SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Infrastructure”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 73 records · Page 4

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Third Quarter 2021)

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the third calendar quarter of 2021 (Q3). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the seventh report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Fourth Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the fourth calendar quarter of 2021 (Q4). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the eighth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Third Quarter 2022

Electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure continues to rapidly change and grow. Using data from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Alternative Fueling Station Locator, this report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the third calendar quarter of 2022 (Q3 2022) by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the eleventh report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Fourth Quarter 2022)

Electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure continues to rapidly change and grow. Using data from the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Alternative Fueling Station Locator, this report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the fourth calendar quarter of 2022 (Q4 2022) by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the twelfth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (First Quarter 2023)

Electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure continues to rapidly change and grow. Using data from the U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator, this report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2023 by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with a 2030 infrastructure requirement scenario. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the thirteenth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Second Quarter 2023

Electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure continues to rapidly change and grow. Using data from the U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator, this report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the second calendar quarter of 2023 by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with a 2030 infrastructure requirement scenario. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the fourteenth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Enabling human–infrastructure interfaces for inspection using augmented reality

Decaying infrastructure maintenance cost allocation depends heavily on accurate and safe inspection in the field. New tools to conduct inspections can assist in prioritizing investments in maintenance and repairs. The industrial revolution termed as “Industry 4.0” is based on the intelligence of machines working with humans in a collaborative workspace. Contrarily, infrastructure management has relied on the human for making day-to-day decisions. New emerging technologies can assist during infrastructure inspections, to quantify structural condition with more objective data. However, today’s owners agree in trusting the inspector’s decision in the field over data collected with sensors. If data collected in the field is accessible during the inspections, the inspector decisions can be improved with sensors. New research opportunities in the human–infrastructure interface would allow researchers to improve the human awareness of their surrounding environment during inspections. This article studies the role of Augmented Reality (AR) technology as a tool to increase human awareness of infrastructure in their inspection work. The domains of interest of this research include both infrastructure inspections (emphasis on the collection of data of structures to inform management decisions) and emergency management (focus on the data collection of the environment to inform human actions). This article describes the use of a head-mounted device to access real-time data and information during their field inspection. The authors leverage the use of low-cost smart sensors and QR code scanners integrated with Augmented Reality applications for augmented human interface with the physical environment. This article presents a novel interface architecture for developing Augmented Reality–enabled inspection to assist the inspector’s workflow in conducting infrastructure inspection works with two new applications and summarizes the results from various experiments. The main contributions of this work to computer-aided community are enabling inspectors to visualize data files from database and real-time data access using an Augmented Reality environment.

Maharjan, D.↗

DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: First Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2021 (Q1). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the target infrastructure volume for 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the fifth report in a series. Previous reports from 2020 can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2026

Public water supply infrastructure extensification and diversification in surface waters is insufficient to meet future demands in Texas

