SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Options”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 361 records · Page 20

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2026

Software Verification of VARPOW

The VARPOW program is a post-processing utility program for DIF3D, specifically DIF3DVARIANT, and it was developed to provide interface files for the thermal analysis program DASSH. The basic methodology of VARPOW is to take the neutron and gamma flux (moments) calculated by DIF3D (or GAMSOR) and combine them with the heating (coefficient) cross sections to calculate the spatial power distributions using the DIF3DVARIANT spatial basis. VARPOW can use the output from GAMSOR (both steady state neutron and gamma flux calculations) or standard DIF3D/REBUS calculations (neutron flux only). The correct approach for defining the power distribution is to use GAMSOR as its purpose was to properly compute the gamma heating throughout the modeled domain. The power desnities calculated by VARPOW are broken into fuel, cladding and coolant terms for which isotope-wise categorization is needed. VARPOW has built in options the user can select for the isotope categorization or VARPOW can import a file that details the isotope categorization. VARPOW can export the solution in the polynomial basis of DIF3D-VARIANT or the monomial basis of DIF3D-VARIANT. Recently the clad neutron damage calculation capability was introduced into VARPOW, and it now allows a pathway to get distributions of clad DPA. The purpose of this work is to verify the power distribution, fast neutron flux and clad DPA results calculated by VARPOW from both the GAMSOR and DIF3D input options and verify that the input and output options are consistent with the manual. Hand calculation and independent numerical calculation are used for this verification work.

Zhong, Zhaopeng [Argonne National Laboratory (ANL)↗

DOE OSTI2021

Stakeholder Support for Wildlife Conservation Funding Policies

State wildlife management agencies in the United States have depended on a “user-pay” funding model for conservation efforts that relies on revenue from hunting license sales and a federal excise tax on firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment. Declines in hunting participation, however, jeopardize sustainability of the current funding model. Ensuring support among stakeholders for wildlife management and conservation may require expanding sources of funding and incorporating the perspectives and values of a diversifying constituency into decision making processes. We used a web-based survey of wildlife-associated recreationists in Michigan, USA to evaluate support for a range of conservation funding policies. Respondents self-identified primarily as hunters (n = 2,558) or wildlife watchers (n = 942). We used binary logistic regression to evaluate support for four conservation funding policy options: state sales tax, lottery proceeds, extractive industry revenue, and a user-based tax on outdoor gear (i.e., “backpack tax”). Determinants of support varied by type of policy and stakeholder characteristics. We found no statistically significant differences between hunters and wildlife watchers in their support for conservation funding policies when accounting for other variables such as wildlife value orientations, engagement in stewardship behaviors, age, and gender. The industry-based policy achieved the greatest level of approval, while the backpack tax had the lowest. Respondents were mixed in their support of the sales tax and lottery proceeds options. Cluster analysis revealed three homogenous groups related to conservation funding policies: “strong support,” “mixed/opposed,” and “anti-backpack tax.” Clusters differed in their support for conservation funding policies and on psychological and demographic variables. The “strong support” and “anti-backpack tax” groups differed in their levels of stewardship engagement, knowledge of conservation funding mechanisms, and support for the backpack tax option. The “mixed-opposed” group tended to be older, less educated, and less likely to be a member of a conservation organization. Results suggest support for conservation funding differs by policy type and social and psychological characteristics of stakeholders. Based on differences in policy support revealed in this study, we suggest a multi-tiered approach to funding conservation and building on support among wildlife stakeholders to mitigate the looming funding crisis for state wildlife agencies.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Transport Cost for Carbon Removal Projects With Biomass and CO2 Storage

