Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Congress:”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Editorial: Innovations in climate resilience

At Battelle’s second Annual Innovations in Climate Resilience Conference, we were inspired this year by the phrase “Bold Leaps and Action.” Climate resilience is a goal and a field that requires boldness. Achieving a state in which societies, countries, continents, and even the globe is robust to changes in climate is often met with doubt, speculation, and indifference. Boldness is required to overcome the gap between an individual’s personal experience and the sheer scale of climate interactions that span from microbes to planets and from nanoseconds to millennia. Moreover, individual scientists, government leaders, and industrialists might each make a small impact and never directly see a measurable effect in Earth’s climate resilience. Is the scientific work in this area futile? Are we as a community on the right path or are we on the right track? Or are we collectively leveraging our potential and contributions toward scalable and more impactful climate resilience solutions that create compounding effects for cities, regions, countries? That leads us to the second part of the phrase that inspired us. It is not just bold leaps but it is action too. The scientific community must put into effect the discoveries that come along with our work in climate resilience. This includes the processes or activities that translate foundational science into real products that society can use. Never before in the history of this country have we had such a commitment to the Research Topic of climate resilience. The White House has made it a major part of their platform. Congress has appropriated and authorized billions of dollars in support. The part we need next is real action. Through our efforts we can discover the interconnected scientific breakthroughs at many spatial scales from city/regional/state to global that were not possible without those government programs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Auto Stop-Start Fuel Consumption Benefits

With increasingly stringent regulations mandating the improvement of vehicle fuel economy, automotive manufacturers face growing pressure to develop and implement technologies that improve overall system efficiency. One such technology is an automatic (auto) stop-start feature. Auto stop-start reduces idle time and reduces fuel use by temporarily shutting the engine off when the vehicle comes to a stop and automatically re-starting it when the brake is released, or the accelerator is pressed. As mandated by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is required to keep the public informed about fuel saving practices. This is done, in partnership with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), through the fueleconomy.gov website. The “Fuel-Saving Technologies” and “Gas Mileage Tips” sections of the website are focused on helping the public make informed purchasing decisions and encouraging fuel-saving driving habits. Here, in order to provide users with accurate information about the auto stop-start feature, experiments were conducted to determine its fuel economy effect. Four vehicles were tested both with and without the feature enabled under three test cycles: the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) city fuel economy test, the US06 high acceleration aggressive driving schedule that is often identified as the “Supplemental FTP” driving schedule, and the EPA New York City Cycle (NYCC). The results were compared to measure the fuel economy and consumption effects of using the auto stop-start feature. It was found that the fuel economy improvement varied significantly between drive cycles depending on the amount and percentage of idle time during the test. The largest fuel economy improvements were 7.27% and 26.4% for the FTP and NYCC, respectively.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Regulatory Development & Support for Advanced Reactor Technology Program

During 2012, the Department of Energy (DOE) instituted an Advanced Reactor Concepts Technical Review Panel process to evaluate viable reactor concepts from industry and identify research and development needs. Early in the process, the Technical Review Panel members and advanced reactor designers noted the need to develop a regulatory framework for non-light water advanced reactors to reduce risk and uncertainty to the industry. Concurrently, and in response to Congressional direction, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) provided a report to Congress on advanced reactors. In this report, NRC noted that several reactor vendors also identified the need for regulatory guidance for advanced non-light water reactor designs.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

