Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “security economics”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 361 records · Page 20
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Flexible operation of nuclear hybrid energy systems for load following and water desalination

Nuclear hybrid energy systems (NHES) have the potential to provide dependable and emission-free electricity to the grid while also increasing the flexibility and reliability of the electrical grid. Molten salt reactor (MSR) technology can provide consistent, carbon-free electricity while also increasing efficiency, security, and sustainability and reducing nuclear waste. This study investigates the integration of Molten Salt Reactors (MSR) and conventional Pressurized Water Reactors (PWR) with desalination technologies: Direct Contact Membrane Distillation (DCMD), Multi-Stage Flash Distillation (MSFD), and Reverse Osmosis (RO). Dynamic first-principles models were developed and tested using real grid data from the New York Independent System Operator. The results demonstrate that nuclear power is capable of flexibly responding to changing grid demand while simultaneously producing clean water, particularly during periods of low electricity demand. The MSR-RO system was found to be the most efficient in electricity generation and water production, and all hybrid systems reduced CO2 emissions by 356,000 to 682,000 tons annually. Economic analysis reveals that nuclear desalination technologies are cost-competitive with conventional systems, especially when paired with RO. Finally, these findings confirm the technical feasibility and environmental benefits of nuclear hybrid systems for sustainable electricity and water production.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2022

IER-517: Molybdenum Optimized Benchmark System Demonstrating Integral Correlations (MOBY DICK)

Nuclear criticality experiments are essential to the validation of nuclear data used in simulation software. The quality of nuclear data becomes paramount as simulation software becomes more relied upon for criticality safety studies and designs of nuclear systems. To improve the quality of nuclear data, experimenters can design critical experiments that are sensitive to isotope reaction pairs in materials of interest. The efforts conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD-NEA) Working Party on Nuclear Criticality Safety (WPNCS) Subgroup 8: Preservation of Expert Knowledge and Judgement Applied to Criticality Benchmarks (SG8) to categorize benchmarks according to their usefulness for nuclear data validation have been of great importance. Based on the OECD studies benchmark experiments included in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Handbook are concisely used by nuclear data evaluators, criticality safety engineers and others to validate nuclear data and simulation results. A lack of benchmarks sensitive to molybdenum in the (ICSBEP), particularly in the intermediate range, was noted by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), the French Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), and Y-12 National Security Site prompting them to submit a joint integral experiment request to the Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) in 2019. The request included both HEU and Plutonium systems in order to validate differential nuclear data focusing on the intermediate energy range but also includes thermal and fast configurations. This document represents the preliminary design work for a series of molybdenum integral experiments known as Molybdenum Optimized Benchmark System Demonstrating Integral Correlations (MOBY DICK).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Building Envelope Characteristics in Cold Climates

Prescriptive guidelines for thermal insulation in the design of buildings in cold climates have traditionally been derived by a holistic consideration of climatic factors, energy policy, environmental policy, and economics. The differences in thermal barrier requirements in buildings across the arctic and subarctic regions of the world are influenced as much by the differing priorities of the governing bodies that set these requirements as by actual physical demands and conditions. Usually, national requirements for building envelope characteristics such as thermal insulation values, building envelope airtightness, vapor permeability, building mass, and detailing are based on economics, durability, and environmental considerations. Consideration of thermal energy system resilience provides a new paradigm through which to view the optimization of these parameters. The paper describes specifics of construction in cold climates; summarizes best practice requirements for the building envelope characteristics for buildings located in cold and arctic climate of the United States, Canada, and Scandinavian countries; provides some details illustrating how to implement these requirements; and compares the effects of different levels of building envelope efficiency and building mass on indoor air temperature decay when heat supply is interrupted. The paper also presents results from experts' discussions during the consultation forum "Thermal Energy Systems Resilience in Cold/Arctic Climates" (ERDC 2020) and research conducted under the IEA EBC Annex 73, the Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP) Project "Technologies Integration to Achieve Resilient, Low-Energy Military Installations," and U.S. Army Program project 633734T1500 under Military Engineering Technology Demonstration. The paper complements the Cold-Climate Design Guide (ASHRAE 2015) with a focus on the resilience of thermal energy systems.

Arctic↗
DOE OSTI2021

Wyoming CarbonSAFE: Advancing Commercialization of Low-Carbon Energy Technologies in Fossil-Rich Wyoming

