation and climate is a key science need, and a goal of the DOE Atmospheric Systems Research program. This study focused on characterizing the numbers and types of ice nucleating particles (INPs), the rare particles in air that possess properties to trigger the formation of ice crystals in cold clouds, which are the initial seeds for wintertime snowfall, and for rainfall in many parts of the Earth. In this study, data were analyzed from field studies of INP numbers, types and spatial distributions feeding winter clouds on the West Coast of the U.S., so that regional scale and climate model simulations performed by other DOE-funded scientists can be improved in the future.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

ARIES team achieves major milestone in support of nonproliferation

The Advanced Recovery and Integrated Extraction System (ARIES) Program is a great example of LANL’s Weapons and Global Security programs working together to achieve important nuclear security mission goals. Executed at PF-4, a facility better known for its pit production mission, the ARIES Program is helping the nation meet its nonproliferation commitments by preparing surplus weapons-grade plutonium for final disposition. ARIES recently met a major milestone of producing 1 metric ton of plutonium oxide from material removed from surplus pits. The milestone was celebrated in an awards ceremony at LANL on January 28.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2020

Counter Unmanned Aircraft System (CUAS) Implementation Storyline

This report is an FY21 Deliverable for NA-21.1, International Nuclear Security, WBS 21.1.1.1.4 Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems (CUAS), under C.1.4, Develop Suite of Engagement Materials and Tools for Country/Regional Teams. The responsibility for protecting nuclear assets is an immense challenge for governments. Policy changes based on geopolitics, instability of government regimes, and technological advances that facilitate theft of nuclear material all contribute to the enduring task of staying current with these and other threats. One of the recent threats to come along is the use of drones or Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) to circumvent traditional Physical Security Systems. There are significant resources invested on physical protection systems for securing nuclear assets, but many of these systems can now be bypassed by simply flying over these measures intended to guard against ground attacks. In recent years the threat increased to hostile groups to attack or surveil due to advances and availability of UAS platforms. It is now more urgent to implement systems and procedures to counter the UAS threat. The United States (U.S.) federal government granted authority to the Department of Energy (DOE) to implement a Counter UAS to protect nuclear assets. This document provides a very practical and transparent view of the trials, tribulations and challenges we encountered while implementing the first Counter-Unmanned Aircraft System (CUAS) Program in the DOE at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL).

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2021

Midwest Nuclear-based Net-Zero Carbon Steelmaking Demonstration

Globally, the iron and steel industry accounts for around a quarter of GHG emissions from the manufacturing sector , which is about 7% of the 33 gigatonnes (Gt) of global CO 2 emissions . Thus, globally, the steel industry is a 2-3 Gt CO 2 per year emissions challenge. The steel industry is important to the U.S. economy with output equal to $0.5 trillion and domestic production capacity is critical to national defense, infrastructure, energy production, and transportation. President Biden’s executive order on climate identifies actions and policies to put the Nation on a path to achieve net-zero carbon emissions, economy-wide, by no later than 2050. To achieve this, deep carbon reductions in the power, transportation, buildings and capital-intensive industrial manufacturing segments such as steel, cement and chemicals need to be addressed. In its recent “Accelerating Decarbonization of the U.S. Energy System” report , the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) stated that, “while technology exists to decarbonize all parts of the energy system, some sectors remain at precommercial or first-of-a-kind demonstration stages and require significant improvement in cost and performance to become commercially viable.” The NAS goes on to state that these hard to decarbonize sectors include “aviation, shipping, and industrial subsectors such as steel, cement, and chemicals manufacturing .” The Administration has proposed a timeline to decarbonize energy, transportation and then industry and manufacturing. From a life-cycle approach, decarbonizing steel and other large industrial inputs are necessary to decarbonize transformations in energy and transportation. DOE’s TRI-Lab Consortium’s Integrated Energy Systems (IES) program is a collaboration amongst DOE’s three applied energy laboratories: the National Energy Technology Laboratory; National Renewable Energy Laboratory and Idaho National Laboratory. The IES approach looks at more tightly integrating low-carbon nuclear energy, renewable electricity, energy storage, load/demand balancing, and biomass (including plastics and other wastes) with one or more industrial processes that utilize heat and/or power from these clean and waste energy sources to produce a low-carbon commodity-scale product.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2023

