Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “National Energy Technology Laboratory”

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

Abstract for CRADA between National Energy Technology Laboratory and Shell International Exploration & Production, Inc

Introducing CO₂ into geothermal systems as a working fluid in reservoirs can enhance geothermal conductivity, production, and pressure maintenance. A cross-disciplinary interaction of geothermal reservoir stimulation and CO₂ utilization satisfies renewable energy demands and operations that support sustainable energy infrastructure. Challenges to implementing CO₂-stimulated geothermal enhancement (CS-GE) include (1) accurately characterizing and imaging CO₂-stimulated geothermal reservoirs; (2) quantitatively inferring CS-GE evolution under current and future engineered conditions for cost effective operations; and (3) monitoring resources by improving observational methods to advance the understanding of complex geothermal systems for sweep efficiency and, ultimately, cost effectiveness. NETL and Shell will collaborate under this CRADA to develop software to image key features, including CO₂-stimulated fracture imaging, CO₂ fluid sweep imaging and heat transfer and exchange imaging by leveraging available datasets and applying advanced Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning (AI/ML), multi-level data analytics and data/information fusion to better understand the comprehensive mechanisms of CO₂-stimulated geothermal systems.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) between National Energy Technology Laboratory and Susteon, Inc. (Final Report)

NETL developed a nanostructured Fe catalyst capable of converting syngas to olefins. Initial laboratory testing demonstrated this technology possessed high reactivity (~70% conversion), good olefin selectivity (~40 weight %), and a long-performance lifetime (greater than 500 h on stream with no degradation). Under CRADA Agreement 0988, NETL and Susteon collaborated to evaluate the commercial potential of this catalyst technology by scaling up the catalyst synthesis and collecting reactivity data to characterize the mass and energy balance associated with utilizing this catalyst in a Fischer Tropsch to Olefins (FTO) reactor. Research under CRADA Agreement 0988 illustrated there are technical barriers associated with synthesizing the catalyst that the team was not able to overcome. Reactivity testing with this material illustrated that the catalyst deactivated in less than 50 hours of time on stream. Due to this technical barrier, the team did not meet its Go/No-Go decision target of creating a FTO process that produces at least a 25% reduction in olefin production cost compared to the current state-of the-art technologies. As a result, the team has stopped all work on CRADA Agreement 0988.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Abstract for CRADA between National Energy Technology Laboratory and American Institute of Chemical Engineers dba RAPID Manufacturing Institute

NETL and RAPID Manufacturing will develop advanced electromagnetic (EM) reactors and catalysts to produce light olefins from alternative feedstocks using CO2 soft oxidation. Light olefins are the building blocks for many plastic products, in addition to synthetic fibers, rubbers, and polymers. This project has the potential to produce high-value light olefins from alternative feedstocks with reduced energy consumption (50-70%), carbon intensity (50-70%), and production cost (15-25%) compared to the traditional olefin production processes.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

NRAP Recommended Practices for Containment Assurance and Leakage Risk Quantification

This report presents recommendations for quantitatively assessing and managing leakage risk and effective containment assurance at geologic carbon storage (GCS) sites, amidst uncertainty in site characteristics and performance. These recommended practices are a product of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP)—a multi-year collaborative research effort of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. These recommended practices are organized as a set of conceptual workflows that correspond with the stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They consider aspects of site characterization, quantification of potential leakage, assessing the spatial extent of potential environmental impacts, optimizing monitoring design for detection of potential leakage, evaluation of concordance between monitored and forecasted reservoir response, assessing conformance with expected/accepted performance, and determination of the timeline over which risk of impactful leakage can be expected to abate. These conceptual workflows are intended to aid stakeholders in making risk management decisions at GCS sites and to support development of sound, risk-based justifications for characterizing the subsurface, defining area of potential leakage impact, designing site monitoring plans, selecting leakage risk management/mitigation alternatives, and estimating site closure timelines.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Distribution System Model Calibration for GMLC 3.3.3 "Incipient Failure Identification for Common Grid Asset Classes" - Project Summary