Wyoming’s Powder River Basin (PRB) is the most prolific coal producer and exporter in the United States and the State of Wyoming’s largest oil-producing basin. In addition to being a leading energy producer, the PRB is the site of research programs whose aim is to develop and integrate low-carbon technologies into existing fossil fuel energy industries. Much of the PRB’s low-carbon research is focused around Dry Fork Station (DFS), which is the newest coal-fired power station in the western US. Currently, DFS hosts five carbon capture projects, including pilot-scale capture projects that utilize different capture technologies and a full front-end engineering and design (FEED) study, a commercial CO 2 pipeline for nearby CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery industry, and is also co-located with the Wyoming Integrated Test Center, which is a host facility for unconventional carbon utilization research (i.e. flue gas carbon-to-products innovations). DFS is also the host site for the Wyoming CarbonSAFE project. Wyoming CarbonSAFE, funded by the Department of Energy/National Energy Technology Laboratory, is a multi-phased program (currently in Phase II) whose core objective is developing and validating storage sites within a complex capable of storing 50 million metric tonnes of CO 2 over a 30 year project period using carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS). This paper will provide an overview of the project to-date, showing that CarbonSAFE goals are achievable with respect to geologic, environmental, regulatory, CO 2 source and economic conditions, and why the State of Wyoming offers one of the more favorable environments to advance the commercialization studies. In 2019, the project team designed and completed a ~10,000 foot stratigraphic test well just south of DFS. From this well, the team collected over 600 feet of core, fluid samples from target injection zones, and a full petrophysical log suite. In addition, legacy 2D seismic lines were acquired and a 3D seismic survey was acquired in the fall of 2020. The objective of these field activities has been to identify and characterize target storage reservoirs and associated caprock. This complex has several reservoirs that could meet commercial injection goals, and over 4000 feet of associated caprock. Simulations of site performance suggest that stacked injection provides the most effective storage strategy, and would necessitate several sites within the greater complex to meet final project injection goals. Other work within this project includes the development of a business-case around proximal fields with CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery potential and existing tax credits, assessment of regulatory conditions, including pore space ownership and Class VI injection well permitting requirements, implementation of a robust public outreach Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3821220 GHGT-15 McLaughlin 2 program, and surface site characterization activities that have focused on environmental factors. In the PRB and at DFS, the State of Wyoming and other entities have made carbon management a priority of its future energy industry by providing a regulatory and business framework that is favorable to advancing these technologies. These endeavors will become more realistic with the successful implementation of Wyoming CarbonSAFE, and its ability to secure and validate commercial-scale CCUS at the center of Wyoming’s premier low-carbon research efforts.

McLaughlin, Fred↗
DOE OSTI2024

Technical report Letter: RAFM, ODS steels and MMLC for Nuclear energy application

The lifetime, thermodynamic efficiency, safety and economic viability of new generation fission and fusion reactor concepts can largely be tied to the mechanical performance and stability of structural alloys under extreme environments. In this context, engineered nano materials could have broad-reaching impact on the future of advanced nuclear fuel-cycle and reactors. These systems are characterized by a large number density of interfaces which are efficient sinks for point defects and moderately biased; therefore limiting the deleterious effects of irradiation. Broadly, nuclear nano-technology deals with the use of the latest engineered-nanomaterials for improving the nuclear power performances and safety in all areas of nuclear energy production to bring new generations of nuclear power units. New advanced fuel assembly designs also have implications for securities and safeguards. To support the readiness for potential future license applications, an understanding of the technologies that would enable new reactor designs in the areas of component performance and domestic safeguards is necessary. This technical report letter work explores the technical issues and potential regulatory considerations associated with developing and adopting fuel claddings made of advanced nano- materials. Specifically three classes of nanomaterials are considered: (i) reduced activation ferritic/martensitic (RAFM) steels, (ii)oxide dispersed steels (ODS) and (iii) multi-metallic layered composites (MMLC).

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

An editorial to the Special Issue on “Severe climate Risks”

The history of this Special Issue (https://www.sciencedirect.com/special-issue/10JD7LNJNQ0) indirectly dates back to the early 1990s, when the signature of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change kicked-off an international political process based on one overarching and foundational principle: to avoid “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” at the global level. More than three decades later, such a principle remains central, though complementary aims made their way through the climate negotiation process, such as the importance of ensuring equity and justice, to give just one example here. Scientific knowledge also considerably progressed and we know more about the range of risks that climate change imposes and will continue to impose to the biosphere and humankind, worldwide and at all territorial levels. It is also clear that societal responses to these risks —“climate adaptation” as we know it— are increasingly happening, but definitely not at the pace of climate risk trends (Berrang-Ford et al., 2021, Erisken et al., 2021, Olazabal and Ruiz De Gopegui, 2021, Magnan et al., 2023a, Reckien et al., 2023, UNEP, 2023). As a result, concerns have emerged over the recent years in both the scientific and policy arenas around the idea that societies may not be able to address all climate risks, and that limits to adaptation and induced residual risks need to be considered more seriously. Such concerns further highlight the continuing importance of the imperative to minimise dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system, at any scale. But what does “dangerous interference” mean? How can we decide that we are entering the “dangerous” space, compared to a broader range of climate risks that would qualify as problematic but not necessarily “dangerous”? Who should make such a decision? Which conditions drive risk severity over time, including in the future? And what would be the environmental, economic, social and cultural implications of prioritising some climate risks over others? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was a pioneer in addressing such questions through the development of the “Key Risks” framing that describes those climate risks having the potential to become dangerous or “severe” over the course of this century (Schellnhuber et al., 2006, Schneider et al., 2007, Oppenheimer et al., 2014, O’Neill et al., 2022). The Fifth and Sixth assessment cycles (AR5 and AR6) went a step further by identifying about 120 Key Risks across regions and sectors, and clustering them into 8 “Representative Key Risks” covering a range of geographical systems (low-lying coasts, and to terrestrial and ocean ecosystems), sectors (critical infrastructure, living standards, human health, food security, and water security) and human dimensions (peace and mobility) (Oppenheimer et al., 2014, O’Neill et al., 2022). This Special Issue was born of the efforts of a range of authors, during the development of the IPCC AR6 main Assessment Report between 2019 and 2022, to characterise Key Risks and Representative Key Risks, and advance knowledge on what shapes “severe climate risks” conceptually as well as in the real-world. The series of papers forming this Special Issue is not intended to cover the topic exhaustively, but rather to give readers an overview through the following narrative: defining “severe climate risks” is highly challenging (Magnan et al., 2023b), but knowledge is expanding on the driving climate hazards (Tebaldi et al., 2023) and their implications on geographical systems, sectors and human dimensions, using here food security (Mirzabaev et al., 2023), human mobility (Gilmore et al., 2024) and peace (Buhaug et al., 2023) as illustrative examples. The overall intention is to support especially decision-makers, whatever the scale or sector considered, in asking severity-driven questions to identify sector- and context-specific “priority” risks from climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Treatment of Problematic Reactive Metal Wastes Using GeoMelt ICV - WM2020 Conference Paper