4.2.1.31 Integrated Life Cycle Sustainability Analysis

This project provides the Department of Energy's Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) with strategic decision-support for the evaluation of its R&D portfolio by developing, validating, and applying a coherent methodology and consistent model framework to quantify the net effects of an expanding US bioeconomy. The framework fills an analysis gap previously identified by Peer Review and supports a related milestone in BETO's Multi-Year Program Plan. The framework was scoped with inputs from practitioners in academia, national laboratories, and federal agencies. The model is a top-down, economy-wide framework using a coherent methodology to compute environmental and socio-economic metrics. It is purposefully complementary to existing bottom-up, process-based techno-economic and life cycle assessment BETO tools and uses their data as inputs. Presently, the model covers several commercial and near-commercial biofuel routes and an emerging pathway for plastics upcycling. It covers temporal detail across four time-steps and is currently being expanded with a prospective modeling capability. The model has provided analyses for the Third Triennial Report to Congress (RtC3) on the environmental impacts of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2), among others. As part of this project, NREL also provides scientific support to BETO in the International Energy Agency's Technology Collaboration Program on Bioenergy (IEA Bioenergy) Task 45 on Sustainability. Here, NREL evaluates and synthesizes activities that develop, compare, or apply metrics, methods, and tools to quantify sustainability effects of bioeconomy products. NREL also coordinates related national lab involvement and a BETO Working Group on Sustainable Land Management.

bioeconomy↗
DOE OSTI2021

The U.S. Accident Tolerant Fuels Program — Update on a National Initiative

In 2012 the U.S. Congress directed the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy to give priority to developing enhanced fuels and cladding for light water reactors to improve safety in the event of accidents in the reactor or spent fuel pools. DOE developed a plan with a goal to insert a Lead Test Assembly (LTA) into a commercial light water reactor by the end of FY 2022. Three of the leading commercial nuclear fuel vendors, in concert with several participating commercial nuclear utilities, are now seriously engaged in this initiative and have exceeded initial expectations by having met DOE’s goal this year, three years ahead of schedule. The early successes of the ATF program are due in part to a strong collaboration by the DOE national laboratories with both commercial nuclear fuel vendors and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This undertaking has recently been expanded to incorporate an effort to extend burnup from the current U.S. regulatory limit of 62 GWD/MTU and increase enrichment as necessary to support routine utilization of fuel at >75 GWD/MTU. This effort provides a critical economic incentive to accelerate the deployment of ATF technologies. This paper reviews the DOE-sponsored, industry-led ATF concepts currently under development and highlights the contributions made by the DOE laboratories in support of these ATF concepts, including: 1) steady-state irradiation testing in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) and High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR); 2) transient irradiation testing in the Transient Reactor Test Facility (TREAT); 3) fabrication process development and characterization of high density fuels, Cr-coated Zry cladding, FeCrAl cladding, and SiC cladding; and 4) post-irradiation examination of lead test rods irradiated in commercial reactors.

Goldner, Frank J.↗
DOE OSTI2023

NETL Direct Air Capture Center

In 2022 Congress authorized the $25M National Energy Technology Laboratory Direct Air Capture Center. The facility will be specifically targeted at accelerating the commercialization of technologies beyond the conceptual stage which have not yet reached full pilot-scale (TRL 3 to 6). The ability to operate over a wide range of conditions will help the developers to understand how their technologies respond in different climates, from summer to winter and arid to tropical. NETL recognizes that DAC technology is still early in its evolution, and a wide variety of highly varied technologies are being explored. The Center will be designed with substantial flexibility to accommodate the rapidly evolving technological landscape. Testing systems at three scales will be included: lab-scale systems designed to examine the long-term stability of DAC materials, bench-scale module testing systems capable of probing flow dynamics, and small pilot-scale skid rooms able to test prototype DAC units under a wide variety of climate conditions. The NETL DAC Center will feature dedicated engineering, technician, scientific and logistical support for experimental system design, installation, operation of experiments, and interpretation of results for projects including but not limited to kinetics of absorption/desorption, thermal duty, and post-mortem elemental characterization to understand degradation. The NETL DAC Center projects will also have access to dedicated process modeling and analysis to evaluate the technoeconomic aspects of new technologies. NETL’s Systems Engineering and Analysis (SEA) team, the Carbon Capture Simulation Initiative (CCSI), and the Institute for the Design of Advanced Energy Systems (IDAES) are all potential collaborators with NETL’s testing partners from industry, academia, and other research institutions. NETL also has world class capabilities in device scale modeling (i.e., MFIX) that will be available to help design more efficient contactors and optimize unique internal configurations that can be realized by advanced manufacturing. The talk will cover the design and capabilities of the center, the planned availability, and feedback will be solicited from the audience on DAC testing needs.