The data were developed to evaluate the capacity of existing and potential new surface water supply infrastructure to meet projected public water demands across districts in Texas under multiple future socioeconomic and climate scenarios. The database integrates hydrologic, water quality, infrastructure, energy, cost, demographic, and demand-projection information for candidate surface water supply locations. Candidate sites include stream reaches, waterbodies, reservoir surplus locations, and potential new reservoir sites. Water availability is characterized using historical and projected flow conditions, while site suitability is evaluated using five indicators: Water Availability Index (WAI), Water Quality Index (WQI), Energy Requirement Index (ERI), Water Treatment Cost (WTC), and Water Infrastructure Cost (WIC). The datasets include statewide candidate-site information, district-level demand projections under Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs), runoff-based allocation constraints, climate-stress metrics, and optimization outputs evaluating alternative infrastructure planning strategies. Optimization results compare Business-as-Usual (BAU) and All Surface Water (AllSW) demand-management approaches under both scaled and fixed cost-cap strategies. Associated validation datasets provide district-level feasibility assessments, infrastructure selection outcomes, cost-cap utilization, demand satisfaction metrics, and constraint diagnostics. Additional datasets quantify projected changes in storage and flow conditions as well as water availability stress for both existing and newly selected intake locations under the SSP5 scenario for mid-century and late-century climate conditions. Together, these datasets support assessment of the extent to which surface-water infrastructure expansion and diversification strategies can satisfy future public water demands while accounting for hydrologic, economic, and planning constraints across Texas. Dataset(s) Description Dataset_preoptimization.xlsx Comprehensive pre-optimization dataset containing candidate water-supply sites and associated hydrologic, water-quality, infrastructure, climate, demographic, runoff, and demand-projection variables used as inputs to the optimization analyses. Includes variable descriptions and the full statewide candidate-site database. District_level_site_selection.zip - Compressed archive containing all SSP-specific district-level optimization result files MESIO_ssp1_results.xlsx District-level site selection results for SSP1 (MESIO). Includes variable descriptions, BAU and AllSW site-selection results under scaled and fixed cost strategies, and district-level validation diagnostics. MESID_ssp2_results.xlsx District-level site selection results for SSP2 (MESID). Includes variable descriptions, BAU and AllSW site-selection results under scaled and fixed cost strategies, and district-level validation diagnostics. LCMRD_ssp3_results.xlsx District-level site selection results for SSP3 (LCMRD). Includes variable descriptions, BAU and AllSW site-selection results under scaled and fixed cost strategies, and district-level validation diagnostics. IRDev-Low_ssp4l_results.xlsx District-level site selection results for SSP4-Low (IRDev-Low). Includes variable descriptions, BAU and AllSW site-selection results under scaled and fixed cost strategies, and district-level validation diagnostics. IRDev-High_ssp4h_results.xlsx District-level site selection results for SSP4-High (IRDev-High). Includes variable descriptions, BAU and AllSW site-selection results under scaled and fixed cost strategies, and district-level validation diagnostics. RSIM_ssp5_results.xlsx District-level site selection results for SSP5 (RSIM). Includes variable descriptions, BAU and AllSW site-selection results under scaled and fixed cost strategies, and district-level validation diagnostics. tx_hydrological_stress.xlsx Hydrological stress dataset for existing and newly selected intake locations. Includes projected mid-century and late-century changes, gain/loss classifications, planning strategy information, and accompanying variable descriptions. Also includes water-stress metrics derived from historical and projected low-flow conditions.

Okoye, Perpetua I. (ORCID:0000000215545033)↗

NASA NTRS2012

A Cis-Lunar Propellant Infrastructure for Flexible Path Exploration and Space Commerce

This paper describes a space infrastructure concept that exploits lunar water for propellant production and delivers it to users in cis-lunar space. The goal is to provide responsive economical space transportation to destinations beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) and enable in-space commerce. This is a game changing concept that could fundamentally affect future space operations, provide greater access to space beyond LEO, and broaden participation in space exploration. The challenge is to minimize infrastructure development cost while achieving a low operational cost. This study discusses the evolutionary development of the infrastructure from a very modest robotic operation to one that is capable of supporting human operations. The cis-lunar infrastructure involves a mix of technologies including cryogenic propellant production, reusable lunar landers, propellant tankers, orbital transfer vehicles, aerobraking technologies, and electric propulsion. This cislunar propellant infrastructure replaces Earth-launched propellants for missions beyond LEO. It enables users to reach destinations with smaller launchers or effectively multiplies the user s existing payload capacity. Users can exploit the expanded capacity to launch logistics material that can then be traded with the infrastructure for propellants. This mutually beneficial trade between the cis-lunar infrastructure and propellant users forms the basis of in-space commerce.

