Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “site analysis”

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 415 records · Page 23

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 site. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 site. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 site. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

AWAKEN Virtual Tower / Derived Data

Virtual tower data consist of profiles of wind speed and direction at a number of locations near the A1 sites. These profiles were computed from dual-Doppler analysis of two Halo XR+ scanning Doppler lidars located at sites A5 and A7. Both lidars performed shallow RHI scans in the general direction of the A1 site. Scan azimuths were periodically adjusted to sample different locations. This resulted in a total of 14 unique tower locations over 5 periods between 12 November 2022 and 17 October 2023.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

Measurement report: A comparison of ground-level ice-nucleating-particle abundance and aerosol properties during autumn at contrasting marine and terrestrial locations

Abstract. Ice-nucleating particles (INPs) are an essential class of aerosols found worldwide that have far-reaching but poorly quantified climate feedback mechanisms through interaction with clouds and impacts on precipitation. These particles can have highly variable physicochemical properties in the atmosphere, and it is crucial to continuously monitor their long-term concentration relative to total ambient aerosol populations at a wide variety of sites to comprehensively understand aerosol–cloud interactions in the atmosphere. Hence, our study applied an in situ forced expansion cooling device to measure ambient INP concentrations and test its automated continuous measurements at atmospheric observatories, where complementary aerosol instruments are heavily equipped. Using collocated aerosol size, number, and composition measurements from these sites, we analyzed the correlation between sources and abundance of INPs in different environments. Toward this aim, we have measured ground-level INP concentrations at two contrasting sites, one in the Southern Great Plains (SGP) region of the United States with a substantial terrestrially influenced aerosol population and one in the Eastern North Atlantic Ocean (ENA) region with a primarily marine-influenced aerosol population. These measurements examined INPs mainly formed through immersion freezing and were performed at a ≤ 12 min resolution and with a wide range of heterogeneous freezing temperatures (Ts above −31 °C) for at least 45 d at each site. The associated INP data analysis was conducted in a consistent manner. We also explored the additional offline characterization of ambient aerosol particle samples from both locations in comparison to in situ data. From our ENA data, on average, INP abundance ranges from ≈ 1 to ≈ 20 L−1 (−30 °C ≤ T ≤ −20 °C) during October–November 2020. Backward air mass trajectories reveal a strong marine influence at ENA with 75.7 % of air masses originating over the Atlantic Ocean and 96.6 % of air masses traveling over open water, but analysis of particle chemistry suggests an additional INP source besides maritime aerosols (e.g., sea spray aerosols) at ENA. In contrast, 90.8 % of air masses at the SGP location originated from the North American continent, and 96.1 % of the time, these air masses traveled over land. As a result, organic-rich SGP aerosols from terrestrial sources exhibited notably high INP abundance from ≈ 1 to ≈ 100 L−1 (−30 °C ≤ T ≤ −15 °C) during October–November 2019. The probability density function of aerosol surface area-scaled immersion freezing efficiency (ice nucleation active surface site density; ns) was assessed for selected freezing temperatures. While the INP concentrations measured at SGP are higher than those of ENA, the ns(T) values of SGP (≈ 105 to ≈ 107 m−2 for −30 °C ≤ T ≤ −15 °C) are reciprocally lower than ENA for approximately 2 orders of magnitude (≈ 107 to ≈ 109 m−2 for −30 °C ≤ T ≤ −15 °C). The observed difference in ns(T) mainly stems from varied available aerosol surface areas, Saer, from two sites (Saer,SGP > Saer,ENA). INP parameterizations were developed as a function of examined freezing temperatures from SGP and ENA for our study periods.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Application of quantitative risk assessment to address stakeholder questions in geologic carbon storage

