Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “pipeline infrastructure”

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.

278 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluating Direct and Indirect Influence on EV Charging Stations Across the US

The adoption of new technology for electric vehicles (EV) and mobility applications can bring underappreciated vulnerabilities to the power grid. One area of potential fraud and adversarial influence is through the business ecosystem of startups that own and deploy EV technology. Yet, there are no models or analyses that map the network of organizations and people that have direct and indirect influence over technologies currently deployed in the grid. To fill this gap, we develop a multilayer network model to measure direct and indirect influence on EV charging stations. First, we create and adversarial socio-technical network (ASTN) model via a data fusion pipeline for different US regions of interest (ROI). Then, we develop an integrated ASTN for Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, and Philadelphia. We rank EV charging companies direct influence within each geographic region as well as indirect influence via social network analysis. While some companies have strong direct and indirect influence (i.e., ChargePoint) others show a mismatch between their influence over charging stations and their position within the social network. For example, Tesla has strong direct influence on stations and weak indirect influence over competitors. In contrast, 7Charge has weak direct influence over stations, but strong indirect influence over competitors.

29 - ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

A multi-criteria CCUS screening evaluation of the Gulf of Mexico, USA

Continued research into reservoir characterization along with offshore carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) transportation and infrastructure assets is needed to facilitate development of safe and successful carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) projects. This paper outlines a multi-criteria evaluation methodology that incorporates disparate sets of quantitative, spatially variable data into a decision-making framework for screening the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) outer continental shelf (OCS) for potentially viable CO 2 storage and enhanced oil recovery (EOR) sites. Criteria categories include favorable geologic characteristics, logistics, and potential risks. Data compiled for 14 criteria from several publicly available geographic information system (GIS) layers was aggregated over 2559 spatially balanced points across the study area using the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)-developed Cumulative Spatial Impact Layers™ (CSIL) GIS tool. Criteria are weighted by qualitative expert opinion relative to their perceived importance to given scenarios— the output of combined criteria values and weights enables regional CO 2 storage suitability differentiation. The methodology considers both technical and non-technical factors impacting CCUS decision-making. The flexible methodology enables a systematic approach to regional ranking at high spatial resolution over a large study domain. Additionally, the framework enables high-grading of priority sites that warrant further characterization and follow-on analysis. Areas along the Louisiana coast and Mississippi River Delta consistently rank high for all scenarios largely a result of the favorable geology with the potential for stacked storage, as well as the density of existing pipelines and platforms, and proximity to several onshore CO 2 sources. High-graded regions for the CO 2 EOR-related scenarios are typically located further offshore towards the middle and edge of the OCS compared to higher priority regions for the geologic storage scenarios which fall closer to the Louisiana coastline.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Mapping Rare Earths and Toxics in E-Waste via Hyperspectral Imaging and Machine Learning

Electronic waste (e-waste) presents a mounting challenge to environmental sustainability due to its complex composition, which includes high-value rare earth elements, hazardous organic compounds, and non-recyclable plastics. Accurate and scalable material classification is essential for enabling efficient resource recovery and safe recycling practices. This study introduces a confidence-aware classification pipeline that combines mid-infrared hyperspectral imaging (HSI), spectral angle mapping (SAM), and iterative machine learning to perform pixel-level material identification across e-waste devices. A curated spectral library encompassing artificial materials (e.g., plastic iron oxide, galvanized metals), minerals (e.g., allanite, hematite), and organic compounds (e.g., benzanthracene, toluene) was used to generate pseudo-labels, each assigned a confidence score based on SAM-derived spectral similarity. High-confidence samples from seven consumer electronics—digital cameras, keyboards, laptop fans, modems, motherboards, TV remotes, and speakers—were iteratively expanded and classified using models such as Support Vector Machine (SVM), Random Forest, Gradient Boosting Classifier, Partial Least Squares Discriminant Analysis (PLSDA) and Logistic Regression. The best-performing classifiers achieved macro F1 scores approaching 1.0. Results revealed widespread plastic content (dominated by plastic iron oxide), the presence of rare earth-bearing minerals like cerium-containing allanite, and pervasive detection of hazardous organics such as benzanthracene. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) visualizations and confusion matrices confirmed high separability and robust classification performance. This methodology enables precise, non-destructive, and scalable classification of heterogeneous e-waste streams. It supports automated, hazard-aware sorting in recycling workflows, facilitating selective recovery of critical materials and compliance with circular economy goals. The confidence-aware framework provides a foundation for real-time deployment in industrial settings, offering significant implications for smart e-recycling infrastructure and policy-driven material stewardship.