Strategies to remove carbon from the atmosphere are needed to meet global climate goals. Promising strategies include the conversion of waste biomass to hydrogen, methane, liquid fuels, or electricity coupled with CO 2 capture and storage (CCS). A key challenge for these projects is the need to connect geographically dispersed biomass supplies with geologic storage sites by either transporting biomass or CO 2 . We assess the cost of transport for biomass conversion projects with CCS using publicly available cost data for trucking, rail, and CO 2 pipelines in the United States. We find that for large projects (order of 1 Mt/yr CO 2 or greater), CO 2 by pipeline is the lowest cost option. However, for projects that send most of the biomass carbon to storage, such as gasification to hydrogen or electricity production, biomass by rail is a competitive option. For smaller projects and lower fractions of carbon sent to storage, such as for pyrolysis to liquid fuels, CO 2 by rail is the lowest cost option. Assessing three plausible example projects in the United States, we estimate that total transport costs range from $24/t-CO 2 stored for a gasification to hydrogen project traversing 670 km to $\$ 36$/t for a gasification to renewable natural gas project traversing 530 km. In general, if developers have flexibility in choosing transport mode and project type, biomass sources and storage sites can be connected across hundreds of kilometers for transport costs in the range of $20-40/t-CO 2 stored. Truck and rail are often viable modes when pipelines cannot be constructed. Distances of 1,000 km or more can be connected in the same cost range when shared CO 2 pipelines are employed.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Comparison of CNN-Based Image Classification Approaches for Implementation of Low-Cost Multispectral Arcing Detection

Camera-based sensing has benefited in recent years from developments in machine learning data processing methods, as well as improved data collection options such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) mounted sensors. However, cost considerations, both for the initial purchase of sensors as well as updates, maintenance, or potential replacement if damaged, can limit adoption of more expensive sensing options for some applications. To evaluate more affordable options with less expensive, more available, and more easily replaceable hardware, we examine the use of machine learning-based image classification with custom datasets, utilizing deep learning based-image classification and the use of ensemble models for sensor fusion. Utilizing the same models for each camera to reduce technical overhead, we showed that for a very representative training dataset, camera-based detection can be successful for detection of electrical arcing. We also use multiple validation datasets, based on conditions expected to be of varying difficulty, to evaluate custom data. These results show that ensemble models of different data sources can mitigate risks from gaps in training data, though the system will be less redundant for those cases unless other precautions are taken. We found that with good quality custom datasets, data fusion models can be utilized without specialization in design to the specific cameras utilized, allowing for less specialized, more accessible equipment to be utilized as multispectral camera components. This approach can provide an alternative to expensive sensing equipment for applications in which lower-cost or more easily replaceable sensing equipment is desirable.

convolutional neural networks↗

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 OSTI2020

ePROJECT BUILDER: PROMOTING WIDER ADOPTION OF ENERGY SAVINGS PERFORMANCE CONTRACTS THROUGH STANDARDIZATION AND TRANSPARENCY

The United States Federal Government has been conducting guaranteed savings energy savings performance contracts for over 20 years and now relies on ESPC for the majority of its energy efficiency work. Along with a related financed project type, these deals resulted in $4.2 billion of project investment in the five years ending in 2016, a pace that has even accelerated since. Measurement and verification (M&V) on the projects is the key to assuring savings realization and persistence. Perceived as a weakness or burdensome added cost in the early years of the program, M&V has become a strength. All energy conservation measures (ECMs) have some form of measurement – defined as a measured baseline establishment followed by at least one measurement of the main energy-saving parameter taken in the performance period for each ECM. The government’s in-house energy consulting office, the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), now recommends measurement of these “Option A” M&V ECMs throughout the contract term, usually annually. Moreover, a significantly higher percentage of projects are now characterized by more ambitious M&V, including Option B (all parameter measurement) for most generation (including renewable) and some efficiency measures, and more frequent Option C (whole facility utility bill analysis) for “deep retrofit” projects with multiple, interactive ECMs. Coincident with this progress in M&V has been a much greater embracing of ESPC by the federal agencies, resulting in the enormous rate of projects now executed. This paper traces the evolution of M&V in federal ESPC and argues that the heightened credibility of the savings has contributed significantly to the procurement vehicle’s long-term viability. This focus on savings integrity via M&V has been learned over two decades for U.S. federal ESPC, but countries with developing ESPC markets would be wise to emphasize it as their markets emerge, allowing them to avoid some of the “growing pains” experienced in the U.S.

