Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “peat”

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 379 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Manufacture of Carbon Foam in Continuous Process at Atmospheric Pressure

CFOAM LLC has been manufacturing CFOAM® vitreous carbon foam from coal in panel form for several years. The process is currently set up in batch mode as two steps, where the first step is conducted at very high pressure. In order to reduce cost and increase capacity, a new process for making carbon foam is being developed that can be performed at atmospheric pressure. This advance in turn would enable the development of a continuous manufacturing process, which is also being pursued. Both carbon foam panels and light weight aggregates are being investigate. Progress on the evolution of the pilot scale manufacturing plant and initial results of processing, microstructure, properties and performance of carbon foam products made using this new process will be discussed. This project is being supported by a cooperative agreement with the Department of Energy – National Energy Technology Laboratory (DE-FOA-0002185, Area of Interest 4: Coal-Derived Carbon Foam Produced via a Continuous Process, award number DE-FE-0031992).

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Staged OMB for Modular Gasifier/Burner

The goal of this final project report is to comprehensively summarize the work conducted on project DE-FE0031506. In accordance with the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO), the University of Kentucky Center for Applied Energy Research (UK CAER) (Recipient) has developed a staged opposed multi-burner (OMB) gasifier, scaled down from a commercial gasification technology to utilize coal slurry as feed for the high-temperature gasification. The project involved the design, fabrication, commissioning, parametric testing, and performance validation of the entrained gasifier with multiple burners to narrow the major near-term technical gaps that impede the application of small-size gasification by modularizing the system. Project results verified the UK CAER approach to address the major technical challenges on the gasification modularization for a distributed application at a small scale of 1-5 MWe, while maintaining advantages in cost and flexibility, which include: 1) a cost-effective burner configuration to provide high flexibility in both load and fuel feed; 2) the modularized staged-OMB to provide better gasification performance such as a desired temperature profile, better fuel conversion, better gasification efficiency, and long lifetimes of the refractory wall and burners; and 3) load control simply through changing the number of burners firing. UK CAER’s staged gasifier configuration, fuel blend performance, and economic evaluation shows promise, as summarized in this report, as an effective means for improved gasification efficiency with reduced operation cost and process complexity.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Business Models for Coal Plant Decommissioning

Aging coal-fired power plants are retiring across the United States. Researchers at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory studied coal-fired power plant decommissioning business models to support program development for the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (EERE) to engage with communities affected by power plant retirement processes. Evaluating and reducing the impact on coal-dependent communities from phasing out coal production is a crucial piece of nationwide economic development and community-directed engagement in the clean energy future. This report describes the steps in the typical coal-fired power plant decommissioning process, including analysis of the following key factors: Drivers including policy and regulations, competition with other fuels, and corporate responsibility goals; Types of coal plant decommissioning including plant retirement without full decommissioning, repurposing with fuel switch, redeveloping to utilize existing transmission, and decommissioning and repurposing with other commercial activities; and, Costs of coal plant decommissioning, including variations across regulated and deregulated markets and the funding resources to support decommissioning activities. The details described in this report relied heavily on the availability of local news reports and communications regarding plant retirements, as the researchers identified a lack of formal literature surrounding business models for coal plant decommissioning and a need for a more robust source material collection. In addition, a lack of oversight entities responsible for decommissioning processes may have led to this shortfall of information. Future research regarding coal plant decommissioning can include quantitative studies on power plant retirement drivers, procedures, and costs, qualitative assessments on affects decommissioning has on surrounding communities, investors, and other stakeholders, and identifying best practices to engage community stakeholders in the decommissioning process.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Coal-dependent Communities in Transition: Identifying Best Practices to Ensure Equitable Outcomes