Luebke, David↗
DOE OSTI2023

Accelerating commercialization of direct air capture technology

In 2022 Congress authorized the $25M National Energy Technology Laboratory Direct Air Capture Center. The facility will be specifically targeted at accelerating the commercialization of technologies beyond the conceptual stage which have not yet reached full pilot-scale (TRL 3 to 6). The ability to operate over a wide range of conditions will help the developers to understand how their technologies respond in different climates, from summer to winter and arid to tropical. NETL recognizes that DAC technology is still early in its evolution, and a wide variety of highly varied technologies are being explored. The Center will be designed with substantial flexibility to accommodate the rapidly evolving technological landscape. Testing systems at three scales will be included: lab-scale systems designed to examine the long-term stability of DAC materials, bench-scale module testing systems capable of probing flow dynamics, and small pilot-scale skid rooms able to test prototype DAC units under a wide variety of climate conditions. The NETL DAC Center will feature dedicated engineering, technician, scientific and logistical support for experimental system design, installation, operation of experiments, and interpretation of results for projects including but not limited to kinetics of absorption/desorption, thermal duty, and post-mortem elemental characterization to understand degradation. The NETL DAC Center projects will also have access to dedicated process modeling and analysis to evaluate the technoeconomic aspects of new technologies. NETL’s Systems Engineering and Analysis (SEA) team, the Carbon Capture Simulation Initiative (CCSI), and the Institute for the Design of Advanced Energy Systems (IDAES) are all potential collaborators with NETL’s testing partners from industry, academia, and other research institutions. NETL also has world class capabilities in device scale modeling (i.e., MFIX) that will be available to help design more efficient contactors and optimize unique internal configurations that can be realized by advanced manufacturing. The talk will cover the design and capabilities of the center, the planned availability, and feedback will be solicited from the audience on DAC testing needs.

Luebke, David↗
DOE OSTI2023

Pilot Business Case Analysis for Digital Infrastructure

The Inflation Reduction Act Has Provided an Opening to Dramatically Change and Improve the Economics of Nuclear Power Until recently, the commercial nuclear sector has faced unprecedented financial challenges driven by low natural gas prices and subsidized renewables, in a marketplace that did not reward carbon-free baseload capacity. The industry is also plagued by labor shortages, increasingly obsolete labor-centric operating models and antiquated analog technology that threaten the viability of the long-term operations of domestic nuclear facilities. In this context, the economic survival of nuclear power plants requires an efficient and technology-centric operating model that harvests the native efficiencies of advanced technology. Such transformations have been made in many other industries – notably, oil and gas. The passage by Congress of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in 2022 provides nuclear operators with unprecedented economic incentives to pursue these upgrades. To realize the benefits of these incentives and achieve the necessary transformations in the nuclear operating model, the nuclear industry must overcome both the continuing unease about licensing pathways and uncertainty related to implementation costs.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2023

System Analysis Support of Consent-Based Siting Efforts - 23400

To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management (IWM) program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various system options for the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste. With these tools, integrated waste management system (IWMS) architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analyses and assessments typically use these modeling and simulation tools to investigate things like the implications of changes in various assumptions and parameters such as acceptance rates, receipt logic, facility capacities and capabilities, use of standardized canisters, and different assumed system operation start dates. Some example system analysis results have been published previously. With the passage of the consolidated appropriations acts for fiscal years 2021 and 2022, Congress provided funding and direction for the DOE to move forward with interim storage to support near-term action in managing the nation’s SNF as an important component of an IWMS. Consent-based siting is a phased, adaptive, and collaborative approach to siting facilities that focuses on the needs and concerns of people and communities. Communities participate in the siting process by working carefully through a series of phases and steps with the DOE (as the implementing organization). Each step and phase helps a community determine whether and how hosting a facility to manage SNF is aligned to the community’s goals. By its nature, a consent-based siting process must be transparent, flexible, adaptive, and responsive to community concerns. Thus, the phases and steps are intended to serve as a guide, not a prescriptive set of instructions. System analysis research analysts interface with DOE’s consent-based siting for a federal interim storage program and can perform preliminary system analyses as requested to support various aspects of the consent-based siting team’s work. This paper provides an overview of IWM program’s system analysis activities that support the ongoing consent-based siting process. The questions that decision-makers, planners, communities, and stakeholders might have during the consent-based siting process are similar to questions that have been explored by system analysts previously. Specifically, this paper discusses work that will inform consent-based siting efforts in the areas of community impacts, cost estimates, various SNF acceptance rates by potential facilities, potential consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) capacities and configurations, and the implications of a CISF on the overall waste management system. It is expected that system analysis will continue to be performed to support the consent-based siting process in the future.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Life-Cycle Baseline Customization for the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20304