Oeftering, Richard C.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Offshore Oil and Gas Infrastructure Reuse for CCS: Opportunities and Challenges in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico

The United States Gulf of Mexico has historically been a significant oil and gas producing region and continues to produce hydrocarbons today. As such, significant investments have been made to install oil and gas infrastructure such as pipelines, platforms, and wells. As these assets reach the end of their useful life or production associated with the assets is curtailed, the assets become a liability for both the owner/operators and the U.S. and state governments responsible for regulating the assets. There are costs and risks associated with safely decommissioning the assets, and in some cases, the assets may be abandoned (e.g., the owner is no longer a going concern). In parallel, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology has developed in the United States and interest and incentives for CCS projects have accelerated in recent years, with many public announcements of CCS projects in development in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico region. The region is particularly well-suited to CCS due to the high density of industry on the coastline (i.e., CO 2 sources) and favorable geology in the near-offshore region. CCS also requires the use of many of the same assets required for oil and gas production (pipelines, platforms, wells) and the oil and gas industry has direct experience with CO 2 transport and injection (i.e., EOR). Therefore, the combination of existing infrastructure in close proximity to potential CCS project sites appears to provide a potential “win-win” solution for re-use of existing oil and gas assets. This paper presents a high-level evaluation of oil and gas infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico with the goals of identifying the scale of the opportunity (e.g., how much existing infrastructure is realistically re-usable), identifying gaps in knowledge/policy/information required to evaluate existing infrastructure for re-use, and proposing key actions that could be pursued to further the assessment of existing infrastructure re-use for CCS.

Infrastructure, reuse, re-purpose, oil and gas, pi↗

DOE OSTI2022

Leveraging SETS resilience capabilities for safe-to-fail infrastructure under climate change

As the rehabilitation of infrastructure is outpaced by changes in the profile, frequency, and intensity of extreme weather events, infrastructure’s service disruptions and failures become increasingly likely. Safe-to-fail approaches for infrastructure planning and design improve the capacity of cities to adapt for uncertain climate futures by identifying social, ecological, and technological systems (SETS) capabilities to prepare for potential failure scenarios. In this work, we argue for transforming infrastructure planning and design to effectively utilize safe-to-fail approaches by navigating the opportunities and trade-offs of SETS resilience capabilities. From a technological vantage point, traditional infrastructure planning approaches account for social and ecological domains as external design conditions rather than embedded system characteristics. Safe-to-fail approaches directly challenge the isolation of the technological domain by necessitating a recognition that SETS domains are interconnected and interdependent in infrastructure systems, as such risks and system capabilities for resilience must be managed cohesively.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2019

Public charging infrastructure for plug-in electric vehicles: What is it worth?

A lack of charging infrastructure is an important barrier to the growth of the plug-in electric vehicle (PEV) market. Public charging infrastructure has tangible and intangible value, such as reducing range anxiety or building confidence in the future of the PEV market. Quantifying the value of public charging infrastructure can inform analysis of investment decisions and can help predict the impact of charging infrastructure on future PEV sales. Estimates of willingness to pay (WTP) based on stated preference surveys are limited by consumers' lack of familiarity with PEVs. As an alternative, we focus on quantifying the tangible value of public PEV chargers in terms of their ability to displace gasoline use for PHEVs and to enable additional electric (e-) vehicle miles for BEVs, thereby mitigating the limitations of shorter range and longer recharging time. Simulation studies provide data that can be used to quantify e-miles enabled by public chargers and the value of additional e-miles can be inferred from econometric estimates of WTP for increased vehicle range. Functions are synthesized that estimate the WTP for public charging infrastructure by plug-in hybrid and battery electric vehicles, conditional on vehicle range, annual vehicle travel, pre-existing charging infrastructure, energy prices, vehicle efficiency, and household income. A case study based on California's public charging network in 2017 indicates that, to the purchaser of a new BEV with a 100-mile range and home recharging, existing public fast chargers are worth about $1500 for intraregional travel, and fast chargers along intercity routes are valued at over $6500.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2025

CHARGE-MAP: An integrated framework to study the multicriteria EV charging infrastructure expansion problem