The U.S. coal industry is experiencing a sharp increase in the numbers of retired and/or decommissioned coal-fired power plants across the U.S. In the years between 2010-2019, around 102 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired generating capacity has been announced to be decommissioned, representing more than 546 coal-fired power plant units, and an additional 17 GW is planned to be decommissioned by 2025. This change in the energy production landscape presents an impact on the social, environmental, and economic prospects of coal-dependent communities. This report examined the role of communities in the coal power plant decommissioning process and provided community-identified best practices to ensure an equitable process. The experiences of four coal-dependent communities—Wise County, VA, Muskegon, MI, Anderson County, TN, and Becker, MN—are presented as case studies to understand the impacts of the decommissioning process, and associated best practices, from the communities’ perspective. The report results highlight the need to recognize that the decommissioning decision-making process must be community-based to be equitable. Each community’s input is key to the transition away from coal power because there is no one-size-fits-all development plan. In other words, each community’s trajectory through the decommissioning process—from the retirement decision-making stage to the final site redevelopment phase—is unique because each community has distinct needs and wants from the energy transition. What is best for one community may not be suited for another. Ultimately, the framework for site development and community revitalization post-decommissioning cannot be universal because each community’s profile—from a social, cultural, and economic perspective—is different. Community impacts of power plant decommissioning are not limited to job and revenue losses. Communities are likely to be impacted culturally, socially, environmentally, and have long-term health-based impacts that should be acknowledged and addressed in post-retirement plans. Commonly identified decommissioning best practices include: Early and continued engagement throughout, with a number of mediums for communication and feedback (e.g., in-person sessions, virtual meetings, written comment opportunities); Early planning of post-decommissioning projects to replace lost jobs, revenue, and economic activity; Recognition (and mitigation, if possible) of social impacts on the community due to plant closure; Transparency throughout the process, with trusted information being provided about the decommissioning process and timeline; potential impacts on the workforce, economy, and environment; and the feasibility of alternative site uses; Identification of funding sources, technical experts, and/or strategic partnerships to support decommissioning and the affected communities upfront; and, Acknowledgment of communities as stakeholders who have a role in the conversation and right to determine their futures. Three key areas for assisting coal-dependent communities affected by the energy transition: Technical assistance: assessment of site feasibility for alternative uses or to repower with new technologies; Cross-partnership engagement and collaboration: facilitate knowledge-sharing of “lessons learned” about the decommissioning process between communities and provide guidance for decision-making processes; and, Financial assistance: access to grant and/or loan programs to assist with redevelopment survey, bolster community economic security through job creation, and cover environmental clean-up costs. Technical assistance, cross-partnership engagement, and financial aid can be mobilized to help communities throughout various stages of the decommissioning process, including the retirement decision, the site reclamation phase, and eventual revitalization of the site and surrounding community.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Fuels Characterization for National Research Council Canada 2-m Pool Fire Test Series

This report provides a detailed analysis of the physical and chemical properties of three liquid hydrocarbon fuels: heptane, Bakken crude, and a diluted bitumen, that were subsequently tested in a series of 2-m pool fire experiments at Sandia National Laboratories for the National Research Council Canada. Properties such as relative density, vapor pressure (VPCR x ), composition, and heat of combustion were evaluated. The heptane analysis, with relative density = 0.69 (at 15°C), confirmed that the material tested was consistent with high-purity (>99%) n-heptane. The Bakken crude, with a relative density = 0.81 (at 15°C), exhibited a vapor pressure by VPCR 0.2 (37.8°C) in the range 120-157 kPa. The dilbit, with a relative density = 0.92 (at 15°C) exhibited a vapor pressure by VPCR 0.2 (37.8°C) in the range 85-98 kPa. Solids remaining in the test pans after the pool fires were also collected and weighed. No detectable solids were left after the heptane burns. In contrast, the crude oils left some brittle, black solid residue. On average, dilbit pool fires left about 40 more residue by mass than Bakken pool fires for equivalent mass of fuel feed.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

SECARB Post Injection Assessment Report

The Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) managed the overall Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB) Phase III project and The Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG), at the University of Texas at Austin, managed all activities associated with the Early Test field site near Cranfield, Mississippi (the Early Test or Cranfield Project). The SECARB project at Cranfield was focused downdip of the oil rim and on demonstrating the stacked nature of the storage potential at this location: enhanced oil recovery (EOR) up-dip and saline downdip. Because the injection for EOR continued after the SECARB project ended, no actual post-injection period occurred. However, information collected during the SECARB-monitored injection period, including pressure and CO2 plume position, was utilized in an EOR carbon lifecycle assessment. The carbon lifecycle assessment provided insight on tracking injection fronts and production efficiencies across the field. To complete the post injection assessment, taking into account the continuing EOR period after closeout of SECARB field activities, this report provides data and analysis done under another DOE-funded project. The follow up project focused on the carbon lifecycle of EOR and included an assessment of EOR at as-operated and under possible future scenarios. This work was published by Hossieni et al. (2018) and Hosseininoosheri (2019).