One of the responsibilities of the federal government is to estimate sound and defensible life-cycle baseline costs for use in federal budget estimates and to meet federal financial reporting requirements. To accomplish this, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Legacy Management (LM) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have partnered together to ensure that the liabilities documented in each Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) site's life-cycle baseline are specifically tailored. FUSRAP was created in the mid-1970's to clean up radiological contamination resulting from the early development of nuclear weapons. DOE was responsible for FUSRAP until October 1997, when Congress transferred the administration and execution of FUSRAP site cleanups to USACE. By 1997, DOE had completed the cleanup of 25 of the 46 sites that were active within the program and had begun cleanup at 13 additional sites. USACE was assigned responsibility for the cleanup of the 21 remaining FUSRAP sites, and at 8 additional sites that had since been referred for cleanup. The LM mission for the FUSRAP sites is to perform long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). Currently, LM provides long-term stewardship for 34 completed FUSRAP sites. Another 20 sites are under active remediation by USACE. Within the last 5 years, USACE has completed the cleanup at five FUSRAP sites and the LTS and M responsibility has been transferred to LM. By 2029, USACE will compete remediation at eight additional sites and LTS and M for those sites will transfer to LM. Because responsibilities for the FUSRAP sites transfer between USACE and LM upon completion of remedial actions, both agencies maintain life-cycle baselines for different stages of the project and both must have a strong understanding of the needs and requirements for each site. This understanding ensures that the life-cycle baselines form a complete and accurate picture of what is required for the site and for the FUSRAP program. LM focuses on several things when customizing the life-cycle baseline estimates for the FUSRAP sites, including (1) Understanding the unique requirements for each site. By reviewing site-specific documents prepared by USACE, such as Feasibility Studies and Records of Decision, and partnering with USACE to gain additional insight about site conditions and requirements for stewardship, as well as potential risks, LM can better develop the life-cycle baselines. (2) Developing site-specific labor breakdowns. This ensures the required labor mix is baselined for specific activities by comparing the labor mix required to perform activities at (a) other LM-managed FUSRAP sites and (b) non-FUSRAP LM sites and (c) by USACE at active FUSRAP sites. (3) Taking a tiered approach to life-cycle baseline planning. Estimates for sites transferring to LM in the near term (5 years) are more definitive than for sites transferring in the out-year period. Remedial actions at the near-term sites are at or near completion, providing LM a strong understanding of the LTS and M requirements and remaining liabilities. This in turn allows for site-specific customization of the baseline. (4) Using a robust risk management approach to ensure that liabilities specific to each site are identified, evaluated by probability and severity, and documented in relation to the impact to cost or schedule. To ensure the most accuracy within all the baselines, the FUSRAP life-cycle baselines are updated as needed to support program, project, and contract management needs. (authors)