Decommissioning of sodium-cooled reactors and fast reactor technologies has generated a number of reactive metal waste configurations that are problematic to treat and typically lack cost effective treatment methods and disposition options. As a result, Veolia Nuclear Solutions, under contract with Idaho National Laboratory (owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC) demonstrated its GeoMelt® In-Container Vitrification (ICV)™ technology to safely convert sodium metal to a non-reactive vitrified oxide form. The demonstration project, supported by glass formulation and crucible testing, consisted of a series of ICV™ melts that processed elemental sodium into stable non-reactive glass. INL is currently implementing GeoMelt® technology as a means to safely and reliably convert radioactive reactive metal residues that contaminate sodium cooled reactor components into waste forms that comply with existing disposition pathways. Reactive metal wastes require treatment in order to remove the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) reactivity and ignitability characteristics to comply with land disposal restrictions. GeoMelt®, which is an alternative to other potential treatment approaches, provides a robust approach that chemically converts the reactive metals to an inert oxide while also immobilizing radionuclides in a vitrified waste form with durability equal to or better than vitrified nuclear fuel reprocessing wastes (very robust and inert waste forms). Most other treatment approaches generate hydrogen gas which is problematic. In 2016, Veolia Nuclear Solutions first demonstrated the effectiveness of the GeoMelt® ICV™ process in deactivating reactive sodium metal. Crucible, bench-scale, and engineering-scale demonstrations were conducted on several surrogate waste configurations with various ratios of sodium metal and glass-formers. Each ratio and configuration demonstrated complete deactivation of the surrogate sodium metal. Follow-on work in 2017 demonstrated the deactivation of reactive sodium by GeoMelt® ICV™ at a higher waste loading relative to previously demonstrated work performed in 2016; the higher waste loading optimized glass chemistry while enhancing the economical full-scale treatment of reactive metals. Additionally, follow-on demonstration testing in 2018 and 2019 focused on more complex shapes and other reactive-metals (mocked up Experimental Breeder Reactor II [EBR-II] subassembly, sodium filled heat exchanger, and a can containing sodium potassium alloy) which were all performed at engineering-scale. Since 2018, a 10-metric ton full-scale GeoMelt unit (GeoMelt® Richland) was designed, installed, and commissioned at Perma-Fix Northwest in Richland, Washington for the treatment of reactive metal wastes. As of September 2019, over 900 55-gallon drums containing a total of around 3,500 lb of sodium with low levels of radioactivity have been treated at GeoMelt ® Richland, with resulting glass monoliths disposed at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). A full-scale radiological demonstration melt on an actual EBR-II subassembly has also been performed using the full-scale melter in 2019. The GeoMelt® technology is a proven radioactive waste treatment technology capable of immobilizing radioactive wastes, including bulk rubble such as drums and other steel vessels usually without pretreatment. Utilizing the GeoMelt® technology to treat reactive metals eliminates pretreatment steps resulting from having to separate the reactive metal from steel containers or jackets as GeoMelt® can easily operate at temperatures sufficient to melt the steel and expose the reactive metal for treatment. Eliminating handling steps of reactive metals is a significant safety advantage since reactive metals are pyrophoric. The results generated as a part of the 2018-2019 demonstration program are presented in the paper.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Establishing a Technical Assistance Network to Build Capacity in Southwest Alaska (Southwest Alaska Energy Network - Final Report)

The Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference (SWAMC) is a non-profit regional membership economic development organization that represents the Aleutian/Pribilof Islands, Bristol Bay, and Kodiak regions of southwest Alaska. SWAMC applied for the DOE-OIE Establishment of an Inter-Tribal Technical Assistance Energy Providers Network grant FOA to work with our partners to provide energy planning and project development technical assistance. The project team was made up of SWAMC, three regional organizations, a management consulting firm, and a panel of technical consultants. SWAMC sub-contracted with the three Alaska Native regional non-profit organizations – Aleutian Pribilof Islands Association (APIA), Bristol Bay Native Association (BBNA), and Kodiak Area Native Association (KANA) – to fund full or partial Regional Energy Coordinator (REC) positions. The project period ran from September 2016 to March 2020. The project goal was to help southwest Alaska regional tribal partners and communities to develop efficient and financially sustainable structures for identifying and developing energy projects that enhance community resiliency and energy sustainability. This project established energy coordinators and management structures in the Aleutian, Bristol Bay, and Kodiak regions to expand technical assistance capacity of regional residents; demonstrate this capacity by advancing energy efficiency, heat, and power supply projects; and secure long-term funding commitments to establish a sustained technical assistance structure. The project team expanded technical assistance capacity of energy coordinators and regional stakeholders in several ways: by providing funding for the SWAMC project manager to attend three Office of Indian Energy trainings; for energy coordinators to attend numerous energy conferences; for utility clerks from several villages to receive one-on-one reporting training on Alaska’s Power Cost Equalization electric subsidy program; and for the Kodiak REC to complete the Arctic Remote Energy Networks Academy and NREL’s Executive Energy Leadership Academy. The energy coordinators demonstrated and shared their increased capacity by hosting several public events: SWAMC hosted two full-day energy workshops in February 2017 and 2018; the Kodiak REC hosted seven Energy Committee meetings for Kodiak stakeholders and gave several presentations at other events; and SWAMC and BBNA organized a Bristol Bay Regional Energy Visioning Session in May 2019. The project team created platforms to both share and request information to involve energy stakeholders in this project, including an energy website, a Facebook group, a periodic newsletter, surveys, mass emails, and paper mailers. An increase in regional capacity was demonstrated through several grant awards, including a $1.2 million USDA grant for Akhiok for an electric distribution infrastructure replacement; an AHFC Kickstarter grant for Aleknagik to audit 2 Tribal and 3 City buildings; and installation of an Air Source Heat Pump demonstration project in Atka. Two communities and one region – Ouzinkie (May 2017), Ugashik (July 2017), and the Bristol Bay region (May 2019) – utilized DOE’s technical assistance services to hold Strategic Energy Planning sessions with NREL and DOE facilitation assistance. And in early 2018, SWAMC established a parallel program, funded through a USDA Energy Audit and Renewable Energy Development grant to provide subsidized energy audits for small businesses in the region. SWAMC and partners have now completed energy audits of over 60 businesses (buildings and fishing vessels) and are currently operating a third round of the USDA program. Fifteen of those business owners have now received additional grant funding to cover 25% of the cost of the energy efficiency upgrades identified in the audit. This technical assistance structure will be sustained beyond DOE grant funding in several forms. As a sign of increased grant writing and project management capacity, the Kodiak Regional Energy Coordinator applied for and received a USDA Community Facilities Technical Assistance and Training grant to continue work begun under this program. Energy coordination tasks have been folded into existing economic development positions at SWAMC and at BBNA, ensuring long-term outreach and support in the region.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Conflicts of Greens’ in Renewable Energy Landscapes: Case Studies and a Planning Framework

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) through renewable energy deployment is a goal for many cities and nations to mitigate the effects of a rapidly changing climate while securing energy needs. Given national and state level policies on green energy to achieve GHG reduction targets, localities are considering utility-scale renewable energy (USRE) facilities on remote lands, rural areas, oceans, coastal waters and large rivers to meet the energy needs for urban residents and industries. Although these USRE facilities generate much “greener” electricity than fossil fuel power plants, locating them can pose conflicts with wildlife, including endangered, threatened and/or special status species, and the habitats that support wildlife populations (Brunette et al., 2013; Gasparatos et al. 2016; Mulvaney 2017), which lead to a “Conflict of Greens” (Ko et al., 2011). In addition to ecological impacts, conflicts over social and cultural resources in local communities lead to concerns over environmental justice, in this context “energy justice,” where negative environmental, social, and economic impacts of energy projects fall more heavily upon marginalized, vulnerable, or indigenous communities. The Pacific Rim region is a center of major and growing economies, and it has become a battlefield for competing “green” objectives. In addition to progressive renewable energy goals, such as in California, Hawaii, and Taiwan, countries around the Pacific Rim have the majority of the growth in manufacturing of wind and solar energy devices and also some of the highest levels of renewables deployment with China, India, and the US leading the way in wind and solar installations. Developing renewable energy source in the ocean such as offshore wind, tidal, and wave energy, are beginning to add to this mix. Given this challenge, the APRU SCL energy working group provides six case studies that address questions about the “Conflict of Greens” across the Pacific Rim including South Korea, Taiwan, and the United States (California, Hawaii, and Massachusetts). The literature review highlights the emerging ecological, social, and economic aspects of conflicts over siting renewables on the landscape. Using case studies, we examine the trial and errors in least-conflict spatial planning, data collection and analysis, public participation in decision-making, mitigation, social planning for energy transitions, and multi-scalar approaches. Lastly, we recommend interdisciplinary policy, planning, and design actions for sustainable energy landscapes across the Pacific Rim and beyond.

green versus green, renewable energy↗
DOE OSTI2020

Treatment of Problematic Reactive Metal Wastes Using the GeoMelt{sup R} In-Container Vitrification (ICV{sup TM}) Process - 20326