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

SECARB Semi-Annual Field Review Reports - Early Test

The Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) managed the overall Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB) Phase III project and The Bureau of Economic Geology (BEG), at the University of Texas at Austin, managed all activities associated with the Early Test field site near Cranfield, Mississippi (the Early Test or Cranfield Project). BEG was assisted in the management of site activities by Sandia Technologies (Sandia). BEG and Sandia implemented reporting procedures that included monthly and quarterly technical progress reports, as well as periodic reporting on key field activities. Subsequent sections of this report catalog the field activities and are organized in a semiannual chronology. The Cranfield Project was located approximately 12 miles east of Natchez, Mississippi. Denbury Onshore, LLC, began operating a commercial CO 2 flood of the field (using the subsurface injection of CO 2 for EOR) in June 2008. Carbon dioxide from the Jackson Dome, a natural source near Jackson, Mississippi, was delivered to the Cranfield oilfield via pipeline. Beginning in October 2008, the SECARB Early Test team characterized the surface and subsurface of the Cranfield site. During the field test CO 2 was injected into the lower Tuscaloosa Formation, a regionally extensive saline formation with the potential to hold millions of tons of CO 2 emissions. By January 2015, the team injected more than 11 million metric tons of CO 2 and monitored a total stored CO 2 mass of 5,326,975 metric tons. SECARB’s study operations occurred in four integrated research program areas within Cranfield field: (1) the High Volume Injection Test area (HiVIT); (2) the Detailed Area of Study (DAS); (3) the Geomechanical area; and (4) the near-surface observatory, also called the “P-site.” Carbon dioxide injection activities were conducted at the HiVIT and the DAS. Figure 1.1-1 provides a depiction of the DAS.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

SECARB 2020 Semi-Annual Field Review Reports - Anthropogenic Test

The Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) managed the overall Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB) Phase III project and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) managed all activities associated with the Anthropogenic Test site. Advanced Resources International, Inc. (ARI) assisted EPRI with the management of site activities. EPRI and ARI followed reporting procedures that included monthly and quarterly technical progress reports, as well as periodic reporting on key field activities. Subsequent sections of this report catalog the field activities and are organized in a semi-annual chronology. The SECARB Anthropogenic Test was the largest demonstration of a fully integrated, pulverized coal-fueled carbon capture and storage (CCS) project in the United States as of 2012 and supports a commercial prototype of CO 2 capture; transportation; subsurface storage; and monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA); and assessment. The demonstration-scale, post-combustion CO 2 capture facility at Alabama Power Company’s Plant Barry diverted flue gas (25MW equivalent) from its Unit #5 coal burning facility and captured the CO 2 using Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) KM-CDRTM advanced amine technology. The captured CO2 was compressed at Plant Barry and transported by pipeline to the injection location southeast of Citronelle, Alabama. The Citronelle Project’s geologic storage and MVA sites were located on the flanks of the Citronelle Dome, approximately three miles southeast of the city of Citronelle. The injection zone, the Paluxy Formation, a saline formation that occurs at approximately 9,400 feet and overlies the oil production horizon of the Citronelle oilfield, presents a favorable injection reservoir in terms of areal extent and petrophysical characteristics. The confining zone, the basal shale of the overlying Washita-Fredericksburg Formation, is persistent throughout the Citronelle area and possesses the appropriate criteria to act as an effective CO 2 seal.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Geologic Risk Assessment Activities at SECARB Cranfield, MS Site

Risk Assessment (RA) of RCSP Phase 3 sites is a DOE requirement and valuable to DOE’s program because this process encourage careful consideration of elements that could damage an individual project, or if severe ,damage credibility and public commercial acceptance of the sequestration process. Poor outcomes even from small projects can have negative consequences larger than the cost to the individual project. In addition, practice in risk assessment compared to project evolution is needed as part of the confidence-building toward future large scale, long term industrial activities.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