Circular economy↗
DOE OSTI2025

Datum: A Scientific Metadata Catalog

The data catalog market is currently flooded with a myriad of different products, but none serve the scientific community well. There are cloud-native tools like Databricks, Snowflake,to on-premise solutions like Collibra and Datahub. The common failing of all these tools however, is their inability to serve the scientific data community directly. Most catalogs are targeted towards financial, health, or user data - not sensor or scientific domain data. They also prioritize integrations that often don’t exist or are just starting to be used in the scientific realm - all while ignoring common scientific tools and file types. Datum is a catalog which targets the scientific data directly, including the tools and networks in which those tools are used. We work with the producers and consumers of the data where they are, targeting cloud and on-premise with a focus on classified networks. Datum is an Erlang/Elixir application. Technical Features Note: The features listed below are still under development and may change, slightly, upon final delivery of the product. File Formats - Datum has the ability to read additional metadata and provides processing pipelines for the following file formats: Plain Text, PDF, LaTeX, HTML, Open Document Format (.odt), XML, CSV/TSV (and other standard delimiters), OpenDocument Database and Spreadsheets, Geo-Referenced TIFF, Common Data Format, HDF/HDF5, LabView TDMS, Excel, DeltaTables, Parquet, Apache Iceberg, Apache Hudi and many others. Metadata Collection - Scanners for the local and networked file systems and cloud storage providers. Network integration with common databases such as MSSQL and MySQL. User Plugin System - Users are able to provide either file processing, metadata extraction, or sampling plugins in the programming language of their choice. Authentication/Authorization -: OIDC integration, SCIM provisioning and EntraID integration out of the box. Full user and group management system with a “least privilege” operating mode. Governance - Customizable data governance platform; dictate and enforce required metadata, enforce data embargos, and enforce user agreements and NDAs before data access. Ability to create health checks on data, rejecting abandoned or poorly curated data and automatically removing it from the search index. Ability for users to submit corrections. Search - Semantic search is a first class citizen. No licenses to expensive, external software required. Integrated use of vectors and vector-based search allows for AI agent integration at all levels of operation. Metadata Model - Display and control data’s lineage and connections to other data and data directories. Data is modeled after a filesystem - an organization instantly recognizable and navigable by most any user. CLI and SDK - Ships with a Command Line Interface (CLI) tool and with a fully-featured Python SDK. This allows for rapid and programmatic use of Datum by every level of user. Minimal Infrastructure - Datum ships as a single executable file and can be run on any operating system and most CPU architectures. Datum has no reliance on external databases, search indexing tools, or other outside services - and it runs equally well on edge computing devices, cloud services, or in a clustered HPC environment.

darrington, john↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Database and Explorer

Overview The Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Toolkit is an online exploratory visualization tool developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) with support from other federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). It provides a single point of access to authoritative information on federal agency investment in a portfolio of research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects that have been publicly announced to advance technologies for point source carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, transport, storage, and conversion, collectively referred to as carbon management. The RD&D programs covered in this tool are authorized by annual congressional appropriations ("Base Program") and the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The tool also incorporates public information on other federal initiatives, such as the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs, and public information released by other government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) and Primacy States’ Underground Injection Control Class VI permits and EPA’s facility level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Developed in a geographic information system, the tool organizes carbon management projects into five groups based on the primary technology that a project aims to advance, each visually represented as a digital layer ("carbon management project layer"). Only federally funded projects are included, which can be awarded projects that are completed or ongoing, or projects that have been selected but are currently under negotiation. Project information can be viewed in the map or in the attribute table below it when turned on. In the map view, each project is displayed at either its host site (for field work), where available, or its performer site (project lead's location, further explained in the table below). Host sites and performer sites are represented in distinct icons. Several reference layers offer additional public information on infrastructural and natural resource environment for carbon management. These reference layers, combined with multiple geographical basemaps, enable users to visualize the carbon management project layers in context. Carbon management project information will be updated monthly based on feedback and information availability. Carbon management project layers Point Source Carbon Capture (PSC) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power plants or industrial facilities. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing CO2 from the atmosphere, including direct air capture (DAC) and DAC hubs, direct ocean capture, enhanced mineralization, and biomass carbon removal and storage. For projects with multiple host sites, each of the sites are displayed individually with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the total for the entire project. Carbon Transport This layer contains DOE- and DOT-funded projects focused on CO2 transport. The Transport Research and Development sublayer contains projects that do not involve physical infrastructure; the Proposed Transport Corridor sublayer contains projects for which either a route for the transport infrastructure has been proposed or a general area for the transport infrastructure has been identified. Carbon Storage This layer contains DOE-funded key projects focused on CO2 storage. For projects with multiple field-work sites, each of the sites are displayed individually on the map with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the overall total for the entire project. Carbon Conversion This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on converting CO2 into economically valuable products. Reference layers The following layers provide additional information in the geographic proximity of carbon management projects. Users should reference the original sources for more details (weblinks provided below and in pop-up windows on the map). Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub and Facility These layers illustrate the approximate areas of the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs announced by DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) and the approximate locations of individual facilities that constitute the hubs (see "Where are the H2Hubs located?" on the webpage linked above). EPA Facility Level GHG Emissions (direct emitter) This layer shows direct CO2 emissions from stationary sources in 2022, using data extracted from EPA's Facility Level Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT). Captured and injected CO2 are not deducted from direct emitters’ total emissions. Contact EPA for additional details. Underground Injection Control Class VI permit/permit application This layer shows the locations of CO2 injection wells that are granted or in the process of applying for an Underground Injection Control Class VI permit by EPA or a Primacy State (currently Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming). The URLs for the permits or permit applications are provided in the pop-up windows associated with the well locations. Contact EPA for additional details. Carbon Storage Resource This layer contains information on prospective CO2 storage resources in saline formations and oil and gas reservoirs provided by the National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB) spatial database. Contact NETL for additional details. Existing CO2 pipeline This layer shows active CO2 pipelines based on information digitized from the map issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Contact PHMSA for additional details.

