Results for “subsidy” — Page 2

DOE OSTI2025

Techno-economic assessment of distributed wellhead RO water treatment for nitrate removal and salinity reduction: A field study in small disadvantaged communities

Techno-economic analysis of distributed wellhead water treatment and desalination (DWTD) systems was carried out based on a three-year field study in three small, disadvantaged communities (DACs) to evaluate the reliability and affordability of upgrading their impaired well water. The local water supplies of the three study DACs, located in Salinas Valley, California, were contaminated with nitrate at levels (~ 12–87 mg/L NO$^{-}_{3}$ - N) ) above the California maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 10 mg/L NO$^{-}_{3}$ - N , and had elevated water salinity (~600–1,600 mg/L total dissolved solids(TDS)) above its secondary MCL (SMCL) of 500 mg/L TDS. Well water nitrate removal and salinity reduction were accomplished via reverse osmosis (RO) based DWTD systems that operated autonomously, supported by remote monitoring and supervisory cyberinfrastructure. Reliable DWTD operation provided treated water quality, with respect to nitrate and salinity, in the range of 0.5–6.3 mg/L NO$^{-}_{3}$ - N and 57–161 mg/L TDS, respectively, which were well below the respective MCL and SMCL. The levelized cost of water treatment was in the range of ~$$2/m 3 - $$2.9/m 3 which aligns with typical residential water costs in California and in the study region, and monthly residential water costs (39 dollars-74 dollars/residential unit/month) were also within the range in California. The study showcased the DWTD approach as a viable and potentially scalable solution for upgrading impaired local potable water supply of communities lacking centralized water delivery infrastructure. However, streamlined permitting processes and standardized regulatory frameworks are critical to promoting wider adoption and maximizing the socio-economic benefits of the DWT approach. Moreover, DACs are likely to require government subsidies in order to cover the CapEx of DWTD systems in addition to upgrade of site infrastructure.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Game theoretic modeling and optimization of competition and collaboration in dual channel electronic waste supply chains

The rapid growth of electronic waste (e-waste) presents critical challenges for sustainable resource recovery and environmental protection. This study develops a dual-channel closed-loop supply chain (CLSC) model formulated as a hierarchical Stackelberg game, that integrates dynamic pricing and cost-sharing mechanisms to optimize both economic and environmental outcomes. The model explicitly captures strategic interactions between manufacturer-led and third-party recycling channels, accounting for consumer behavior, regulatory incentives, and market competition. Numerical simulations conducted (implemented over a four-iteration horizon using a commercial optimization solver) show that, relative to the baseline equilibrium, manufacturer profit increases from 11.6 thousand USD to 37.9 thousand USD (+226.8%), total recycled volume rises from 7,848 to 7,942 units (+1.2%), and collector profit nearly doubles under cost-sharing, enabling more equitable profit distribution. Furthermore, scenario-based simulations across Sub-Saharan Africa, high-income economies, and emerging Asian industrial countries reveal that infrastructure quality, policy intensity, and labor costs critically shape recycling efficiency and profit allocation. These findings demonstrate that subsidies alone are insufficient to ensure system efficiency. Instead, coordinated strategies that integrate internal incentive alignment with context-sensitive policy support are required. Overall, this study offers a robust framework for designing resilient, efficient, and regionally adaptable e-waste management systems.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2026

Can economic drivers enable an affordable, reliable, and resilient energy system in rural Alaska?

Price subsidies, such as the Alaska Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program, are intended to provide affordable energy. However, these economic drivers may be barriers to a clean energy transition and economic development, especially in rural Alaska. Reliable and affordable energy, a challenge in rural Alaska, is the foundation for individual and community security and economic development. Addressing the climate change crisis requires a sustainable transition to decarbonized energy systems that are more equitable, reliable, and affordable.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Prospects for silvicultural enhancement of fire resistance in mesic westside forests of the Pacific Northwest

Increasing wildfire activity in mesic, temperate Pacific Northwest forests west of the Cascade Range crest has stimulated interest in understanding whether alternative forest management practices could reduce risk of stand-replacing fire. To explore how management can enhance fire resistance in these forests and assess tradeoffs among resistance enhancement, carbon sequestration and storage, and economic returns, we conducted 40-year simulations of stand development with BioSum, a framework for conducting landscape analysis with the Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS), utilizing a statistically representative and spatially balanced sample of Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) plots. Simulation outcomes under business-as-usual silviculture were contrasted with fire-aware silviculture, and treatment optimization logic was developed and applied to represent landscape-scale outcomes under business-as-usual and fire-focused management scenarios. Simulation results indicate that fire-aware prescriptions and fire-focused management can meaningfully enhance stand- and landscape-scale fire resistance of westside forests under less than extreme fire weather, but at the cost of lower economic returns and reduced net carbon storage and sequestration over the 40-year analysis window. Shifting from business-as-usual regeneration harvests with short rotations to fire-aware, episodic selection harvest improved fire resistance the most, especially in young privately-owned forests, and with only modest tradeoffs in carbon and economic outcomes. While fire-aware treatments generally reduced net present value from forest operations over business-as-usual, most treatments still generated positive net present value and could be implemented without subsidy. Fire-aware prescriptions that removed and utilized non-merchantable harvest residues instead of burning them, via either pile or broadcast burning, partially mitigated carbon emissions associated with fire-aware treatments, with about the same improvement in fire resistance. Given the currently limited institutional and financial capacity to implement fire resistance enhancing treatments at scale, the insights from this analysis may aid managers seeking to elevate fire resistance to prioritize where and how to manage.

Science & Technology - Other Topics↗

DOE OSTI2026

Passenger Survey - Washington DC Metrorail - 2012

The primary purposes of the survey were to update ridership by the jurisdiction of residence for use in Metrorail’s operating subsidy allocation and to collect demographic, travel, and access data for Title VI compliance, system planning, and operation analyses. It was not a customer opinion survey; the focus was on ridership and travel characteristics.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2026

Metrobus Survey - Washington DC - 2014

The primary purposes of the survey were to update ridership by the jurisdiction of residence for use in Metrobus’ operating subsidy allocation and to collect demographic, travel, and access data for Title VI compliance, system planning, and operation analyses. It was not a customer opinion survey; the focus was on ridership and travel characteristics.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