Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “DOLLARS”

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 433 records · Page 24
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Tennessee

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Tennessee. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Texas

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Texas. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Utah

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Utah. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Vermont

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Vermont. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Virginia

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Virginia. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Washington

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Washington. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of West Virginia

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of West Virginia. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Wisconsin

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Wisconsin. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Cost Effectiveness of ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 for the State of Wyoming

Moving to the ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) edition from Standard 90.1-2010 (ASHRAE 2010) is cost-effective for the State of Wyoming. The table below shows the state-wide economic impact of upgrading to Standard 90.1-2013 in terms of the annual energy cost savings in dollars per square foot, additional construction cost per square foot required by the upgrade, and life-cycle cost (LCC) per square foot. These results are weighted averages for all building types in all climate zones in the state, based on weightings shown in Table 4. The methodology used for this analysis is consistent with the methodology used in the national cost-effectiveness analysis. Additional results and details on the methodology are presented in the following sections. The report provides analysis of two LCC scenarios: Scenario 1, representing publicly-owned buildings, considers initial costs, energy costs, maintenance costs, and replacement costs—without borrowing or taxes. Scenario 2, representing privately-owned buildings, adds borrowing costs and tax impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Installed Cost Benchmarks and Deployment Barriers for Residential Solar Photovoltaics with Energy Storage: Q1 2016

In this report, we fill a gap in the existing knowledge about PV-plus-storage system costs and value by providing detailed component- and system-level installed cost benchmarks for residential systems. We also examine other barriers to increased deployment of PV-plus-storage systems in the residential sector. The results are meant to help technology manufacturers, installers, and other stakeholders identify cost-reduction opportunities and inform decision makers about regulatory, policy, and market characteristics that impede solar plus storage deployment. In addition, our periodic cost benchmarks will document progress in cost reductions over time. To analyze costs for PV-plus-storage systems deployed in the first quarter of 2016, we adapt the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's component- and system-level cost-modeling methods for standalone PV. In general, we attempt to model best-in-class installation techniques and business operations from an installed-cost perspective. In addition to our original analysis, model development, and review of published literature, we derive inputs for our model and validate our draft results via interviews with industry and subject-matter experts. One challenge to analyzing the costs of PV-plus-storage systems is choosing an appropriate cost metric. Unlike standalone PV, energy storage lacks universally accepted cost metrics, such as dollars per watt of installed capacity and lifetime levelized cost of energy. We explain the difficulty of arriving at a standard approach for reporting storage costs and then provide the rationale for using the total installed costs of a standard PV-plus-storage system as our primary metric, rather than using a system-size-normalized metric.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Open-Source Integrated Design-Analysis Environment For Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling & Simulation Final Scientific/Technical Report

The framework created through the Open-Source Integrated Design-Analysis Environment (IDAE) for Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling & Simulation grant has simplify and democratize advanced modeling and simulation in the nuclear energy industry that works on a range of nuclear engineering applications. It leverages millions of investment dollars from the Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy for modeling and simulation of light water reactors and the Office of Nuclear Energy's research and development. The IDEA framework enhanced Kitware’s Computational Model Builder (CMB) while leveraging existing open-source toolkits and creating a graphical end-to-end umbrella guiding end-users and developers through the nuclear energy advanced modeling and simulation lifecycle. In addition, the work deliver strategic advancements in meshing and visualization for ensembles.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2016

Recovery of Utility Fixed Costs: Utility, Consumer, Environmental and Economist Perspectives

Utilities recover costs for providing electric service to retail customers through a combination of rate components that together comprise customers’ monthly electric bills. Rates and rate designs are set by state regulators and vary by jurisdiction, utility and customer class. In addition to the fundamental tenet of setting fair and reasonable rates, rate design balances economic efficiency, equity and fairness, customer satisfaction, utility revenue stability, and customer price and bill stability. At the most basic level, retail electricity bills in the United States typically include a fixed monthly customer charge — a set dollar amount regardless of energy usage — and a volumetric energy charge for each kilowatt-hour consumed. The energy charge may be flat across all hours, vary by usage level (for example, higher rates at higher levels of usage), or vary based on time of consumption. While some utility costs, such as fuel costs, clearly vary according to electricity usage, other costs are “fixed” over the short run — generally, those that do not vary over the course of a year. Depending on your point of view, and whether the state’s electricity industry has been restructured or remains vertically integrated, the set of costs that are “fixed” may be quite limited. Or the set may extend to all capacity costs for generation, transmission and distribution. In the long run, all costs are variable. In the context of flat or declining loads in some regions, utilities are proposing a variety of changes to retail rate designs, particularly for residential customers, to recover fixed costs. In this report, authors representing utility (Chapter 1), consumer (Chapter 2), environmentalist (Chapter 3) and economist (Chapter 4) perspectives discuss fixed costs for electric utilities and set out their principles for recovering those costs. The table on the next page summarizes each author’s relative preferences for various options for fixed cost recovery, some of which may be used in combination. The specific design of any ratemaking option matters crucially, so a general preference for a given option does not indicate support for any particular application.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Uranium Mining and Milling

The beginning of the nuclear fuel cycle is with mining and milling. These two stages may take billions of dollars invested and applied over a multi-year period before any product is redeemed

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Energy Factors in Commercial Mortgages: Gaps and Opportunities

The commercial real estate mortgage market is enormous, with almost half a trillion dollars in deals originated in 2015. Relative to other energy efficiency financing mechanisms, very little attention has been paid to the potential of commercial mortgages as a channel for promoting energy efficiency investments. The valuation and underwriting elements of the business are largely driven by the “net operating income” (NOI) metric – essentially, rents minus expenses. While NOI ostensibly includes all expenses, energy factors are in several ways given short shrift in the underwriting process. This is particularly interesting when juxtaposed upon a not insignificant body of research revealing that there are in fact tangible benefits (such as higher valuations and lower vacancy and default rates) for energy-efficient and “green” commercial buildings. This scoping report characterizes the current status and potential interventions to promote greater inclusion of energy factors in the commercial mortgage process.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2014