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

Panel Session 2: Hot Topics in US DOE Environmental Management

The well-attended Panel Session was chaired by Martin Schneider. The four panelists did not provide presentations. Rather the session was a discussion focusing on pressing issues facing US DOE Environmental Management (EM) sites and how the program is moving forward. The session began by momentarily reflecting on a success: the three Tank Waste Treatment Facilities will soon be coming online. These three facilities will treat as much waste in two years as was treated in the past 30 years. That is a significant milestone in progress. Also, safety enhancements at WIPP are a big success. The panelists noted that there will be challenges with the victories of the startup of the Waste Treatment Facilities. Treating tank waste is the last EM mission and will help with the relationships with the stakeholders, regulators and Congress. One of the biggest challenges will be moving back to full operation mode. Although the operation will increase productivity of reducing/managing the tank waste, it will decrease life cycle cost and lessen years of cleanup. The challenge will be having people understand that EM will be operating 24/7 and that maintenance will be key in keeping the operations. EM will be working together with the regulators to show tangible progress that will be effective and efficient. By working together, they can find opportunities/technologies for streamlining and accelerating cleanup. Recent changes to the regulatory framework between DOE-EM Los Alamos Field Office and New Mexico Environmental Department have helped cleanup in Los Alamos. Every year EM and the agencies review progress and come to agreements on the next work priorities. At Savannah River Site, the Federal Facility Agreement among EM, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has developed a small core team that work are shared by together in resolving issues that come up. The discussion moved on to how progress can be made by sharing lessons learned among the contractors. An example of how these learned lessons can be shared is that key representatives from projects across the EM sites participate in various forums to review/contribute to the work planned. Other opportunities can be by temporary assignments of DOE staff to gain experience and by monthly EM Headquarters report that provide the lessons learned across the EM sites. The panelists discussed how skyline changes are the best examples of tangible progress. Decontamination and Demolition (D and D) of structures are the easiest tangible progress that can be seen. Whereas tank waste cleanup is the hardest to see. Disposal of waste onsite versus offsite is another challenge, and timely discussions are necessary to get to the best value to the government.

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

Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, UMTRCA Title I Disposal Site 35 Years Postclosure (1985-2020) - 20288

The DOE Office of Legacy Management (LM) Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, Disposal Site is a former uranium ore-processing site located in the borough of Canonsburg and an important part of US history. For 46 years (1911-1957), the site processed ore, for vanadium, radium and then uranium. Soils and groundwater beneath the site were contaminated by the milling operations. The 15-hectare (37-acre) site is owned by the US government and managed by LM, which serves as the federal land manager and steward of cultural, historical, and natural resources at Cold War legacy sites that have been successfully cleaned up to remedial standards. In 1978 Congress directed DOE to remediate 22 inactive uranium-ore processing sites under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA), in accordance with standards promulgated by the US Environmental Protection Agency in Title 40 CFR Part 192 (40 (CFR 192). Subpart B of 40 CFR 192 regulates the cleanup of contaminated groundwater at the processing sites. The radioactive materials were encapsulated in US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-approved disposal cells, and the NRC general license for UMTRCA Title I sites is established in 10 CFR 40.27. Canonsburg was the first site to be remediated under UMTRCA. From 1983 to 1985, the Canonsburg site underwent cleanup under this US law that provides for the safe and environmentally sound disposal, long-term stabilization, and control of uranium mill tailings in a manner that minimizes or eliminates radiation health hazards to the public. The site is unique in that it is one of only two UMTRCA Title I sites in the eastern half of the United States, the other site being the Burrell, Pennsylvania, Title I Disposal Site, a vicinity property to the Canonsburg site. It has been 35 years since the disposal cell at the Canonsburg site was completed. This paper discusses the many efforts that have been taken to maintain the site and presents some of the lessons learned concerning the long-term care of the site. The discussion includes but is not limited to the following: (1) Preserving site history so the community can better appreciate and understand the site. (2) Community outreach efforts, and the importance of maintaining transparency of environmental monitoring results with the community. (3) Pursuing reuse opportunities that offer the potential for improving the community. (4) Remaining engaged with the local community. (5) Remaining proactive in the long-term care of the site. (authors)

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

Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage and Radioactive Waste Disposal in the United States: A Law and Policy Analysis - 20302