Carbon Conversion↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection

Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection Description This dataset contains input and output data for the manuscript Mongird, K. et al. (under review) titled "Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection". Input data corresponds to gridded spatial siting attributes that are necessary to conduct a random forest machine learning analysis of siting feature importance. Output data includes SHAP feature analysis outputs, and classification report values. For data on power plant siting results referred to in the manuscript, please refer to the CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations data download page. The downloadable data includes values for eight different future scenarios for the Western US. 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 Technical Information The dataset includes two sets of data files: (1) CERF gridded siting parameters and (2) Feature analysis outputs and classification reports. All downloadable data is in csv file format. Files with x/y coordinate information use the Albers Equal Area Conic projection (ESRI:102003). 1. CERF Gridded Siting Parameters This directory provides a balanced sample of gridded CERF siting parameters data for eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055, seven different technologies, and eight timesteps. This data serves as input to the feature analysis. It contains the following parameters. region_name - name of region (i.e., state) sited - binary value representing whether the grid cell received a siting of that technology type (1=True) rcp - binary value representing scenario resource concentration pathway (0 = RCP4.5, 1 = RCP8.5) ssp - binary value representing scenario shared socioeconomic pathway (0 = SSP3, 1 = SSP5) climate - binary value representing cooler (0) or hotter (1) GCM forcing tech_name - generation technology name sited_year - year that values correspond to transmission_cost - cost of transmission interconnection pipeline_cost - cost of natural gas pipeline interconnection interconnection_cost - total interconnection cost (sum of transmission cost and gas pipeline cost) lmp - associated locational marginal value ($/MWh) associated with the grid cell, timestep, scenario, and technology xcoord - x-coordinate of location ycoord - y-coordinate of location 2a. Feature Analysis Output The dataset includes the feature analysis shap output for locational marginal price and interconnection cost. It contains the following parameters. technology - generator technology name scenario - name of scenario feature - name of feature, either locational_marginal_price or interconnection_cost value - the mean of absolute value of SHAP values for given feature 2b. Feature Analysis Classification Report This download includes the classification report associated with each random forest model. The dataset contains the following parameters. technology - generation technology name scenario - name of scenario test - one of precision (the proportion of predicted positives that are actually correct), recall (the proportion of actual positives that were correctly identified), f1-score (the harmonic mean of precision and recall) 0.0 - value of test for classification of 0 (grid cell not chosen for siting) 1.0 - value of test for classification of 1 (grid cell chosen for siting) accuracy - accuracy of model (i.e., fraction of all predictions that were right) macro avg - Simple average of test values for all classes weighted avg - Weighted average of test values for all classes, weighted based on 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4 License 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↗
DOE OSTI2020

Optical follow-up of gravitational wave triggers with DECam during the first two LIGO/VIRGO observing runs

Gravitational wave (GW) events detectable by LIGO and Virgo have several possible progenitors, including black hole mergers, neutron star mergers, black hole–neutron star mergers, supernovae, and cosmic string cusps. A subset of GW events is expected to produce electromagnetic (EM) emission that, once detected, will provide complementary information about their astrophysical context. To that end, the LIGO–Virgo Collaboration (LVC) sends GW candidate alerts to the astronomical community so that searches for their EM counterparts can be pursued. The DESGW group, consisting of members of the Dark Energy Survey (DES), the LVC, and other members of the astronomical community, uses the Dark Energy Camera (DECam) to perform a search and discovery program for optical signatures of LVC GW events. DESGW aims to use a sample of GW events as standard sirens for cosmology. Due to the short decay timescale of the expected EM counterparts and the need to quickly eliminate survey areas with no counterpart candidates, it is critical to complete the initial analysis of each night’s images as quickly as possible. We discuss our search area determination, imaging pipeline, and candidate selection processes. We review results from the DESGW program during the first two LIGO–Virgo observing campaigns and introduce other science applications that our pipeline enables.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
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↗