Decommissioning of sodium-cooled reactors and fast reactor technologies has generated a number of reactive metal waste configurations that are problematic to treat and typically lack cost effective treatment methods and disposition options. As a result, Veolia Nuclear Solutions, under contract with Idaho National Laboratory (owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and managed and operated by Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC) demonstrated its GeoMelt{sup R} In-Container Vitrification (ICV){sup TM} technology to safely convert sodium metal to a non-reactive vitrified oxide form. The demonstration project, supported by glass formulation and crucible testing, consisted of a series of ICV{sup TM} melts that processed elemental sodium into stable non-reactive glass. INL is currently implementing GeoMelt{sup R} technology as a means to safely and reliably convert radioactive reactive metal residues that contaminate sodium cooled reactor components into waste forms that comply with existing disposition pathways. Reactive metal wastes require treatment in order to remove the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) reactivity and ignitability characteristics to comply with land disposal restrictions. GeoMelt{sup R}, which is an alternative to other potential treatment approaches, provides a robust approach that chemically converts the reactive metals to an inert oxide while also immobilizing radionuclides in a vitrified waste form with durability equal to or better than vitrified nuclear fuel reprocessing wastes (very robust and inert waste forms). Most other treatment approaches generate hydrogen gas which is problematic. In 2016, Veolia Nuclear Solutions first demonstrated the effectiveness of the GeoMelt{sup R} ICV{sup TM} process in deactivating reactive sodium metal. Crucible, bench-scale, and engineering-scale demonstrations were conducted on several surrogate waste configurations with various ratios of sodium metal and glass formers. Each ratio and configuration demonstrated complete deactivation of the surrogate sodium metal. Follow-on work in 2017 demonstrated the deactivation of reactive sodium by GeoMelt{sup R} ICV{sup TM} at a higher waste loading relative to previously demonstrated work performed in 2016; the higher waste loading optimized glass chemistry while enhancing the economical full-scale treatment of reactive metals. Additionally, follow-on demonstration testing in 2018 and 2019 focused on more complex shapes and other reactive-metals (mocked up Experimental Breeder Reactor II [EBR-II] subassembly, sodium filled heat exchanger, and a can containing sodium potassium alloy) which were all performed at engineering scale. Veolia Nuclear Solutions designed, installed, and commissioned in September 2018, at Perma-Fix Northwest in Richland Washington, a 10-metric ton full-scale GeoMelt unit (GeoMelt{sup R} Richland) for the treatment of reactive metal wastes. As of September 2019, over 900 55-gallon drums containing a total of around 3,500 lb of sodium with low levels of radioactivity have been treated at GeoMelt{sup R} Richland, with resulting glass monoliths disposed at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). A full-scale radiological demonstration melt on an actual EBR-II subassembly has also been performed using the full-scale melter in 2019. The GeoMelt{sup R} technology is a proven radioactive waste treatment technology capable of immobilizing radioactive wastes, including bulk rubble such as drums and other steel vessels usually without pretreatment. Utilizing the GeoMelt{sup R} technology to treat reactive metals eliminates pretreatment steps resulting from having to separate the reactive metal from steel containers or jackets as GeoMelt{sup R} can easily operate at temperatures sufficient to melt the steel and expose the reactive metal for treatment. Eliminating handling steps of reactive metals is a significant safety advantage since reactive metals are pyrophoric. The results generated as a part of the 2018-2019 demonstration program are presented in the paper. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

An Overview of Policies Influencing Air Pollution from the Electricity Sector in South Asia

The electricity sector is a substantial source of air pollution and associated health problems in South Asia and elsewhere. Fossil-fueled power plants emit a wide variety of harmful pollutants. Those with the greatest health impacts are particulate matter and ozone. Once released into the atmosphere, there is no practical way to remove air pollutants, which means that policies designed to improve air quality have to limit the pollutants before release. However, tackling such pollution is challenging because developing economies also need to provide electricity as a basic necessity for their citizens and as an engine of economic growth. This report provides examples of policies impacting air pollution from the fossil-fuel electricity sector in the South Asian countries of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Some of this information was difficult to locate, so this is not a comprehensive study, but rather an overview or "scan" of the sector that includes examples of (1) policies that directly regulate air quality by limiting emissions from specific point sources (by restricting operating hours, for instance), and (2) indirect policies that incentivize or disincentivize polluting activities, such as policies to encourage fuel switching, for example. The report shows (1) the great variation among the policy instruments used in each country, (2) that many countries, especially those that have a mismatch between seasonal demand and resource availability, could improve energy security and reduce air pollution through increased cross-border electricity trade, and (3) some countries have contradictory policies (promoting both coal and renewables, for instance).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Flexible Siting Criteria and Staff Minimization for Micro-Reactors

The economic potential of micro-reactors is vast and underestimated. Commonly-emphasized applications include niche markets such as remote communities, mines and military bases. However, micro-reactors could be used as flexible energy generators also for larger markets, such as mobile and containerized agriculture and manufacturing facilities, district heating, micro-grids for data centers, sea ports, airports and hospitals. The implication is that micro-reactors may have to be deployed also in non-remote locations. Successful implementation of micro-reactors needs a navigable and predictable licensing process, technology-appropriate siting restrictions, risk-informed emergency and safety requirements, and practical operating and maintenance requirements. The primary goal of this project was to develop siting criteria that are tailored to micro-reactors deployable in densely-populated areas, e.g., urban environments. To achieve that goal, we compared the characteristics of the MIT research reactor (MITR) with those of leading micro-reactor concepts (e.g., eVinci, USNC, Aurora), and evaluated whether and how the MITR design basis (e.g., inherent safety features, engineered safety systems, source term, emergency planning and emergency operating procedures) and associated regulations may be applicable to these new micro-reactors as well. What makes MITR a unique analogue in this context is its small power rating (6 MWt) and physical size, mode of operations (24/7 with a somewhat more commercial flavor than typical university reactors), and especially its urban location. Of course significant differences exist, such as mission (power production vs. research) and the reactor design itself. Leveraging the MITR experience, this project was able to generate criteria that will allow micro-reactors to realize their full economic potential as flexible heat and electricity generators for a diverse portfolio of applications in non-remote locations. As such, the outcome of this project might encourage investment in and use of micro-reactors. A second goal of the project was to conceptualize a model of operations for micro-reactors that would minimize the staffing requirements, and thus reduce the cost of electricity and heat generated by these systems. Here too our approach was to systematically review the MITR experience and requirements, as well as survey the innovations in autonomous control technologies and monitoring (e.g., advanced sensors, drones, robotics, AI) that would permit a dramatic reduction in staffing at future micro-reactor installations. The scope of work was expanded after the start date to include also an evaluation of micro-reactor security, using the so-called consequence-based analysis, and the development of a methodology to perform dynamic risk assessment for micro-reactors, using system theory and modeling and simulation.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Demonstrating Advanced Nuclear Energy Solutions for Net Zero