Earni, Shankar↗

DOE OSTI2020

M&V in ESPC: The U.S. Federal Experience and Implications for Developing ESPC Markets

Coleman, Philip↗

DOE OSTI2020

M&V in ESPC: The U.S. Federal Experience and Implications for Developing ESPC Markets

The United States Federal Government has been conducting guaranteed savings energy savings performance contracts for over 20 years and now relies on ESPC for the majority of its energy efficiency work. Along with a related financed project type, these deals resulted in $4.2 billion of project investment in the five years ending in 2016, a pace that has even accelerated since.Measurement and verification (M&V) on the projects is the key to assuring savings realization and persistence. Perceived as a weakness or burdensome added cost in the early years of the program, M&V has become a strength. All energy conservation measures (ECMs) have some form of measurement – defined as a measured baseline establishment followed by at least one measurement of the main energy-saving parameter for a given ECM taken in the performance period. The government’s in-house energy consulting office, the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP), now recommends measurement of these “Option A” M&V ECMs throughout the contract term, usually annually. Moreover, a significantly higher percentage of projects are now characterized by more ambitious M&V, including Option B (all parameter measurement) for most generation (including renewable) and some efficiency measures, and more frequent Option C (whole facility utility bill analysis) for “deep retrofit” projects with multiple, interactive ECMs. Coincident with this progress in M&V has been a much greater embracing of ESPC by the federal agencies, resulting in the enormous rate of projects now executed. This paper traces the evolution of M&V in federal ESPC and argues that the heightened credibility of the estimated (and guaranteed) savings has contributed significantly to the procurement vehicle’s long-term viability. This focus on savings integrity via M&V has been learned over two decades for U.S. federal ESPC, but countries with developing ESPC markets would be wise to emphasize it as their markets emerge, allowing them to avoid some of the “growing pains” experienced in the U.S.

Coleman, Philip↗

DOE OSTI2020

Performance Potential of Mixed Data Management Modes for Heterogeneous Memory Systems

Many high-performance systems now include different types of memory devices within the same compute platform to meet strict performance and cost constraints. Such heterogeneous memory systems often include an upper-level tier with better performance, but limited capacity, and lower-level tiers with higher capacity, but less bandwidth and longer latencies for reads and writes. To utilize the different memory layers efficiently, current systems rely on hardware-directed, memory -side caching or they provide facilities in the operating system (OS) that allow applications to make their own data-tier assignments. Since these data management options each come with their own set of trade-offs, many systems also include mixed data management configurations that allow applications to employ hardware- and software-directed management simultaneously, but for different portions of their address space. Despite the opportunity to address limitations of stand-alone data management options, such mixed management modes are under-utilized in practice, and have not been evaluated in prior studies of complex memory hardware. In this work, we develop custom program profiling, configurations, and policies to study the potential of mixed data management modes to outperform hardware- or software-based management schemes alone. Our experiments, conducted on an Intel ® Knights Landing platform with high-bandwidth memory, demonstrate that the mixed data management mode achieves the same or better performance than the best stand-alone option for five memory intensive benchmark applications (run separately and in isolation), resulting in an average speedup compared to the best stand-alone policy of over 10 %, on average.

Effler, Chad↗

DOE OSTI2021

Light-Duty Vehicle Choice Modeling and Benefits Analysis (van018)

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Vehicle Technologies and Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Offices (VTO and HFTO) support research and development of efficient and sustainable transportation technologies that will improve energy efficiency, minimize emissions, and enable America to use less petroleum. The analysis in this poster is based on technical progress goals established in VTO and HFTO in the years immediately prior to and including 2020, and it summarizes the estimated energy and emissions benefits corresponding with achievement of those goals. The goals span research activities on batteries, electric drive technologies (EDT), combustion, lightweight materials, fuel cells, and hydrogen storage. The Automotive Deployment Options Projection Tool (ADOPT) is used to estimate the benefits for light-duty vehicles. ADOPT is a vehicle choice and stock model that estimates vehicle technology improvement impacts on sales, energy, and emissions. It includes all the existing vehicle options for realism, estimates their sales using extensively validated consumer preferences, creates new market-driven vehicle options through time, and rolls up sales to estimate energy and emissions. ADOPT takes in technology progress assumptions and applies these to the modeled vehicles through time. The assumptions are represented by a No Program scenario that reflects the technology improvements assumed to occur without further contributions from VTO or HFTO, and a Program Success scenario under which VTO and HFTO program goals are realized. The benefits are calculated by comparing ADOPT's estimated national-level energy and emissions resulting from the Program Success relative to the No Program scenario. By 2050, the Program Success scenario results in 11% less annual petroleum consumption and 10% less annual carbon emissions than the No Program scenario.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Case Study: Hybrid Carbon Conversion Using Low-Carbon Energy Sources in Coal-Producing States