Support for the Second MOSAiC Science Conference support (Final Report)

This is a final report for a conference support project. The US Department of Energy’s Atmospheric System Research Program provided funding support for the Second MOSAiC Science Conference. MOSAiC is the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate, a yearlong, international expedition into the rapidly changing Arctic sea ice. The expedition collected measurements of the atmosphere, sea ice, and ocean to study coupled physical, chemical, and biological processes. The Second MOSAiC Science Conference provided an important opportunity to bring the MOSAiC-interested community together to discuss MOSAiC data, scientific analyses, synthesis, modeling activities, and more. Overall, the conference was a significant success and has motivated and facilitated a great deal of ongoing research. The support provide by this project was used along with support from other agencies to implement a participant support program that enabled participation in the conference by a diverse collection of researchers from many different countries and disciplines, 60% of whom were female. Most of these participants were Early Career Researchers. Participation by these researchers was vital to the overall success of the conference and has helped to build leadership and research skills for the participants that will serve both themselves and the broader scientific community in the future.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-2 LWR Pelletized MOX Fuel Fabrication

Nature of this 2021 Module update from previous AFC-CBRs: Use of U,Pu MOX life cycle cost data from late 1970s Non-proliferation Assessment Systems Analysis Program (NASAP). This archived data has been updated in 2018-2019 to reflect today’s regulatory and economic conditions and is presented in 2017. For the lower unit cost MOX fabrication case the PuO 2 from the reprocessed LWR SNF is assumed to be fabricated immediately after aqueous PUREX reprocessing, thus minimizing the time for undesirable actinide radioisotopes, from the standpoint of radiation safety, to build in. Fabricated MOX utilizing separated and multi-year stored Pu from aqueously reprocessed SNF has also been added to this Module as a second LWR MOX fabrication variant, requiring additional and more costly glovebox design and operations to protect personnel. This new NASAP-informed data augments historical data and unit cost projections appearing in the 2009 (Shropshire et al 2009), 2012 (Dixon et al 2012), and 2017 Dixon et al 2017) AFC-CBRs. The “What-it-takes” 2017 unit fabrication cost values based on the updated NASAP studies are escalated to 2020$ for this 2021 Update Report.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-7 Contact-Handled Pelletized Pressurized Heavy Water (PHWR) UOX Fuel Fabrication (Rev.1)

In addition to literature-based pressurized heavy-water reactor (PHWR) fuel price information in the 2017 AFC-CBR, the what-it-takes (WIT) unit cost data in this update is informed by new analysis and escalation of the 1978 PHWR-UOX fuel life cycle cost (LCC) data from ORNL reports prepared for the 1977–1980 Nonproliferation Alternative Systems Assessment Program (NASAP). (These reports are referenced and summarized in detail in Module D1-PR.) The PHWR fuel fabrication LCC data in these reports is scaled from a bottom-up cost estimate for a reference technology pressurized-water reactor (PWR)—uranium oxide (UOX) fuel fabrication plant by using algorithms that consider the manufacturing process complexity, fuel design complexity, plant floor space requirements, and the radiation and health, safety, and environmental (HS&E) regulatory environment of PHWR-UOX fuel production vis-à-vis light-water reactor (LWR)-UOX production (PWR fuel in this case). The module name has been changed from “Canadian Deuterium Uranium (CANDU)” to the more generic PHWR fuel fabrication in recognition that not all power reactors that might use this fuel type are considered. Unfortunately, the detailed algorithms and their design bases were not archived at the end of the NASAP effort of the commercial CANDU concept specifically developed in the middle of the last century by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis Report: Module D1-4 and Module D1-5 Ceramic Pelletized Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) Fuel Fabrication Ceramic Vibrocompacted Fuel Fabrication