Background/Objectives. The aggressive goals being set by nation states, communities, and private industry for decarbonization of grid electricity, industrial heat sources, and transportation around the world are imperative to mitigating the devastating effects that we are seeing from climate change. Although many of these goals focus on accomplishments by 2035 or 2050, the decisions that we make today won’t just impact the landscape of energy systems for the next 20 or 30 years—they will shape the world’s environment for centuries to come. That means that we can’t just focus on technologies that will get us to 2050, but technologies that will withstand our energy demands over that long-ranging future. Success will require us to utilize all of the clean energy resources that we have available to meet demands for electricity, heat, and steam, and we will need energy carriers such as hydrogen that do not emit additional greenhouse gases at the point of use. Nuclear energy, ranging from technologies in service today to advanced, higher temperature and modular systems that will be in service this decade, will provide a robust complement to renewable energy resources that operate variably. Researchers across the U.S. Department of Energy laboratory complex are working to advance multiple aspects of these clean energy solutions, with many focusing on integrated energy system solutions that leverage all available clean energy assets to meet wide-ranging energy demands. Approach/Activities. Nuclear energy is a proven, zero-emission option during operation that can provide consistent, dispatchable power to meet electricity demands while also providing high-quality heat that can meet energy demands beyond the electricity sector. Energy system design should seek to maximize these assets. As a dispatchable energy source with a small land utilization footprint, nuclear energy can be collocated with renewable resources, and the smaller systems that will be deployed this decade (ranging from a few megawatts to hundreds of megawatts) can be installed right where that energy is needed. Integrated nuclear and renewable systems will enhance power grid reliability and resilience, and they will help stabilize the grid through their increasingly flexible operation. Licensing, installation, and broad adoption of these advanced nuclear energy systems are expected to progress significantly in the 2020s, but this may be longer than desired by some stakeholders wishing to implement impactful clean energy decisions today. However, one must recall that nuclear energy systems will operate for 80 or more years, as is being demonstrated by current fleet nuclear systems. The nuclear community is extremely thorough in reviewing these systems with regard to safety and security; these efforts ensure that the deployed systems will continue to provide reliable, resilient energy over that operational lifetime. That investment of time up front will ensure that we can support energy demands over the centuries to come. While advanced nuclear technologies move through this process, communities and private industry may choose to install renewable generation systems that can later be coupled to the complementary nuclear systems as they become available—thus moving closer to the net zero goals in the near term. Choosing technologies and deployment configurations that allow small modular nuclear powerhouses to be added to these “energy parks” as they become available will ensure that advanced technologies can be readily adopted to support growing demands for clean energy. Results/Lessons Learned. The primary focus of integrated energy systems (IES) research is to assess the technical and economic potential of novel multi-input, multioutput solutions that are expected to enhance energy system flexibility, reliability, and resilience as we pursue a clean energy transition. Various energy applications and product streams beyond electricity are being evaluated, ranging from generation of potable water to production of hydrogen, fertilizers, synthetic fuels, and various chemicals. In early FY23 Idaho National Laboratory (INL) will commission thermal energy generation systems that emulate nuclear fission energy input using electric heating and will allow for integrated system testing with thermal energy storage, hydrogen production via high temperature electrolysis (HTE), and power systems hardware to demonstrate operation of a clean energy park within a microgrid or larger grid infrastructure, supporting up to 450 kW of heat input via electric heating and demonstrating operation of HTE systems at the multi-hundred kW scale. This presentation will highlight the wide array of RD&D being conducted at INL and partner laboratories to develop and deploy nuclear and renewable-based IES that will be key to achieving our net zero goals, including both computational and experimental demonstrations. By working with key collaborators in industry, analytical st

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2020

Online Optimization for Networked Distributed Energy Resources With Time-Coupling Constraints

This paper proposes a Lyapunov optimization-based online distributed (LOOD) algorithmic framework for active distribution networks (ADNs) with numerous photovoltaic inverters and inverter air conditionings (IACs). In the proposed scheme, ADNs can track an active power setpoint reference at the substation in response to transmission-level requests while concurrently minimizing the social utility loss and ensuring the security of voltages. Conventional distributed optimization methods are rarely feasible to track the optimal solutions in fast variable environments using a fine-grained sampling interval where the underlying optimization problem evolves with the iterations of the algorithms. In contrast, based on the framework of online convex optimization (OCO), the developed approach uses a distributed algebraic update to compute the next round decisions relying on the current feedback of measurements. Notably, the time-coupling constraints of IACs are decoupled for online implementation with Lyapunov optimization technique. An incentive scheme is tailored to coordinate the customer-owned assets in lieu of the direct control from network operators. Optimality and convergency are characterized analytically. Finally, we corroborate the proposed method on a modified version of 33-node test feeder. Benchmark tests show that the proposed method is computationally and economically efficient, and outperforming existing algorithms.

active distribution networks↗
DOE OSTI2024

NORTH DAKOTA CARBONSAFE PHASE III: SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND PERMITTING OF GEOLOGIC STORAGE OF CARBON DIOXIDE