The demand for more carbon efficient power sources and a decrease in natural gas prices has decreased the desire for coal power. This decrease in demand has led to massive job losses in coal mining regions over the past decade. The purpose of this project is to develop a hybrid energy system utilizing both a coal power plant and advanced reactor, which is competitive with natural gas by improving on profitability and decreasing carbon emissions. This report details the problem with a summary of the impact on the coal industry and the availability of renewable energy sources in the Appalachian region. Because of the geography of the region, variable renewable energy sources are not available without significant size and siting restrictions. However, biomass in the form of wood waste is abundant and can be used as a carbon neutral energy source. Combining biomass and coal processing, in addition to thermal power plants, can increase system profits and efficiency by providing peaking power and conversion opportunities for secondary markets. The electric load is based on publicly available demand data from Appalachian Power, which services the western Virginia and southern West Virginia in the Appalachian region. The demand information is combined by service, normalized, and scaled to an average demand of 1000 kW, which will be the basis for sizing the hybrid energy system. A traditional screening curve analysis for a coal plant and advanced reactor shows that the least cost design varies significantly based on the assumed discount rate and capital recovery period. An optimization program to size the design in TEAL based on the load curve gives 10 optimal designs, all with a negative resulting net present value (NPV) and a coal plant capacity of less than 15%. Including profits from selling captured carbon at a flat rate results in a positive NPV; however, the coal capacity factor only increases to about 40%. There are limitations with this optimization as well since the price of CO2 is likely to decrease as more is sold to the conversion market. The suggested design will combine coal power, an advanced reactor, and coal and biomass coprocessing to produce a variety of products that can be sold to the conversion market while increasing system efficiency. The analysis of conversion pathways for coal and biomass reveals that multiple options will need to be included in the analysis to produce the optimal system design. Three systems will be optimized and compared to determine the best design based on the figures of merit of total NPV and cost of carbon avoided. The first system will include a coal power plant and an advanced reactor that will sell electricity to the grid to meet demand and sell captured carbon to the conversion market. The second system adds a high-temperature steam electrolysis plant, which will utilize electricity during times of low demand to produce hydrogen and sell it to the conversion market. The third system adds biomass and coal processing with options for hydrocarbon oils, syngas to be produced for the conversion market, and electricity generation to power components within the system or provide peaking power. This analysis will be based on a new approach that combines traditional screening curve methods with a dispatch algorithm that optimizes the system based on the opportunity cost of different production options. The resulting optimization algorithm should provide results with less processing time than HERON’s decision tree method. The results from this analysis will determine an optimal design and reinforce the benefits of coal power when used in a hybrid energy system. The initial results show that the addition of a secondary market for carbon sales could result in a positive NPV and increases the capacity factor of the coal plant as compared to a design with only sales to the electricity market. The addition of more markets and additional coal consumption from biomass coprocessing could increase NPV further, replace carbon in other markets through the sale of biomass-derived hydrocarbons, and demonstrate the value of coal power technology.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2021

Topical Report – Findings on Subtask 2.7 – Wet ESP and Aerosol Testing at Coal Creek Station