Distribution system model calibration is a key enabling task for incipient failure identification within the distribution system. This report summarizes the work and publications by Sandia National Laboratories on the GMLC project titled “Incipient Failure Identification for Common Grid Asset Classes”. This project was a joint effort between Sandia National Laboratories, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The included work covers distribution system topology identification, transformer groupings, phase identification, regulator and tap position estimation, and the open-source release and implementation of the developed algorithms.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Materials Challenges and Opportunities for Energy Generation, Conversion, Delivery, and Storage (Applied Energy Tri-Laboratory Consortium Workshop Report)

This report documents the outcomes of the Tri-Laboratory Materials Workshop that was held July 31 and August 1, 2019 to begin addressing the needs, opportunities, and challenges associated with the development, fabrication, and testing of the needed materials and components for integrated hybrid energy systems (i.e., incorporating nuclear, fossil, and renewables for electric and thermal applications). This was accomplished by assembling the research program leads and principal investigators at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), who support the research and development of new technology and system integration. The team then identified and prioritized key materials development needs. This effort was intended to enhance communications and synergy among the Tri-Lab partners. Advanced functional and structural materials are central to transformative energy technologies for energy generation, conversion, delivery, and storage. With that in mind, the workshop focused on identifying and assessing the foundational materials research needs at both the basic and applied levels. Materials challenges include the ability to withstand harsh environments, such as high temperatures and pressures, corrosion, oxidation, or irradiation while maintaining flexible mission profiles and long service lifespans. Advanced energy system material challenges and needs range from materials for the capture, upgrading/concentration, storage, and delivery of low-grade heat to materials for high temperature environments that involve liquid metals, molten salt, and very high temperature gas heat delivery and storage systems. Material improvements are needed for hybrid energy systems due to accelerated corrosion and stress-fatigue failure of materials and equipment, which results from increased frequency and amplitude of thermal, mechanical, and electrical cycling of systems components. Multifunctional materials are needed for high temperature solid-oxide fuel cells, advanced electrochemical reactors, and in-process separation. Relative to materials manufacturing, application of advanced additive and subtractive methods need to be understood to develop both thin-layer homogenous materials and materials of graded composition. Materials modeling and machine learning will be critical to accelerate the design and production of power electronics, and nuclear reactor materials and fuel, as well as to gain an understanding of beneficial materials phenomena or deleterious microstructure evolution. There is also a need for standardized models, computational structures, data reporting protocols and modeling tools across the three laboratories. This would allow consistent results, analysis, and data sharing. Combining computational capabilities between the three laboratories (e.g., hardware, software) would greatly increase computational capabilities and throughput. The workshop identified the need for laboratories to anticipate and address problems that will occur during scale-up. Laboratory work must connect with industry to ensure that research focuses on processes that are scalable and marketable. Industry input and perspective are essential to guide laboratory research to meet these requirements and deploy new technology in industrial demonstrations. Another aspect of scale-up is the integration of multiple systems since new challenges often arise at the subsystem interfaces. Establishing a scale-up manufacturing demonstration/pilot plant, potentially as an industrial user facility, would be beneficial to the laboratories and industry. That modular scale-up manufacturing demonstration/pilot plant would allow researchers to find and resolve interface problems that cannot be identified by focusing only on individual parts. Communication exchanges among the organizers, attendees, and workshop survey responses indicate that the workshop was successful in achieving its goal to identify key technology gaps and research needs. Strong positive feedback was received on the sharing of ideas, capabilities, talent, and passion to move forward on the materials-related action items.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

USE OF NOVEL REFRACTORY DESIGN AND INSTALLATION TECHNIQUES FOR IMPROVED ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN IRON AND STEEL AND OTHER ENERGY INTENSIVE INDUSTRIES

This work describes a US Department of Energy funded program which unites key players to develop and deploy new technologies aimed at increasing energy efficiencies while reducing their overall energy and environmental footprint. The research brings together a vertically integrated collaborative team consisting of the end user (US Steel), material producers/suppliers (Allied Mineral Products and Reno Refractories), raw material suppliers (American Metallurgical Services, Minerals Manufacturing), and research organizations (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory and University of Alabama-Birmingham) with the objective of designing and producing new refractory materials. Design and production criteria are based on novel aggregates, improved particle packing, and engineered surface textures. In addition, the recycling and use of spent refractory materials has been investigated resulting in development of a novel installation technique that utilizes additive manufacturing technology and existing refractory shotcrete technology. The combination of these new technologies will improve the energy, environmental, and economic efficiencies of the steel industry while reducing the environmental footprint. The developed technology is potentially applicable to additional energy intensive industries including cement, glass, pulp and paper, and non-ferrous metals processing.