The widespread adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) in recent years has necessitated the development of effective charging infrastructures. However, charging infrastructure expansion is a multifaceted problem that requires careful consideration of the existing infrastructure, spatiotemporal distribution of charging demands, power-grid capacity, and budget constraints. Here, to approach this complex problem, we present CHARGE-MAP, a data-driven simulation-optimization framework, focused on ensuring meaningful charging experience for individual EV owners. CHARGE-MAP integrates three modules: an agent-based simulation module that estimates spatiotemporal distribution of charging demands by modeling EV adopter mobility and charging behavior; an optimization module that determines optimal new charging station/charger locations and capacities, while minimizing expected detour distances and wait-times with a limited number of new stations; and a power module that determines how to connect the stations to the power grid while maintaining its stability. Using the state of Virginia (consisting of 95 counties and 38 independent cities) as a case study, our results show that CHARGE-MAP can meet the demand of ~198,600 predicted EVs with 1,305 new public charging stations and 2,164 new chargers. It reduces average detour distances for charging by 66% and wait-times at stations by 72% compared to the existing infrastructure. Furthermore, transformer capacity requirement analysis reveals that only 1.8% of residential transformers require upgrades, while over 80% of commercial charging locations can be supported with modest transformer infrastructure (25 to 50 kVA). This indicates that targeted investments can facilitate cost-effective EV integration. Consequently, CHARGE-MAP provides policymakers and urban planners with crucial data-driven insights for effective EV charging infrastructure expansion. Sign up for PNAS alerts.

charging infrastructure↗

DOE OSTI2025

MRCI Task 4: Evaluating Regional Infrastructure Technical Summary Report

The infrastructure required to enable carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) goes beyond the equipment and materials needed to capture, transport, and store carbon dioxide (CO2) but includes people and policy that make CCS feasible. The Infrastructure Assessment task of the Midwest Regional Carbon Initiative (MRCI) seeks to determine the infrastructure requirements for the MRCI study area through four activities: • Infrastructure Readiness: Strategizing the buildout of capture, transport, and storage infrastructure in the Midwest, Northeast, and Mid-Atlantic Offshore. • Site Readiness: Determining the CCS readiness of each state in the MRCI region in the categories of subsurface readiness; infrastructure readiness; regulations, permitting, and incentives; and social dynamics. • Jobs, Economics, and Social Characteristics: Quantifying the economic potential, job opportunities, and training opportunities for CCS as well as the social characteristics of the region with a focus on energy and environmental justice (EJ) issues. • Policy and Regulations: Providing an updated accounting of the CCS-relevant policy and regulations in the MRCI region.

CCUS,Carbon storage,Midwest,Midwest Regional Carbo↗

NASA NTRS2017

ISRU-Based Robotic Construction Technologies For Lunar And Martian Infrastructures

Economically viable and reliable building systems and tool sets are being sought, examined and tested for extraterrestrial infrastructure buildup. This project utilizes a unique architecture weaving the robotic building construction technology with designs for assisting rapid buildup of initial operational capability Lunar and Martian bases. The project intends to develop and test methodologies to construct certain crucial infrastructure elements in order to evaluate the merits, limitations and feasibility of adapting and using such technologies for extraterrestrial application. High priority infrastructure elements suggested by our NASA advisors to be considered include landing pads and aprons, roads, blast walls and shade walls, thermal and micrometeorite protection shields and dust-free platforms utilizing the well-known insitu resource utilization (ISRU) strategy. Current extraterrestrial settlement buildup philosophy holds that in order to minimize the materials needed to be flown in, at great transportation costs, strategies that maximize the use of locally available resources must be adopted. Tools and heavy equipment flown as cargo from Earth are proposed to build required infrastructure to support future missions and settlements on the Moon and Mars. Several unique systems including the Lunar Electric Rover, the unpressurized Chariot rover, the versatile light-weight crane and Tri-Athlete cargo transporter as well as the habitat module mockups and a new generation of spacesuits are undergoing coordinated tests at NASAs D-RATS. This project intends to draw up a detailed synergetic plan to utilize these maturing systems coupled with modern robotic fabrication technologies based primarily on 3D Printing, tailored for swift and reliable Lunar and Martian infrastructure development. This project also intends to increase astronaut safety, improve buildup performance, ameliorate dust interference and concerns, and reduce time-to-commission, all in an economic manner. The goal stated in our Phase I proposal was a high fidelity demonstration at D-RATS to be conducted at the conclusion of the Phase II study. In the course of the Phase I study, however, it became clear that such demonstration was neither possible (due to the maximum Phase II budget limitation and the cost of NASA assets and related overhead expenses to support such demonstrations), nor necessary (due to NASA's low TRL expectation of Phase II results). These important facts were revealed to us only after interacting with the NIAC administrators and meetings with potential future partners at JPL and KSC. Accordingly, it was decided by the team that in order to make best use of resources we should investigate novel directions in the adaptation of our fabrication technologies by using in-house laboratories and to produce truly useful technologies and data, and then proceed with high fidelity demonstration at a later opportunity when sufficient resources become available. Furthermore, we have recognized that in addition to our building scale 3D printing technology called Contour Crafting, variations of some of our other fabrication technologies under development are suitable for construction of infrastructure elements such as regolith based ceramic tiles and hence we have decided to include some related preliminary research in this Phase II proposal.