This is a cost module that is part of the Advanced Fuel Cycle -- Cost Basis Report. Module D1-4: Nature of this module update (Rev 1) from previous advanced fuel cycle cost basis reports (AFCCBRs): new life cycle cost data on U,Pu SFR mixed oxide (MOX) fuels is derived from the Nonproliferation Assessment Systems Analysis Program (NASAP) conducted in the late 1970s. Highassay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) ceramic fuel is also discussed in more detail compared to earlier AFC-CBRs, since some advanced SFR concepts currently under development will require this HALEU fuel type for startup. Module D1-5: Nature of this FY-21 module update from previous AFC-CBRs: this module includes a few new references and a somewhat expanded discussion of vibrocompaction fuel fabrication technology. The WIT values for VIPAC are pegged directly to those for conventional LWR and SFR pelletized U,Pu MOX (note that this module now includes VIPAC MOX fuel for LWRs in addition to SFRs). Based on information from Russia, where VIPAC has been studied extensively, the unit costs are expressed as a percentage of those in the new updated Module D1-2 (pelletized U,Pu MOX) and new updated Module D1-4 (pelletized U,Pu MOX) for large NOAK fabrication facilities of the same production capacity. Since both ceramic pelletized MOX Modules D1-2 and D1-4 benefitted from analysis of 1970s NASAP data, by extension this Module D1-5 also benefits.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Complete Demonstration of a Prototype Version of FORCE User Interface and Conduct Analyst Survey Collecting Feedback on Interface Features and Usability

In 2024 the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) Integrated Energy System (IES) program continued to develop the Framework for Optimization of Resources and Economics (FORCE) analysis ecosystem into a more traditional toolset with simplified software installation, automated workflows, and interactive results visualization. The DOE-NE Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Workbench continued to be leveraged for user input, application workflow and runtime environment, and interactive results visualization capabilities. This report documents the demonstration of a FORCE User Interface (UI) prototype and the results of a survey of analysts’ using the Holistic Energy Resource Optimization Network (HERON) tool in FORCE with the prototype UI.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Characterizing the impact of water uptake on light absorption by aerosol particles

Absorbing aerosols (AA) have an important impact on the global radiation budget. The composition and properties of AA can vary substantially throughout the atmosphere, depending on the particle source and the influence of chemical aging. Uncertainties associated with the radiative effects of AA remain substantial. A key contributor to this uncertainty is understanding the extent to which water uptake alters absorption by AA particles and how this depends on particle composition. We have used new and existing experimental tools to systematically characterize the relationship(s) between AA chemical and physical characteristics, relative humidity, and mixing of AA with other aerosol components through a combination of laboratory and field measurements. We have developed fundamental understanding through laboratory experiments that will enable interpretation of field observations at DOE ARM sites and facilitate process-based improvements in the simulation of absorption by carbonaceous aerosols in climate models. In the laboratory experiments we have considered a variety of different AA types, including fullerene soot (a surrogate for refractory black carbon, or BC) and nigrosine (a surrogate for partially soluble brown carbon, or BrC). By examining a range of AA types we will develop insight into how the chemical and physical properties of AA particles (e.g. whether they are refractory or soluble) impact the influence of water uptake on absorption. These AA particles will also be mixed—both internally and externally—with compounds having a wide range of hygroscopic properties to establish how the impact of water uptake on absorption will vary with photochemical processing. These laboratory observations have been compared with commonly used theoretical models, enabling development of empirical models that will facilitate improved representation of absorption by AA particles in regional and global climate models. Overall, our study has contributed to the mission of the Atmospheric System Research program by quantifying how interactions between aerosols and radiation depend on relative humidity. Through this, our work will improve understanding and model representation of aerosol processes as they affect the Earth’s radiation budget.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Characterization of carbonaceous aerosols during TRACER-CAT