Ambitious international greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets demand a rapid transformation to a low-carbon economy. This transformation includes the accelerated adoption of carbon dioxide (CO2) capture and storage (CCS) technology. However, as with any large-scale engineering enterprise, the widespread commercial-scale deployment of geologic carbon storage (GCS) raises important questions about technology and cost-effectiveness, safety, environmental risk, and long-term liability. Effectively assessing and managing risks and liability associated with GCS projects is a key technical need throughout the project life cycle-from site selection and permitting to monitoring design, operational risk management, and post-operational site closure. This presentation highlights recent advancements in tools for quantitative risk assessment, being developed by the National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP). NRAP is a multi-year, multinational laboratory research collaboration sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management. Our focus will be on these tools' applications in addressing critical stakeholder questions related to supporting permitting to ensure secure and environmentally protective storage; designing effective and efficient monitoring plans; evaluating the effectiveness of remedial actions and risk management alternatives; and informing liability assessment and investment decisions. This paper will detail the key functionality of NRAP’s Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM), a computational framework for assessing leakage risk and containment assurance. This model features streamlined workflows for calculating leakage risk profiles, delineating risk-based area of review, and assessing contingency plans and post-injection site care requirements. ORION is an open-source, observation-based ensemble forecasting toolkit to help operators assess the seismic hazard at a carbon storage site. The State of Stress Analysis Tool (SOSAT), designed to assess subsurface stress conditions and evaluate geomechanical risk resulting from CO2 injection in an area of interest will also be presented. We will also introduce a prototype model to evaluate storage project costs and liability associated with risk management. The Technoeconomic and Liability Evaluation for Storage (TALES) model uses results from forecasts of leakage and induced seismicity risk to estimate the lifecycle cost of managing risk. Finally, a preliminary example of how the NRAP Risk-based Adaptive Monitoring Plan (RAMP) tool can be used to design efficient and effective site monitoring plans and estimate the detectability of fluid leakage will be provided. The relevance of these tools for addressing key stakeholder questions amidst uncertainty will be emphasized.

decision support↗

2020 Cost Analysis of Hydropower Options at Non-Powered Dams

This report provides a cost analysis of potential hydropower development for representative non-powered dam (NPD) sites in the United States. The overarching objective is to support the establishment of a basis for evaluating progress towards improving the competitiveness of new hydropower development for electricity generation. The representative sites, herein referred to as “reference sites”, were selected from sites with detailed water resource data to support the cost analysis. Facility designs, capital costs, plant generation and efficiency profiles, capacity factors, and levelized costs of energy (LCOE) are presented for the sites under baseline and near-term innovation cases. The baseline case represents facility configurations using technologies that are already widely applied in the hydropower industry, whereas near-term innovations are technologies likely to reach wide acceptance within the next 5 to 10 years. Cost savings in the near-term relative to the baseline are discussed to illustrate the potential benefits to the hydropower industry from research and development (R&D) and adoption of these innovations. Medium- to long-term innovation options expected from ongoing private and government R&D efforts are also highlighted but are not quantified in this report because of a current lack of complete information on these options. The key findings of the cost analysis in this study imply that near-term innovations could reduce the baseline costs of hydropower development at US NPD sites. Thus, if remaining R&D issues with these near-term innovations can be resolved within the next 5 to 10 years, industry-wide adoption of these technologies and improved competitiveness of NPD hydropower development can be expected. Specific key findings of the analysis include the following: 1) Potential installed capacity at the NPD sites evaluated in this study vary from 200 kW to 70 MW, representing two orders of magnitude variation across nearly 20 sites; 2) Capital costs, not including development costs, for the sites evaluated in this study vary from $2,200/kW to $34,000/kW but are below $12,000/kW for most sites; 3) Baseline LCOE estimates for lake dams are from $79/MWh to $790/MWh with most sites under $400/MWh, whereas estimates for lock dams are from $134/MWh to $289/MWh with most sites under $200/MWh; 4) Reductions in capital cost per kilowatt under the near-term innovation case are from −77% to −14% for lake dams and −21% to −2.1% for lock dams (excluding one site with a 14% increase in per-kilowatt capital costs); 5) Combined changes in capital costs and capacity factors in the near-term case relative to the baseline lead to reductions in LCOE of −71% to −14% for lake dams and −21% to −14% for lock dams; 6) Overall, LCOE reductions lead to 8 of the 18 sites under the near-term case having LCOE values below $150/MWh compared with only 2 of 18 sites in the baseline case.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility Inadvertent Human Intruder Limits and Doses in Support of the PA2022