Growing concerns over the impact of CO 2 emissions from combustion sources on global climate change have prompted numerous research and development projects aimed at developing cost-effective technologies for CO 2 capture. One family of technologies being demonstrated at pilot and full scale globally is postcombustion carbon capture (PCCC) systems that employ amine-based solvents. The captured CO 2 can be compressed and permanently stored underground or used for enhanced oil recovery. The proximity of North Dakota’s lignite-fired fleet of power plants to potential CO 2 storage options creates a unique atmosphere for PCCC within the state. However, the unique components present in lignite flue gas present a challenge for large-scale PCCC at North Dakota power plants by contributing to aerosol formation. Aerosols can negatively impact the long-term performance of amine-based solvents for CO 2 capture. Amine-based solvents are volatile, and flue gas particulate provides nucleation sites where amine vapors can condense as aerosols. Because aerosols cannot be easily captured at the column outlet using conventional technologies, the amine-laden aerosols escape the system and lead to accelerated solvent losses. Moreover, particulate components can chemically react with amines to form degradation products that can permanently deactivate the amine, cause fouling, and lead to hazardous emissions. Many of the elements that have been shown to catalyze solvent degradation are present in lignite coals and can exacerbate solvent replacement economics. Understanding this issue is critical to the implementation of solvent-based CO 2 capture systems as applied to lignite-fired generation systems. The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) designed and carried out this project to fully characterize aerosol behavior with various control technologies installed to better optimize aerosol mitigation technology for CO 2 capture. To meet the goal of this project, the following objectives were identified: Determine the effectiveness of a wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP) on mitigating formation of problematic aerosols at Great River Energy’s Coal Creek Station, upstream of the PCCC system. Determine the effectiveness of the Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) proprietary amine emission reduction unit (AERU) as a postcapture solvent recovery system for reducing aerosol emissions and extending solvent life downstream of the PCCC system. Determine the impact of aerosols on the efficiency and degradation products of both commercial and advanced solvents within the PCCC system. Work was conducted at Coal Creek Station Unit 1 using a slipstream of flue gas from the outlet of the plant’s flue gas desulfurization (FGD) unit. Flue gas was routed through a pilot-scale FGD unit to remove SO 2 to very low levels (~1 ppm) and then through a direct contact cooler (DCC) to further cool the gas and to remove moisture. The gas exiting the DCC was then optionally routed through a WESP before passing to the CO 2 absorber columns. The MHI solvent was used to scrub CO 2 from the slipstream through a set of two absorber columns. The rich solvent was regenerated in a stripper column by heating to drive off captured CO 2 . Flue gas exiting the absorber column was routed to MHI’s proprietary AERU to recover entrained solvent. The system operated using a catch-and-release method where the CO 2 was separated to provide data on the process, but the captured CO 2 was released back into the host site stack. Particulate was measured, collected, and analyzed from multiple locations throughout the pilot-scale system. Unlike the performance observed in prior work, the inlet FGD and DCC did not remove significant particulate matter from the flue gas. This appears to be due to a difference in the nature of the particulate. The DCC seemed to increase particulate size and count, most likely owing to water condensing onto the surfaces of fly ash particles. When the WESP was operated, it achieved >95% particulate capture. Very little particulate matter or indications of solvent were detected at the AERU outlet. When operating with advanced KS 21 solvent, the particulate material at the AERU outlet was even further decreased. Solvent analysis showed that some species derived from flue gas and ash were slowly concentrating in the solvent over the duration of the test. The levels observed were reported to be within expected ranges and were not of concern to MHI. A high-level techno-economic assessment of installing CO 2 capture at Coal Creek Station suggested that, when using a standard monoethanolamine (MEA)-based solution with simple heat integration, the energy penalty to net generation would be 34%. The bulk of this was due to steam losses for regenerating solvent, followed by parasitic electrical demand for CO 2 compression and then by increased parasitic load for pushing flue gas through the absorber column. These demands could be decreased with a more advanced solvent that exhibits lower heat of regeneration and lower pressure drop than does a simple MEA solution. Further energy could be saved with more thorough heat integration to recover useful energy from the steam used for solvent regeneration. Installing a WESP was predicted to increase the cost of electricity by nearly $5/MWh. This would become cost-effective if solvent losses were roughly 10 times the baseline estimate when not using a WESP but could be returned to baseline by installing the WESP. Piping CO 2 for storage in more favorable geology could help with carbon capture and storage economics. Although storing off-site would necessitate construction of a CO 2 transport pipeline, the cost of this pipeline might be more than offset by reducing the number of wells required, the depths of the wells required, and the electrical demand for the CO 2 compressor. Additional factors that favor off-site storage costs include smaller expected CO 2 plume sizes, which translates to less monitoring and fewer landowner agreements. More detailed assessment of the specific geology in the region under and around Coal Creek Station would be needed to accurately assess the costs and benefits of different storage site options. This subtask was cofunded through the Energy & Environmental Research Center–U.S. Department of Energy Joint Program on Research and Development for Fossil Energy-Related Resources Cooperative Agreement No. DE-FE0024233. Nonfederal funding was provided by the North Dakota Industrial Commission.