While Congress plays political football, spent nuclear fuel continues to sit in de facto interim nuclear waste storage sites throughout the country. This ad hoc approach - if it can even be called an approach - to nuclear waste management is in no one's best interests, because of financial, safety, environmental, and national security concerns with the status quo. Senate leadership had asserted that an up-or-down vote on the Yucca Mountain Project would take place in September or October 2019, but that did not occur. Rather, a conference bill was agreed to, and it provided that, although the nuclear program should receive some funding, funding was not made available for centralized interim storage ('CIS') or the Yucca Mountain Project. The President's FY2021 Budget Request does not contain any proposed funding for the Yucca Mountain Project ('the Project'). This paper will discuss the implications of that process, both for the Project itself and for the U.S. nuclear waste program more generally. In order to provide context for the current situation, this paper will begin by chronicling the history of U.S. nuclear waste management, from the passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 and to the present day. It will discuss the roles of the U.S. Department of Energy, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, federal and state political delegations, and the nuclear energy industry. The paper will then identify key themes that can be expected to affect the future of nuclear waste management in the United States. For example, it will consider whether development of additional CIS facilities is a viable short- to medium-term solution. CIS facilities may relieve immediate pressure at decommissioned or soon-to-be-decommissioned nuclear power plants; but with that pressure partially alleviated, support for building a long-term repository may be reduced. It will also discuss opposition by the State of New Mexico and others to the proposed New Mexico CIS project, based not only on siting concerns but also whether it might become a de facto repository, and whether the State of Texas and others may also be opposed, for similar reasons, to the proposed CIS facility in Texas. Additionally, the paper will examine consent-based siting and its implications for Nevada and other states that are potential hosts for spent nuclear fuel storage and disposal facilities. Further, if the Project is not a politically viable solution, the paper will examine whether it is now time for serious consideration of an alternate location for a permanent repository, as well as consideration of other options entirely, such as deep geologic disposal. The paper will conclude by looking ahead to the 2020 elections. It will describe the positions of candidates (particularly Presidential candidates) on spent nuclear fuel storage and disposal options, without advocating for any particular candidate or political party. Perhaps in 2020, we will at least see a start to a solution to the seemingly intractable problem of nuclear waste management in the United States. (authors)

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

Latest Developments in PM Systems and Methods and their Application to WM Projects - 20364

How do you improve on an industry that is well established yet often misses the mark on key metrics demonstrating effective planning and execution of project scope, schedule and budget? With the increased complexity of DOE projects relative to either poorly kept records of what wastes are stored or the lack of specific knowledge relative to the waste concentrations/quantities, this is a question continually asked and investigated by many. In fact, in 2017, the GAO's report to Congress indicated that although the DOE has made some progress on its monitoring effectiveness and demonstrating progress criteria, these goals were not met and there needs to be more improvement and monitoring. This paper will offer some insights into the latest developments in project management methodologies and the possible application of these to waste management projects. Traditional data generated via a project schedule that utilizes critical path methodology (CPM) and additional earned value management (EVM) data needs to be accurate and enable the project manager to better understand the probability of project success. Although this data has readily been available on most large-scale projects, success as measured by various stakeholder groups including the client, project team, regulators, etc. is less than optimal. Therefore, an urgent need exists to explore how traditional project data (CPM and EVM) coupled with new methodologies allows for better planning and execution by the project team. Many new approaches/methodologies can even be used to predict the success of options prior to full implementation on the actual project. Three approaches/methodologies will be discussed: - Artificial Intelligence; - Change Management; - Blend of Traditional Management (Gantt chart) and Agile Methodologies. As market forces change, so will the direction of project management. The days of 'one size fits all' are no longer valid. A combination of predictive and adaptive approaches in the management of projects is essential to enable execution of project deliverables on time, under budget, and within the contractual scope. This paper is intended to provide the reader with insight to the close relationship of project management trends and business management trends, and to provoke critical thinking about what it means to align project management strategy with an environment of non-stop innovation. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

From Inspiration to Innovation: How an NREL Researcher is Shaping a Sustainable Tomorrow

In this talk, part of the Encontro de Mulheres na Energia Solar, part of the X Brasilian Congress of Solar Energy, I will speak of my strategies towards shaping a sustainable future, through the empowerment of women in science. Nesta palestra do Encontro de Mulheres na Energia Solar, como parte do X Congreso Brasileiro de Energia Solar, vou falar das minhas estrategias para forjar um futuro sustentavel, promovendo o avanco das mulheres na ciencia.

empowering women↗