Extraterrestrial↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Tall Lunar Towers: Systems Analysis of a Lunar-Surface-Assembled Power, Communication, and Navigation Infrastructure

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) intends to develop and maintain a human-lunar presence, requiring infrastructure on the Lunar South Pole. To keep pace with the continued growth in cislunar activity, there is national interest in developing a global lunar infrastructure network for power and Communication, Position, Navigation, and Timing (CPNT). Demonstrating autonomous construction capabilities is an infrastructure-enabling objective. This study explores several architecture trade studies to assess the feasibility of alternative lunar infrastructure concepts. 50 m towers, for instance, enable solar power generation up to 99% of a lunar year in addition to acting as wide-range communication and navigation surface relays. The infrastructure network considered in this study consisted of tower platforms, utilities hosted on the towers, and both crewed and robotic end users. High-level trades were analyzed, such as tower height, location, and distributed vs centralized power grids. Results indicated that even with minimal permanent surface assets (darkness survival power loads on the order of 5 kW or greater), at any of the five locations considered, taller towers resulted in lower infrastructure mass than shorter towers; up to 24% system mass savings were realized by reducing battery mass. Simultaneously, taller towers increased the range of communication coverage; a 50 m tower on the Connecting Ridge had 5 kg more structure and 76% more line-of-sight coverage to a two-meter-tall end user than a 10 m tower with the same location and user height. Leveraging a grid of tall towers for nominal power and communication would not only save up to 2,800 kg in battery mass but would be more maintainable and allow users to take advantage of generational upgrades.

lunar infrastructure↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Space Superhighway: Enabling Active Debris Remediation Through an In-Space Logistics Infrastructure

The Space Superhighway is a future space infrastructure concept intended to support civil, commercial, and national security space interests by providing In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing (ISAM) services across low Earth orbit (LEO), geosynchronous orbit (GEO), and cislunar space. This concept was originally developed by an interagency working group and commissioned by the Executive Office of the President. The Space Superhighway is comprised of three primary components: regional hubs, a sustainable transportation network, and Earth-to-orbit logistics. This study establishes methods which may be used to quantify the cost-savings from use of the Space Superhighway infrastructure and interrogates the effects of the use of this logistics network on a specific use case – removal of 26 pieces of large space debris within LEO. Through application of the established methods and assuming an emplaced Space Superhighway infrastructure with no cost implications related to deployment of infrastructure-related spacecraft, this study found that the cost to use an established Space Superhighway infrastructure to remove the targeted debris may be cheaper than removal of the targeted debris through traditional methods when the ΔV between a regional hub hosting propellant and the debris field is less than 1500 m/s. Through determining optimized locations of regional hubs within LEO, this study estimates that such a ΔV is within expectations for a LEO environment supported by a fully evolved Space Superhighway logistics infrastructure. This study provides a blueprint for future Space Superhighway value proposition studies for other use cases which, when combined, may provide the ultimate benefit and justification for the proliferation of an interconnected Space Superhighway.

Space Superhighway↗