Strege, Joshua↗

DOE OSTI2021

Markets and Economic Requirements for Fission Batteries and Other Nuclear Systems

Fission Batteries (FBs) are nuclear reactors defined by five characteristics which enable large-scale deployment: cost competitive, standardized sizes for economic mass production, easy installation and removal, secure and safe unattended operation with high reliability. FBs are not defined by technology or power level. Technical and market considerations suggest that most FBs will produce 20 to 30 MWt. This proceedings reports on the outcomes of two workshops that were held in January 2021 to better define markets and economic challenges for FBs. Three major markets were identified. The largest market is the industrial and commercial heat market. There are about 4000 industrial users (excluding utilities) that require more than one megawatt of heat. The number of customers versus size of heat demand was determined. In a low-carbon world there is the potential for many additional customers—including expanded biofuels production and district heat. The second market is for non-grid electricity. This includes co-generation plants that produce heat and electricity for a single customer. The third market is the maritime market with ~100,000 ships worldwide. In the United States, natural gas is the low-cost energy option today and will remain so unless constraints or taxes impact its use. If restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions, the FB competition includes natural gas with carbon capture, biofuels, hydrogen and grid electricity. Natural gas with carbon capture is not economically viable on a small scale. Biofuels may be expensive but may be the economically preferred option for locations with small energy demands of a few megawatts. Hydrogen is a potential competitor with many of the characteristics of natural gas. Grid electricity is not a competitive source of heat. For FBs to be economically competitive, the price of delivered heat must be $20-50/MWh ($6-15/million BTU). The economically competitive range for non-grid electricity is estimated at $70-100/MWh. These electricity prices are competitive with the retail prices of electricity in many parts of the United States for the customer. FBs are not expected to be competitive selling wholesale electricity to the grid. To achieve the aforementioned cost targets for heat and electricity markets, FB designers must (1) maximize the power output within the constraints of a FB (e.g., truck transportability, passive decay heat removal), (2) drastically reduce the size of onsite staff, (3) adopt core designs with low fuel costs (enrichment and fabrication), and (4) develop a system design that is efficiently manufactured in factories. The business case depends upon more than being just a replacement for natural gas. The largest incentives for adoption of FBs is where they create new markets and new sources of revenue. An example is the paper and pulp industry that burns biomass wastes to provide heat and electricity to make paper. An external heat source could meet the demand for heat and electricity by the paper process and enable converting waste biomass into liquid biofuels rather than burning to provide heat. Other markets, such as data centers, are driven by special energy requirements such as extreme reliability. Most customers are not in the energy business but need heat and electricity to produce a product—a manufactured good, education, retail sales (shopping malls), marine transport or some other product. As a consequence, there will be large incentives to lease rather than own FBs. Leasing avoids the regulatory challenges that remain with the owner of the FB. Leasing creates large incentives for FP standardization of sizes and transportability to maintain the value of the FB at the end of the lease—similar to the leasing of jet engines and aircraft. The economic constraints combined with technical constraints suggest competitive FBs will likely have outputs exceeding 10 MWt. There appear to be little incentives for very long-lived reactor cores because such machines require much larger inventories of fuel. Maintenance requirements and the options to provide technology updates may favor shorter lifetimes (~5 years). The assessment is that there is the potential for FBs to be economically viable and play a major role in global decarbonization in three markets: heat, non-grid electricity and maritime applications.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2022

COMPOFF: A Compiler Cost model using Machine Learning to predict the Cost of OpenMP Offloading