USU Alternative and Unconventional Energy Research and Development

The purpose and rationale of this project has been to develop enduring research capabilities at Utah State University (USU) and the Utah State University Research Foundation (USURF) in a number of energy efficient and renewable energy areas including primarily a) algae energy systems, b) solar lighting, c) intuitive buildings, d) electric transportation, 3) unconventional energy environmental monitoring and beneficial reuse technologies (water and CO 2 ), f) wind energy profiling, and g) land use impacts. The long-term goal of this initiative has been to create high-wage jobs in Utah and a platform for sustained faculty and student engagement in energy research. The program’s objective has been to provide a balanced portfolio of R&D conducted by faculty, students, and permanent staff. This objective has been met. While some of the project’s tasks met with more success than others, as with any research project of this scope, overall the research has contributed valuable technical insight and broader understanding in key energy related areas. The algae energy systems research resulted in a highly productive workforce development enterprise as it graduated a large number of well prepared students entering alternative energy development fields and scholarship. Moreover, research in this area has demonstrated both the technological and economic limitations and tremendous potential of algae feedstock-based energy and co-products. Research conducted in electric transportation, specifically in both stationary and dynamic wireless inductive coupling charging technologies, has resulted in impactful advances. The project initiated the annual Conference on Electric Roads and Vehicles (http://www.cervconference.org/), which is growing and attracts more than 100 industry experts and scholars. As a direct result of the research, the USU/USURF spin-out startup, WAVE (Wireless Advanced Vehicle Electrification), continues work in wirelessly charged bus transit systems and is poised to quickly become a multi-million dollar company with clients around the globe. Moreover, USU students and researchers alike are now on the leading edge of the electrified transportation workforce. Finally, the legacy of this DOE investment in electric transportation is continuing at USU with the formation in progress of an industry sponsored research center built around the Electric Roadway and Vehicle (EVR) research facility and test track (http://evr.usu.edu). The research conducted in unconventional energy environmental monitoring and beneficial reuse technologies experienced broad success developing experimental and modeling tools and implementing those tools to better understand environmental impacts of industrial processes used in unconventional energy development in the Utah’s Uintah Basin. Before this project began the USU Uintah Basin branch campus had minimal capability to perform this regionally critical environmental research. This research investment enabled monitoring and modeling equipment and expertise to assess impacts of energy development to all aspects of environmental quality. Laboratory capability for environmental analysis has been developed and engaged along with field testing at multiple locations. Successful campaigns to measure greenhouse gas and hydrocarbon emissions from produced water surface impoundments and leakage from subsurface oil and gas infrastructure were executed. A computer model of meteorological conditions during winter inversion episodes was created, and commercialization efforts are underway for those models. Finally, in the past 24 months, nearly $2 million in non- DOE external funding from state, local, federal and private entities has been awarded to USU Uintah Basin to continue and add to work and capability established by this task. The preceding examples represent a few highlights resulting from the USU Alternative and Unconventional Energy Research and Development project. The following report provides further detail.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2017

China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.

International trade and related economic activities in Central and South Asia are increasing as developing economies, particularly India and Pakistan, grow. China continues to emerge as a major regional and global power and has embarked upon numerous regional economic and political initiatives . A major development is the China - Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a host of infrastructure and trade projects worth over 40 billion American dollars . This report analyzes CPEC a nd its potential regional effects, including the trade security implications of the port and land infrastructure developments . As trade increase s in the reg ion and the major CPEC infrastructure projects are completed, there will be numerous implications on trade security and geopolitics within South Asia. CPEC projects uniquely intersect numerous regional situations, including territorial disputes in Kashmir, the Afghanistan/Pakistan border, and Chinese foreign policy a mbitions. A nuanced understanding of these effects can influence future policy adjustments in this region . The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of Sandia National Laboratories or the author's current and past institutions.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2014

Open-Source Integrated Design-Analysis Environment for Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling & Simulation Phase I Final Report

Our proposal described an approach for addressing the barriers of advanced modeling and simulation (M&S) adoption by the nuclear energy industry. This will be achieved by developing a state-of-the-art, open-source integrated design-analysis environment (IDAE) to work on a range of nuclear energy applications, while leveraging best-in-class software created through millions of investment dollars from the Department of Energy (DOE) Office for Nuclear Energy (NE) and from several other funding agencies.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Regulatory Risk Reduction for Advanced Reactor Technologies – FY2016 Status and Work Plan Summary

Millions of public and private sector dollars have been invested over recent decades to realize greater efficiency, reliability, and the inherent and passive safety offered by advanced nuclear reactor technologies. However, a major challenge in experiencing those benefits resides in the existing U.S. regulatory framework. This framework governs all commercial nuclear plant construction, operations, and safety issues and is highly large light water reactor (LWR) technology centric. The framework must be modernized to effectively deal with non-LWR advanced designs if those designs are to become part of the U.S energy supply. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Advanced Reactor Technologies (ART) Regulatory Risk Reduction (RRR) initiative, managed by the Regulatory Affairs Department at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL), is establishing a capability that can systematically retire extraneous licensing risks associated with regulatory framework incompatibilities. This capability proposes to rely heavily on the perspectives of the affected regulated community (i.e., commercial advanced reactor designers/vendors and prospective owner/operators) yet remain tuned to assuring public safety and acceptability by regulators responsible for license issuance. The extent to which broad industry perspectives are being incorporated into the proposed framework makes this initiative unique and of potential benefit to all future domestic non-LWR applicants

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