Absorbing aerosols (AA) have an important impact on the global radiation budget and cloud properties. The composition and properties of AA can vary substantially throughout the atmosphere, depending on the particle source and the influence of chemical aging. Uncertainties associated with the radiative effects of AA remain substantial. A key contributor to this uncertainty is understanding the extent to which coatings in general, and water uptake especially, alters absorption by AA particles and how this depends on particle composition. We deployed new and existing experimental tools during the Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) campaign in Houston, TX as part of the Carbonaceous Aerosols Thrust (CAT) to provide detailed characterization of aerosol optical, chemical, and physical properties. Our TRACER-CAT measurements complemented and expanded on the planned TRACER instrumentation, allowing for more detailed characterization of aerosol properties of relevance to cloud development (a core focus of TRACER), such as the composition of particles that can act as cloud condensation nuclei, than would otherwise be available. Our measurements have allowed for assessment of the relationship(s) between AA optical properties (with a focus on absorption) and the chemical and physical characteristics (including the mixing state of black carbon (BC) containing particles). These field observations occurred in collaboration with Los Alamos National Laboratory in summer 2022 during the TRACER intensive operating period. The instrumentation we co-deployed provided for measurement of (i) multi-wavelength dry aerosol absorption, scattering, and extinction, (ii) the size-dependent composition and abundance of sub-micron aerosol, differentiating between those particles that do and do not contain BC, (iii) BC-specific concentrations and size distributions, (iv) particle size, and (v) the first field measurements at an ARM site of the influence of RH on multi-wavelength absorption by ambient AA. We have leveraged the natural variability of the atmosphere and of aerosol sources in the Houston region to (i) specifically disentangle contributions to light absorption from BC, absorbing organic carbon (brown carbon), and coatings on BC, (ii) characterize the mixing state of BC and assess the factors that give rise to compositional differences between BC-containing and BC-free aerosol, and (iii) establish how water uptake influences absorption and how any such effect depends on particle composition and BC mixing state. Overall, our study contributed to the mission of the Atmospheric System Research program in multiple ways. Through the deployment of complementary, advanced instrumentation for characterization of a wide range of aerosol properties our work helped to maximize the scientific impact of the TRACER campaign. Our work also allowed for development of new insights into the relationship(s) between aerosol composition, hygroscopicity, and the mixing state of BC with aerosol optical properties. Through this, our work has provided knowledge that can improve understanding and model representation of aerosol processes as they affect the Earth’s radiation budget.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Lessons Learned from Ecosystem-Scale Experimental Field Studies (Workshop Report)

Efforts to understand and predict ecosystem responses to environmental change require long-term, large-scale, spatially representative experiments and observations that capture natural variability, test predictive models, and generate transferable knowledge. Such studies are indispensable for unraveling the complexities of terrestrial ecosystems and their responses to disturbances and evolving environmental conditions, while generating the data necessary for developing mechanistic models and predictive tools that inform decision-making processes. Having a rich history of designing and executing large-scale ecosystem experiments, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Environmental System Science program convened a workshop in January 2025 that brought together leaders in the field to distill critical lessons from decades of experience in large-scale experiments. The workshop aimed to (1) provide an ecosystem experiment primer for best practices, thus ensuring a high scientific return on investment for funding agencies, and (2) offer a robust framework for the design and management of future research initiatives. This report synthesizes insights and experiences from workshop participants and is structured to capture the entire research life cycle, from goal setting and design to operations, adaptive management, team dynamics, collaborations, and the often overlooked aspect of decommissioning. By synthesizing decision-making and lessons learned across diverse research approaches, the report aims to provide a template of essential factors to consider when designing successful long-term, large-scale ecosystem experiments.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Security Licensing Basis Framework Development

This report summarizes a technology-inclusive and performance-based method to determine the physical security licensing basis for a commercial nuclear reactor under the proposed 10 CFR 73.100 for Part 53 licensees. The method focuses on the identification of security functions, the contributing security systems and programs to meet those functions, the identification of security events that will provide the foundation for the security licensing basis and includes a risk-informed performance-based defense in depth adequacy method. The method can also be employed to justify performance-based alternative measures to traditional security requirements found in 10 CFR 73.55.

98 - NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL↗
DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) 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.

CERF↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) Model: High-Resolution Power Plant Siting

Abstract This presentation gives an overview of the geospatial power plant siting model CERF. CERF (Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility) is an open source Python package developed under the Integrated Multisector Multiscale Modeling (IM3) Project at PNNL. This presentation covers an overview of how the CERF model works, walks through various power plant siting analyses, and discusses future research opportunities for the model. The CERF model can be accessed at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf. PNNL Information Release Number: PNNL-SA-207336 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.