The HPC industry is inexorably moving towards an era of extremely heterogeneous architectures, with more devices configured on any given HPC platform and potentially more kinds of devices, some of them highly specialized. Writing a separate code suitable for each target system for a given HPC application is not practical. The better solution is to use directive-based parallel programming models such as OpenMP. OpenMP provides a number of options for offloading a piece of code to devices like GPUs. To select the best option from such options during compilation, most modern compilers use analytical models to estimate the cost of executing the original code and the different offloading code variants. Building such an analytical model for compilers is a difficult task that necessitates a lot of effort on the part of a compiler engineer. Recently, machine learning techniques have been successfully applied to build cost models for a variety of compiler optimization problems. In this paper, we present COMPOFF, a cost model which uses the multi-layer perceptrons to statically estimates the Cost of OpenMP OFFloading. We used six different transformations on a parallel code of Wilson Dslash Operator to support GPU offloading, and we predicted their cost of execution on different GPUs using COMPOFF during compile time. Our results show that this model can predict offloading costs with a root mean squared error in prediction of less than 0.5 seconds. Our preliminary findings indicate that this work will make it much easier and faster for scientists and compiler developers to port legacy HPC applications that use OpenMP to new heterogeneous computing environment.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sustainable Biofuels for Low-Carbon Maritime Transportation

The marine shipping sector heavily depends on fossil fuels and is one of the largest petroleum fuel consumers [1,2]. The annual global marine fuel consumption was estimated to be around 400 million metric tons in 2019 (2.5 billion barrels). Moreover, ocean shipping is one of the most significant contributors to sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter emissions. Global shipping contributes 13% of human-caused sulfur emissions and 2.6% of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. As a major source of pollutant emissions, the marine industry faces several challenges related to emission regulations. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has established a framework for reducing the carbon intensity of shipping: 40% reduction relative to 2008 levels by 2030 and 70% reduction by 2050. As the aviation sector, the maritime shipping sector is difficult to decarbonize through electrification. Biofuels offer the best opportunities for decarbonizing marine shipping in the near and medium-term. Advanced biofuels such as pyrolysis bio-oil offer the low-cost potential for meeting carbon reduction goals. For instance, the pyrolysis bio-oil exhibited promising marginal CO2 abatement costs at less than $100/tonne CO2-equivalent at a heavy fuel oil price greater than $1.10/gal [1]. As a potential biofuel option for low-carbon maritime shipping, this presentation focuses on a comparative techno-economic analysis (TEA) of bio-oils produced via a fast pyrolysis-based conversion pathway. The pathway converts a 50/50 blend of forest residues and clean pine to bio-oil via three process options: fast pyrolysis without vapor upgrading, and fast pyrolysis with vapor phase upgrading over ZSM-5 zeolite catalyst and Pt/TiO2 catalyst. The process configuration and operation variation led to different capital and operating costs, as well as the resulting raw bio-oil’s yield and quality, e.g., the water content, total acid number, and carboxylic acid number. The study also determined the minimum upgrading of bio-oils required to enable blending with very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO), with the associated costs reflected in TEA. This study shows that bio-oil could be a cost-effective fuel option for decarbonizing maritime shipping. Further research is required with respect to biofuel blending properties, such as compatibility with existing fuel system infrastructure and suitable engine performance.

BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Achieving Economy-wide Net-Zero Emissions: Is it an impossible goal?

Meeting growing energy demands while eliminating emissions, maintaining affordability, and ensuring energy justice is one of the most significant grand challenges of our time. Governments and private industry around the world have established aggressive goals to achieve net-zero emissions by mid-century. In the U.S., this equates to a net-zero electricity sector by 2035 and across all energy use sectors—including electricity, industry, and transportation—by 2050. The key question then becomes: Can we get there from here? Meeting these aggressive goals demands immediate action, and they require us to think more holistically about our clean energy options. Currently, almost 85% of global energy demands are met by unabated fossil fuels. That means we have a lot of work to do, and we need to consider all of the non-emitting generation options available in each region—including fossil with carbon capture, renewables, and nuclear. And we need to reach our goal while establishing energy justice, which refers to the goal of achieving equity in social and economic participation in the energy system, while remediating past social, economic, and health burdens on communities that have been brought about by our energy system. This presentation will describe U.S. and global efforts focused on novel energy system solutions that strive to maximize use of all clean energy generation options to meet our energy demands, while ensuring sustainability, customer affordability, and a just energy system.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2020

ANDRA's Underground Research Laboratory in Bure: Major Role in the Cigeo Development - 20005