The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), in partnership with Minnkota Power Cooperative Inc. (Minnkota), SLB, and Computer Modelling Group Ltd. (CMG), supported wide-scale deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) as part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory Carbon Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE) Initiative Phase III. This phase included the acquisition, analysis, and development of information to fully characterize two storage complexes to demonstrate viable storage resources for commercial volumes of CO2 (defined by DOE as a minimum of 50 million tonnes [MMt] of CO2 within a 30-year period) (National Energy Technology Laboratory, 2024). Phase III also involved the preparation, submission, and approval of North Dakota underground injection control (UIC) Class VI storage facility permits (SFPs)—required precursors to applications for Class VI injection well permits. The presumed viability of commercial-scale CCS, situated adjacent to Minnkota’s Milton R. Young Station (MRYS), is validated by Minnkota’s continued pursuit of Project Tundra—an initiative to build the world’s largest lignite-based CCS project in central North Dakota (www.projecttundrand.com). Project Tundra comprises two scopes of work, Tundra Capture (installation of postcombustion CO2 capture at MRYS) and Tundra SGS (secure geologic storage). The efforts of North Dakota CarbonSAFE Phase III, Site Characterization and Permitting, supported Tundra SGS. Extensive site-specific characterization activities included a successful multimeasurement geophysical approach and drilling a stratigraphic test well (J-ROC 1, subsequently renamed Liberty-1) adjacent to MRYS. Core collection and analyses, downhole testing and fluid sampling, and geophysical logging were performed on J-ROC 1 and on a nearby stratigraphic test well (known as J-LOC 1), which was drilled, cored, and tested under a complementary project funded by the North Dakota Lignite Research Program. The injection tests performed on J-LOC 1 positively impacted the CarbonSAFE project, resulting in fewer proposed injection wells and significant construction, operations, and monitoring cost savings. The characterization data collected and analyses performed were integrated into geologic models, and successive numerical simulations were run to determine CO2 plume extent and subsurface pressure buildup associated with the planned CO2 injection rate of nearly 4 MMt per year. The latter doubles the CarbonSAFE Initiative goal with an estimated 100 MMt of CO2 stored in 20 years. Application of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) method for estimating the Class VI Rule area of review (AOR) to the overpressurized Broom Creek Formation inspired an alternative method of calculation, called risk-based AOR delineation. This peer-reviewed method was applied for the first time during the storage facility-permitting process. The two SFP applications submitted in 2021 successfully resulted in North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC) orders in 2022 authorizing the creation of the storage facility areas and amalgamation of pore space as well as establishing financial responsibility requirements. After approval of the SFPs, Minnkota filed in 2022 applications for permits to reenter the J-ROC 1 well and to drill two new wells—all with the intended purpose to become Class VI injection wells. To establish eligibility under the Internal Revenue Code for Section 45Q tax incentives, a monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) plan was prepared and submitted by Minnkota to EPA in 2022, resulting in the first such plan approved in North Dakota. Also in 2022, under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Minnkota prepared and submitted an environmental information volume (EIV) describing the proposed CCS project and associated potential environmental impacts. Based on the EIV, DOE determined that the proposed construction project required an environmental assessment, and Minnkota submitted the first draft in 2023 and a revised draft in 2024. Both submissions were followed by a public comment period. Subsequently, DOE issued a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) on September 13, 2024. A successful outreach program, strongly based in the production, presentation, and dissemination of informational material, fostered an environment to aid stakeholders in making informed decisions regarding the planned project. Opportunities for public input were provided at various steps along the way, including at county planning and zoning meetings, before and during the SFP administrative hearing, and during environmental assessment public comment periods. In addition, land/pore space owners and mineral owners had various points of contact, including granting access rights, securing pore space leasing, and mineral owner notifications. Based upon the successful storage facility permitting issued by NDIC, approval of the MRV plan by EPA, and receipt of a FONSI under the NEPA, Minnkota is continuing its pursuit of Project Tundra. In December 2023, the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations under its Carbon Capture Demonstrations Projects Program announced funding for the capture system (Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, 2023) and a proposal for CarbonSAFE Phase IV: Construction funding was submitted in March 2024 for the storage project. A go/no-go decision to proceed with construction and operations in the Broom Creek Formation is anticipated in 2024. References National Energy Technology Laboratory, CarbonSafe Initiative, https://netl.doe.gov/carbon-management/carbon-storage/carbonsafe (accessed August 2024). Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, 2023, OCED selects three projects in CA, ND, and TX to reduce harmful carbon pollution, create new economic opportunities, and advance carbon reducing technologies, December, www.energy.gov/oced/articles/oced-selects-three-projects-ca-nd-and-tx-reduce-harmful-carbon-pollution-create-new (accessed August 2024).

Peck, Wesley↗
DOE OSTI2026

Resilient Crop Production for the Bioeconomy: Frontier Science for the Bioeconomy Workshop Series

A bioeconomy based on energy, chemicals, and bioproducts derived from nonfood crops promotes U.S. prosperity, energy independence, and national security. Crop productivity (i.e., yield) affects profitability for farmers, whereas biomass and seed oil quality affects profitability for biorefineries through the conversion efficiency of feedstock crops into energy, chemicals, and bioproducts. Scientific breakthroughs in plant genetics and genomics, ecological processes, bioprocessing, microbial engineering and design, and conversion technologies have improved the potential market viability of products derived from nonfood crops specifically cultivated as biomass and seed oil feedstocks. Improving understanding of a plant’s complex responses to withstand or recover from stress is crucial to maintaining feedstock yield and quality, particularly in challenging production zones. Stress may be related to biotic or abiotic (i.e., nonliving) environmental conditions that negatively affect plant growth, development, and productivity. Research and development to enhance the environmental resilience of feedstock crops will enable improved production by minimizing losses during stress and improving production on currently economically nonviable marginal lands.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Plan to Qualify New Fuel for the High Flux Isotope Reactor for Material Minimization