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

TRAILS Output Files

Overview This data repository contains ZIP files that store compressed versions of the output of running the WaterPaths utility planning and management tool in the DU Re-Evaluation mode (to download the tool, please see this GitHub repository). The tool was used to simulate the six-utility North Carolina Research Triangle problem. Details on the contents of each ZIP file can be seen below. Data details Temporal range: Weekly data for 2,344 weeks from 2015 to 2060 (45 years). Spatial range: Six water utilities in the North Carolina Research Triangle region (0: Chapel Hil/OWASA, 1: Durham, 2: Cary, 3: Raleigh, 4: Pittsboro, and 5: Chatham) File types: CSV and OUT Different solutions available The solution numbers correspond to the different pathway strategies (henceforth referred to as "solutions") discussed in paper's main and supporting text (abstract and link to the paper here). They are as follows: Sol92: The Durham-focused pathway strategy Sol132: The Raleigh-focused pathway strategy Sol140: The regionally-robust pathway strategy Objectives files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Objectives_RDMXX_solsXX_to_XX.csv files. Each CSV file will consist of a row representing all the objective values for that specific solution, while every six columns represents the reliability, restriction frequency, infrastructure net present value ($ mil), peak financial cost, worst-case cost, and unit cost ($ per MG; in that order) for each of the six utilities. There will be 1,000 such files, denoting the performance of the six utilities across the 1,000 deeply uncertain states of the world (DU SOWs). Pathway files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Pathways_sXX_RDMXX.out file. Each OUT corresponds to the set of infrastructure being triggered in a specific DU SOW, and each file will have the name file will consist of four tab-delimited columns that are described as follows: Realization: The realization in which an infrastructure options being triggered utility: The utility currently triggering infrastructure week: The week in which a specific infrastructure option is being triggered infra.: The infrastructure option being triggered If the OUT file contains only the header line, no infrastructure was triggered for that specific DU SOW. Policies files These files can be obtained by unzipping Policies.zip. Each of the 1,000 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly water use restriction policies for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: 0rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 0 (values between 0 and 1) 1rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 1 (values between 0 and 1) 2rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 2 (values between 0 and 1) 3rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 3 (values between 0 and 1) 4rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 4 (values between 0 and 1) 5rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 5 (values between 0 and 1) 0transf: transfer volume for utility 0 (in MGD) 1transf: transfer volume for utility 1 (in MGD) 2transf: transfer volume for utility 2 (in MGD) 3transf: transfer volume for utility 3 (in MGD) 4transf: transfer volume for utility 4 (in MGD) 5transf: transfer volume for utility 5 (in MGD) Water Sources files These files can be obtained by unzipping WaterSources_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each water source for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xvolume: available water volume from source X (in MGD) Xs_area: surface area of source X (in ACF) Xdemand: demand drawn from a water source from source X (in MGD) Xup_spill: upstream spillage from source X (in MGD) Xww_inflow: wastewater inflow from source X (in MGD) Xcatch_inflow: upstream catchment inflow to source X (in MGD) Xevap: evaporation multiplier for source X (values between 0 and 1) Xds_spill: downstream spillage from source X (in MGD) X_Y_alloc_cap: the allocated capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) X_Y_alloc_dem: the allocated demand from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Xtrmt_alloc_Y: the allocated treatment capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Utilities files These files can be obtained by unzipping Utilities_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each utility for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xcapacity: total storage capacity of utility X (in MG) Xnet_inf: : net inflow for all storage infrastructure for utility X (in MGD) Xst_rof: short term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_stor_rof: short-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_trmt_rof: short-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_rof: long-term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_stor_rof: long-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_trmt_rof: long-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xrest_demand: restricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunrest_demand: unrestricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunfulf_demand: unfulfilled demand for utility X (in MGD) Xwastewater: wastewater return for utility X (in MGD) Xtreat_capacity: total treatment capacity for utility X (in MG) Xcont_fund: reserve (contingency) fund balance for utility X Xins_pout: insurance payout for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xins_price: insurance price for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xinfra_npv: infrastructure net present value for utility ($mil) Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xdebt_serv: debt service for utility X (usually once per year if the infrastructure is triggered; % annual volumetric revenue) Xstor_vol: total stored volume (in MGD) Xobs_ann_dem: observed annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xproj_dem: projected annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xpv_debt_serv: present value of debt service payments for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xgross_rev: gross revenue for utility X ($mil) 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.

Artificial Intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html 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. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. 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

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