This report documents the inadvertent human intruder (IHI) analysis for the E-Area Low-Level Waste Facility (ELLWF) at the Savannah River Site (SRS), near Aiken, South Carolina. This analysis supports the revised ELLWF Performance Assessment (PA), complying with the Department of Energy standard for operation of low-level waste disposal facilities (USDOE, 2017). The ELLWF is an operating waste disposal facility and is scheduled to continue accepting waste to 2065. One task of the revised PA is to establish waste inventory limits for the various disposal units at ELLWF. This is done by modeling future contaminant release and transport through applicable pathways to human receptors, comparing predicted doses per disposed curie with applicable performance measures, to obtain inventory limits which will assure that doses to receptors do not exceed performance measures. This report documents results of modeling future doses to one class of receptor, the inadvertent human intruder. It is assumed that after site closure, public knowledge of the site is lost, and IHIs will engage in activities on the ELLWF that will disrupt the closure cap, causing dose to the IHI. Following USDOE (2017), six different stylized exposure scenarios are considered, simulating activities by an IHI which could result in a radiological dose. The six scenarios are: • Acute – Basement Construction: IHI constructs a basement and encounters waste during excavation which is inadvertently mixed with clean soil and diluted. • Acute – Well Drilling: IHI drills a water well through waste and is exposed to drill cuttings mixed with clean soil that are brought to the surface. • Acute – Discovery: IHI begins constructing a basement but stops when encountering the riprap in the final closure cap and is exposed to photon radiation from unexcavated material residing in the undisturbed waste zone. • Chronic – Agriculture: Resident IHI is exposed to waste that was excavated for basement construction and mixed with native soil in the intruder’s vegetable garden. • Chronic – Post-Drilling: Resident IHI is exposed to waste from drill cuttings mixed with native soil and scattered in the garden area. • Chronic – Residential: Resident IHI is exposed to external radiation while in home located above waste with shielding provided by the concrete basement floor and any soil or engineered material remaining between the basement and waste. Dose calculations are performed using the SRNL Dose Toolkit (Aleman, 2023), following the approach of Smith et al (2019). Calculations are performed separately for 27 of the 33 disposal units (DUs) at ELLWF and are radionuclide specific. The results of the IHI analysis include: • Dose Factors: mrem per disposed curie (acute) and mrem/yr per disposed curie (chronic) for each parent radionuclide, for each DU. • Inventory Limits: in curies, for each parent radionuclide, for each DU. • Estimated Dose to IHI: mrem (acute) and mrem/yr (chronic), for each DU, given its projected closure inventory without inventory biases applied. Most DU-specific IHI inventory limits are in the range of 10 3 to 10 7 curies per nuclide. The lowest inventory limits are associated with gamma-emitters such as Sn-126, Ra-226, Th-232, and Cm-248. Radionuclides with short half-lives such as Pu-241, and nuclides which are pure beta emitters or which decay by electron capture, such as Ni-59 and Ni-63, have the highest limits. For the 27 evaluated DUs, predicted IHI doses are shown in Table ES-1. The maximum acute dose is 1.18 mrem, at ST23, much less than the DOE performance measure of 500 mrem (USDOE, 2017). The highest chronic dose is 37.2 mrem/yr at ST02, below the DOE performance measure of 100 mrem/yr. Also shown are estimated inventory sums of fractions (SOFs) at closure in 2065, for groundwater (GW) and IHI pathways. For each DU, the inventory is constrained by the GW pathway. For most DUs, the IHI SOFs are approximately 1000 times lower than the GW SOF values, and the IHI pathway does not drive risk for any disposal unit.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Structural analysis of mycobacterial homoserine transacetylases central to methionine biosynthesis reveals druggable active site

Mycobacterium tuberculosis is the cause of the world’s most deadly infectious disease. Efforts are underway to target the methionine biosynthesis pathway, as it is not part of the host metabolism. The homoserine transacetylase MetX converts L-homoserine to O-acetyl-L-homoserine at the committed step of this pathway. In order to facilitate structure-based drug design, we determined the high-resolution crystal structures of three MetX proteins, including M. tuberculosis (MtMetX), Mycolicibacterium abscessus (MaMetX), and Mycolicibacterium hassiacum (MhMetX). A comparison of homoserine transacetylases from other bacterial and fungal species reveals a high degree of structural conservation amongst the enzymes. Utilizing homologous structures with bound cofactors, we analyzed the potential ligandability of MetX. The deep active-site tunnel surrounding the catalytic serine yielded many consensus clusters during mapping, suggesting that MtMetX is highly druggable.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