SECARB Regional Project Assessment

The SECARB Cranfield Early Test Project was designed to safely demonstrate large-scale, long-term CO 2 injection and storage in a CO 2 -enhanced oil recovery (EOR) operation and associated saline reservoir. Storage during EOR operations has the potential to offset commercial costs, holding a significant promise for future large-scale deployment in the southeastern United States. Denbury Onshore LLC began CO 2 -EOR operations in July 2008 at the Cranfield oilfield located east of Natchez, Mississippi (Figure 1). The location offered an ideal setting to investigate storage monitoring at a commercial CO 2 -EOR operation. The field team, led by the Gulf Coast Carbon Center of the Bureau of Economic Geology at the University of Texas at Austin, deployed the largest suite of monitoring, verification, accounting (MVA) technologies to collect data to assess long-term CO 2 utilization and storage. The CO 2 injection interval is within the 3,000-meter-deep fluvial lower Tuscaloosa Formation, a large and regionally extensive saline reservoir, at a broad four-way structural closure that defines the Cranfield oilfield. Tests were conducted in the oil-producing area as well as in the non-oil-producing brine aquifer. The CO 2 used during EOR operation was transported via pipeline from the Jackson Dome, a natural source of CO 2 . The study focused on four integrated research areas: (1) the High-Volume Injection Test area (HiVIT); (2) the Detailed Area of Study (DAS); (3) the Geomechanical area; and (4) the near-surface observatory, also called the “P-site.” CO 2 injection occurred at the HiVIT and the DAS (Figure 2 and Figure 3). The DAS was located down-dip of the oil-water interface of the Cranfield oilfield. The well layout included one injection well and two down-dip observation wells. The team was the first of the regional partnerships to monitor more than 1 million metric tons of CO 2 . At the end of the project, the team monitored more than 11 million metric tons of CO 2 injected and 5 million metric tons of CO 2 stored. The Cranfield Project was the fifth project worldwide, and the first such project in the United States, to reach this CO 2 injection volume while being monitored to demonstrate storage effectiveness.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Project Management, Including Data Management Best Practices Framework (Best Management Practice; Work Product 12.3.b)

The Project Management documentation includes: (1) background on the RCSP Initiative and its best practices development process; (2) a historical perspective of best practices for project management; (3) a comparison of the roles of project managers, functional managers, and operations managers; (4) an overview of project management practices for field activities; and discussions of (5) managing change, (6) managing data, and (7) managing knowledge and information.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2020

Information Products & Communication Materials for SSEB, SGA, SLC and Partners [Slides]

Contents include the following: 1) Southeastern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB)–Southern States Energy Board's 48th Annual Meeting, August 8, 2008; 2) Southern States Energy Board Carbon Management Program SSEB Associate Members Meeting, August 21, 2009; 3) Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) Demonstration Project, August 21, 2009; 4) Clean Energy in the Southern Region, August 27, 2010; 5) Carbon Management–Southern Leadership of a Regional Partnership, October 17, 2011; 6) Southeastern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership "Knowledge Sharing", August 10, 2012; 7) Southeastern Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership; 8) Site Visit by Southern Legislative Group, July 30, 2013; 9) SECARB Awards Anthropogenic Test, March 4, 2014; 10) Southern Company/MHI Ltd. 500 TPD CCS Demonstration; 11) SECARB Anthropogenic Test Project Assessment, March 4-5, 2014; 12) Advanced Monitoring Technologies SECARB Phase III CO 2 Storage Citronell, Alabama, March 4, 2014; 13) Geomechanics at Cranfield, March 5, 2014; 14) Gulf Coast Carbon Center Near-Surface Update, March 4-5, 2014; 15) Monitoring Design Best Practices, March 5, 2014; 16) Special Projects–Carbon Management Program, 2015; 17) Special Projects, November 2-3, 2016; 18) Carbon Management Program Carbon Capture & Storage Projects, September 24, 2017; 19) Remarks Before the 58th Annual Meeting of the Executive Committee, September 16, 2018; 20) Annual Business Session, September 24, 2019; and 21) Recent Activities & 2019-2020 Elections Insights, February 7, 2020.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Advanced Cost-Effective Coal-Fired Rotating Detonation Combustor for High Efficiency Power Generation

Coal-based detonation as a means of heat addition in power generation devices is a revolutionary “out of the box” technology concept, wherein it is theoretically possible to achieve an increase in total pressure across the combustor as opposed to a loss of available energy as is the case in conventional combustion systems. Detonation is a revolutionary technology concept of pressure gain combustion that exploits pressure rise from the combustion process to augment high flow momentum and pressures. Recognizing that pressure gain combustion has become a topic of elevated national interest, high energetic modes (exergy) pressure gain combustion (PGC) systems are required. Pressure gain combustion is a key enabling technology for maintaining technological superiority in the development of advanced power generation systems. Pressure gain combustion is an innovative scheme of turbulent combustion that considerably increases thermodynamic cycle efficiencies (~10-20%). This project extends the State-of-the-Art by providing the first direct experimental and computational data of operability dynamics and performance characterization data and create the first validated Coal-Fired RDC investigations. Coal-based RDC is an innovative revolutionary technology that would result in high efficiency power generation and reduced of harmful emissions. Also, the fundamental and open source nature of the project will benefit a broader scientific and industry audience who will be able to utilize the outcomes of this project for advancing the coal-fired RDC power generation development.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Advanced Syngas Cleanup Using Radically Engineered Modular Systems