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is one of five high power research reactors the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program, Office of Conversion is working to convert from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. This effort stems from the primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing, and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project is pursuing fuel qualification and licensing of LEU fuels to support the high-performance reactors. All high-performance reactors except HFIR will be converted to LEU monolithic uranium-molybdenum alloy fuel. HFIR will be evaluated for conversion to LEU using a uranium silicide fuel, namely, U3Si2-Al dispersion fuel. The mission of the USHPRR Project is to develop the technology needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, worldwide use of HEU in civilian applications. The goal is to develop the technical means needed to use low enriched uranium (LEU) instead of HEU fuel in research and test reactors without significant penalties in performance, economics, or safety of the reactors. The USHPRR Project has four major elements, called Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ) managed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Fuel Fabrication (FF) managed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Reactor Conversion (RC) managed at Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), and Cross-Cutting (CC) managed at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). FQ is responsible for the qualification of the fuel type. RC is responsible for supporting reactor conversion analysis and overseeing licensing submittals leading to conversions of domestic reactors to LEU fuel. For the FQ effort, FQ (INL) worked in collaboration with RC (Argonne) and ORNL to develop the plan for the uranium silicide fuel qualification for HFIR. The resulting HFIR Fuel Qualification Plan provides the general approach for the USHPRR team to move the selected uranium silicide fuel design for HFIR conversion through qualification. Authorization and use in HFIR will be approved through the DOE’s Office of Science. Uranium silicide fuel was previously qualified in NUREG-1313 at an approximate maximum heat flux of 1.4 MW/m2 and a maximum fuel section temperature of about 130°C. In addition to the different regulator process utilized by DOE, these upper limits will be exceeded in HFIR; therefore, further testing will be necessary to ensure the fuel can meet HFIR qualification requirements. The HFIR fuel loading may exceed 4.8 gU/cm3 which was determined in the NUREG-1313 safety evaluation to be acceptable for use in non-power NRC-licensed reactors provided there exist no other safety considerations. In addition, the uranium silicide fuel will need to be qualified in a HFIR-specific design. This plan includes the currently available information from the USHPRR Project Functions and Requirements document and expands these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results providing evidence that the requirements have been met. Data collection methods are discussed as well as the process to show that the requirements have been met. This document is designed to provide a pathway for researchers to obtain data necessary and at the appropriate quality level for HFIR fuel qualification

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Plan to Qualify New Fuel for the High Flux Isotope Reactor for Material Minimization

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is one of five high power research reactors the Office of Material Management and Minimization (M3) Program, Office of Conversion is working to convert from using highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to using low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. This effort stems from the primary objective within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to achieve permanent threat reduction by minimizing, and when possible, eliminating weapon-usable nuclear material around the world. Under M3’s Office of Conversion, the U.S. High Performance Research Reactor (USHPRR) Project is pursuing fuel qualification and licensing of the high-performance reactors to operate with LEU fuels. All high-performance reactors except HFIR will be converted to LEU monolithic uranium-molybdenum alloy fuel. HFIR will be evaluated for conversion to LEU using a uranium silicide fuel, namely, U3Si2-Al dispersion fuel.The mission of the USHPRR Project is to develop the technology needed to reduce, and eventually eliminate, worldwide use of HEU in civilian applications. The goal is to develop the technical means needed to use low enriched uranium (LEU) instead of HEU fuel in research and test reactors without significant penalties in performance, economics, or safety of the reactors. The USHPRR Project has four major elements, called Pillars: Fuel Qualification (FQ) managed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Fuel Fabrication (FF) managed at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Reactor Conversion (RC) managed at Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), and Cross-Cutting (CC) managed at Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). FQ is responsible for the qualification of the fuel type. RC is responsible for supporting reactor conversion analysis and overseeing licensing submittals leading to conversions of domestic reactors to LEU fuel. For the FQ effort, FQ (INL) worked in collaboration with RC (Argonne) and ORNL to develop the plan for the uranium silicide fuel qualification for HFIR.The resulting HFIR Fuel Qualification Plan provides the general approach for the USHPRR team to move the selected uranium silicide fuel design for HFIR conversion through qualification. Authorization and use in HFIR will be approved through the DOE’s Office of Science. Uranium silicide fuel was previously qualified in NUREG-1313 at an approximate maximum heat flux of 1.4 MW/m2 and a maximum fuel section temperature of about 130°C. In addition to the different regulator process utilized by DOE, these upper limits will be exceeded in HFIR; therefore, further testing will be necessary to ensure the fuel can meet HFIR qualification requirements. The HFIR fuel loading may exceed 4.8 gU/cm3 which was determined in the NUREG-1313 safety evaluation to be acceptable for use in non-power NRC-regulated reactors provided there exist no other safety considerations. In addition, the uranium silicide fuel will need to be qualified in a HFIR-specific design. This plan includes the currently available information from the USHPRR Project Functions and Requirements document and expands these requirements to ensure that planned tests have traceable results providing evidence that the requirements have been met. Data collection methods are discussed as well as the process to show that the requirements have been met. This document is designed to provide a pathway for researchers to obtain data necessary and at the appropriate quality level for HFIR fuel qualification.

Shokes, Tamara↗