Glycolate Analysis in Tank 22: Developing and Testing Analytical Methods for the Savannah River Site Liquid Waste System

Researchers developed and tested a range of techniques to support a low mg/L Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) of glycolate in radioactive Tank 22 waste solution by Ion Chromatography (IC) and by proton NMR. For the IC method, Dionex OnGuard II cartridges were tested as a means of removing alkali earth and transition metals that can interfere during ion chromatography applications especially when analyzing for low-concentration, chelating analytes. Additionally, concentrations of nitrate in the raw Tank 22 sample (5,000 to 10,000 mg/L) were managed by using reasonable levels of sample dilution. The resulting IC performance quality was enhanced by improving the baseline, increasing sensitivity [Limit of Quantitation (LOQ) of 12 mg/L and Limit of Detection (LOD) of 4.0 mg/L], and resolving analytes into well-defined Gaussian peaks when using the Dionex OnGuard II H⁺ cartridges to remove matrix interferences. High concentrations of nitrate limited the performance of the IC method. To achieve an acceptable baseline, samples with high nitrate content require more dilution, resulting in higher detection limits. Tests on samples with higher concentrations of nitrate (Tank 30 and 32 supernate with approximately 150000 mg/L nitrate) suggested that IC detection limits for glycolate in these samples would be > 500 mg/L. Thus, an LOQ of 12 mg/L is not feasible by this IC method on evaporator feed samples. An alternative method of glycolate analysis, using proton nuclear magnetic resonance (H NMR), was developed by the research team. In initial tests, the H NMR technique provided reasonable quantitation of glycolate in Tank 22 conditions by direct observation of the liquid. The H NMR method may provide improved detection limits for solutions with higher nitrate concentrations. We recommend further development of this analysis for high nitrate LWS samples such as evaporator feed and evaporator drop tank content. A method for pretreatment of samples using crystalline silicotitanate (CST) was developed and tested. The objective of the pretreatment was to facilitate analysis of samples with higher levels of radioactivity. The pretreatment did not influence the glycolate concentration in solution, and the pretreatment is projected to reduce Cs 137 activity in a sample by a factor of 16,200. The double strike CST pretreatment was demonstrated and would allow milliliters of higher activity samples to be transferred from the Shielded Cells and handled in a containment unit for glycolate analysis. The various studies validated IC and H NMR methods for glycolate analysis, defined the range of applicability, and demonstrated key supporting analytical protocols. Based on the results, high quality glycolate analysis of Tank 22 is feasible down to approximately 12 mg/L, with the potential for broader applicability of the methods to other conditions in the Savannah River Site Liquid Waste System (LWS).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Mechanism-Guided Kinetic Analysis of Electrocatalytic Proton Reduction Mediated by a Cobalt Catalyst Bearing a Pendant Basic Site

Cobalt polypyridyl complexes stand out as efficient catalysts for electrochemical proton reduction, but investigations into their operating mechanisms, with broad-reaching implications in catalyst design, have been limited. Herein, we investigate the catalytic activity of a cobalt(II) polypyridyl complex bearing a pendant pyridyl base with a series of organic acids spanning 20 pKa units in acetonitrile. Structural analysis, as well as electrochemical studies, reveals that the Co(III) hydride intermediate is formed through reduction of the Co(II) catalyst followed by direct metal protonation in the initial EC step despite the presence of the pendant base, which is commonly thought of as a more kinetically accessible protonation site. Protonation of the pendant base occurs after the Co(III) hydride intermediate is further reduced in the overall ECEC pathway. Additionally, when the acid used is sufficiently strong, the Co(II) catalyst can be protonated, and the Co(III) hydride can react directly with acid to release H 2 . With thorough mechanistic understanding, the appropriate electroanalytical methods were identified to extract rate constants for the elementary steps over a range of conditions. Thermodynamic square schemes relating catalytic intermediates proposed in the three electrocatalytic HER mechanisms were constructed. Furthermore, these findings reveal a full description of the HER electrocatalysis mediated by this molecular system and provide insights into strategies to improve synthetic fuel-forming catalysts operative through metal hydride intermediates.

08 HYDROGEN↗