The overall objective of this project was to address key knowledge gaps and develop modular sorbent-based warm syngas cleanup designs that will enable 1- to 5-MW REMS-based plants to be cost-competitive with large state-of-the-art commercial plants utilizing all of our abundant domestic coal reserves. We proposed to develop two potential new desulfurization process designs specifically targeted for REMS plants for combined heat and power or polygeneration from coal gasification. The first design is a modification of our commercially offered dual transport reactor design based Warm-gas Desulfurization Process (WDP) where the transport-reactor regenerator is replaced with a fluidized-bed regenerator. This design leverages the learnings obtained from our pre-commercial demonstration testing of the WDP technology for over 3,000 hours and conclusions from the lessons learned workshop. The second design is a fixed-bed process that leverages the successful composition and chemistry of our WDP sorbent to develop an effective fixed-bed sorbent formulation and fixed-bed process design. These two potential desulfurization process designs have a strong technical likelihood of success and offer the best opportunity to effectively employ design standardization, mass production and advanced manufacturing techniques to enable cost competitiveness for syngas cleanup at smaller scale.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Report on High-Fidelity Dynamic Modeling of a Coal-Fired Steam Power Plant

As a result of the growth of renewables including solar and wind energy with fluctuating production, fossil fuel power plants are being required to cycle between high and low power production. This cycling is both at a greater frequency and over a wider range than in the past. In many cases, power plants are not designed for this type of cycling operation but can nonetheless endure these challenging operation requirements under the right conditions. In this project, optimal solution for enhanced flexible operations are being investigated using model based estimation and control techniques. To support the development of model-based estimator and model-based controls at GE Global Research, GE Steam Power configured a dynamic model using a reference steam plant design including the boiler, turbine, and water/steam conditioning systems as well as the controls needed for plant cycling with stability and reliability. The dynamic model was built using the APROS® software from VTT, and then calibrated to multiple load conditions from full load (100%TMCR) to partial loads (75%TMCR, 50%TMCR and 25%TMCR) based on internally developed steady state heat balance models at the unit level. These internal heat balance models are based on first principles and extensive engineering experiences from GE Steam Power as an OEM and a services provider. This topical report presents the structure of the unit level dynamic model, the tuning process, and representative simulation results from typical load cycling simulations using the dynamic model.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Consortium for Production of Affordable Carbon Fibers in the United States (Final Report)

Various feedstocks from coal, petroleum and bio-based acrylonitrile were investigated for their ability to produce carbon fiber within DOE strength (250 ksi), modulus (25 Msi), elongation (>1%) and cost (≤$5/lb) goals for wider utilization in light-weight vehicles for the automotive industry. The overarching approach was to chemically identify and map the various feedstocks, understand the molecular transformation to produce carbon fiber precursors (mesophase for pitch materials of polyacrylonitrile polymer) and how these impact carbon fiber quality. Predictive models were built to relate the feedstocks and precursors to carbon fiber properties using atomistic and micro-scale modeling within ±15%. Using tow-level carbon fiber epoxy composites, carbon fibers tow-level predictions of elastic components of the carbon fibers were also successfully modeled within ±15%, using finite element analysis to confirm single filament carbon fiber properties. These models were validated with tow-level epoxy composite experiments from carbon fibers produced in this study.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

CO 2 and Renewable Electricity into Chemicals: Formic Acid Production from Coal Flue Gas

Formic acid (FA) is an industrial chemical. It is used as a preservative for silage, as a digestive aid for animals, as a fluid for fracking, as a pharmaceutical intermediate and in leather tanning. The global formic acid market is valued at 777.4 million USD in 2020 and is expected to reach 851.8 million USD by the end of 2026. A new major formic acid application is the use of formic acid as a key feedstock for the bioprocessing industry. It has the potential to grow tremendously if we can lower the cost of formic acid production compared with the current fossil-fuel one. Recently, Dioxide Materials has developed a technology that can directly convert CO 2 to pure formic acid with a three-compartment CO 2 electrolyzer. However, the electrolyzer performance needs further improvement for the technology to be commercially viable. The major objective of this project is to develop the electrolyzer technology to enable formic acid as a feedstock for the bioprocessing industry to be economically manufactured from flue gas from a coal fired pilot plant. In particular, the project is to understand how to run the electrolyzer for the conversion of CO 2 into formic acid using flue gas from a coal fired power plant as a source of CO 2 . The work will include characterizing how the performance of the electrolyzer changes with low CO 2 concentration and impurities, developing new cell designs that can still operate with feedstocks with low CO 2 concentrations, testing simulated flue gas in the electrolyzer system and developing filters to remove any impurities that arise.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