The Industrial Center for Geological Disposal, also called Cigeo, is the deep geological disposal facility project developed by Andra since 1991. It is intended for the final disposal of High-Level Waste (HLW) and Intermediate Level Waste-Long Lived (ILW-LL) generated in France by the nuclear industry. Cigeo is located in the east of France (Meuse/Haute-Marne site). The disposal will be implemented in a 140 to 160 m thick clay layer at about 500 m depth. The license application file will be submitted in 2020. If the license is granted, the construction of the pilot phase of Cigeo (ramp, shafts, drifts, initial disposal vaults) could start in 2025 at the earliest. Since 2000, the development of the safety case of Cigeo for post closure has been supported by a three-stage construction, design, and scientific and technological experiment program performed in the French Underground Research Laboratory (URL) in Bure. These stages of the URL activities supported the iterative interactions between the knowledge acquired by scientific and technological R and D program, the design process and the safety assessment. The stages focused on assessing the suitability of the disposal concept, providing the basis for safety options and construction design, and preparing for licensing using large scale demonstrations. Recently, Andra launched the fourth development stage of the URL to implement a new set of technological experiments aiming at consolidating the design options of disposal cells and galleries for the pilot phase of Cigeo and at assessing monitoring technologies. Recently, Andra launched the fourth development stage of the URL to implement a new set of technological experiments aiming at consolidating the design of the pilot phase of Cigeo and at assessing design options and monitoring technologies. Removal of a segment ring, construction of an X drift crossing, improved construction techniques for HLW vaults, and construction of an ILW-LL prototype disposal vault are example activities during the fourth phase. In the future, the URL in Bure will remain a unique location to carry out research on promising technical solutions, to reduce Cigeo's construction and operation risks and strengthen the long-term safety assessment. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Middlesex South FUSRAP Site: Collaboration Towards Beneficial Reuse - 20338

The US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) manages DoE's post-closure responsibilities and ensures the future protection of human health and the environment with respect to sites that have no continuing DOE mission after undergoing remediation. LM's beneficial reuse program promotes the LM strategic goal to sustainably manage and optimize use of public lands. The beneficial reuse program aims to repurpose former contaminated sites to restore the environment, protect the public health, revitalize communities, and spur economic growth. Benefits from the reuse of a site may increase the local tax base, facilitate job growth, utilize existing infrastructure, and enhance or protect natural resources. Beneficial reuse also promotes protectiveness by ensuring activities are compatible with long-term maintenance and protection of public health and the environment, as well as by retaining good stewardship of natural resources. LM actively participates in promoting the economic development vision of the surrounding communities by collaborating with local communities to promote regional or municipal initiatives. The Borough of Middlesex, New Jersey, has prepared the Lincoln Boulevard Redevelopment Plan, which will reinvent a once-viable downtown and enhance the quality of life for the community. The Middlesex South, New Jersey, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site lies within the boundaries of this redevelopment area. In support of this development plan, the Borough is interested in acquiring the site for its Department of Public Works and to increase street access in the future commercial district to be built near adjacent properties. The opportunity to put the FUSRAP site into productive use aligns with LM's mission and strategic goals. In support of beneficial reuse activities, DOE can dispose of excess real property using several mechanisms. The two disposal options applicable to the Middlesex south site include (1) utilizing the US General Services Administration (GSA) or (2) using the Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations Section 770, 'Transfer of Real Property at Defense Nuclear Facilities for Economic Development' (known as a '770 transfer') process. Using the 770 transfer requires economic development as the primary driver, and a specific redevelopment proposal must be submitted. If there is no interest in specific economic development, the GSA option becomes the default mechanism for disposal of the property. In the case of the Middlesex south site, the 770 transfer process is being utilized and the Borough has submitted its economic development proposal to LM. Although LM is encouraged by the opportunity to put the site into productive use, the Middlesex south site is currently on the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Priorities List and remediation is being performed by the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). Consequently, any property transfer must meet the requirements under CERCLA Section 120(h), 'Property Transferred by Federal Agencies.' As the groundwater remedy will not be in place for several years, approval would be required from the US EPA administrator and the governor of the state of New Jersey to perform an early transfer of the site (before all response actions have been completed). The time frame for these approvals to occur under the normal process conflicts with the proposed redevelopment schedule; therefore, various options for expedited sale, transfer, or lease of portions of the site to the Borough were evaluated. The subsequent decision on a mutually beneficial path forward was the result of a collaborative effort between LM, USACE, the Borough and its redevelopment team, EPA, and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