Hemrick, James↗
DOE OSTI2022

Use of novel refractory design and installation techniques for improved energy efficiency in iron and steel and other energy intensive industries

This paper describes the planned work to be performed under a United States Department of Energy funded project to bring together the key players necessary to develop and deploy new technology which could increase the thermal efficiency of the steel industry as well as other energy intensive industries. It is hoped that such improvements in energy efficiency will reduce the overall energy and environmental footprint of domestic industry, as well as provide economic benefit to the individual companies. The described project brings together a vertically integrated collaborative team consisting of the end user (U.S. Steel), material producers/suppliers (Allied Mineral Products and Reno Refractories), raw material suppliers (American Metallurgical Services, Minerals Manufacturing), and research organizations (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory and University of Alabama-Birmingham) with the objective of designing and producing new refractory materials based on novel aggregates, improved particle packing, and engineered surface texture. In addition, the recycling and use of spent refractory materials will be investigated and a novel installation technique will be developed taking advantage of new additive manufacturing technology and existing refractory shotcrete technology. It is hoped that the combination of these new technologies will allow for the improvement of the energy, environmental, and economic efficiency of the steel industry while also reducing the environmental footprint of the refractory and steel industries. Additionally, the developed technology is expected to be applicable to other energy intensive industries such as cement, glass, pulp and paper, and non-ferrous metals processing.

Hemrick, James↗
DOE OSTI2025

National Energy Water Treatment & Speciation (NEWTS): A Water & Critical Mineral Database and Dashboard

The scarcity of water resources, the need for beneficial water reuse, and the challenges of wastewater treatment are becoming increasingly pressing in economic, social, and environmental domains. Addressing these concerns requires effective treatment strategies to manage wastewater streams and tackle environmental and economic issues. Furthermore, the recovery of critical minerals from the waste streams associated with energy production holds the promise of offsetting treatment costs and securing local sources of valuable minerals. However, relevant data on these waste streams are dispersed and challenging to locate. The process of ingesting such data into modeling software often involves multiple steps, requiring data restructuring to meet software-input requirements. The non-standardized reporting of water data makes data aggregation and reformatting a time-consuming process. Additionally, essential attributes necessary for modeling water treatment and mineral scale formation are frequently missing. Moreover, data gaps vary depending on the region of interest. Consequently, there is a pressing need for high-quality energy-water composition data that can be easily imported into water chemistry modeling software. To address this need, the National Energy Technology Laboratory has created the National Energy Water Treatment and Speciation (NEWTS) Database and Dashboard—a free online tool catering to community leaders and water researchers. NEWTS facilitates a comprehensive understanding of the composition of energy-related wastewater streams in the United States. The datasets provide detailed concentrations and speciation of major and minor aqueous compounds in energy-related wastewater streams, including power plant leachate, acid mine drainage, brackish water, and oil and gas produced water across the United States. Many of the aqueous species are critical minerals (Li, REEs) in high demand to modernize the world’s energy infrastructure. Many of the datasets also contain volumetric flow-rates needed to model the treatment and reuse scenarios in advanced aqueous chemistry software programs. The NEWTS Database and Dashboard offer public access to hitherto challenging-to-access datasets, presented in a standardized format that is tailored for easy input into aqueous chemistry modeling software. By performing the work needed to transform dispersed, disparate data sources into unified, model-ready datasets, NEWTS serves as an essential resource in advancing water treatment research and sustainable water resource management.

produced water management↗
DOE OSTI2024

Investigating Material Properties of Subsurface Rock Formations Modified by Engineering Mineral Precipitation (Final Scientific and Technical Report)

Montana State University’s (MSU) Energy Research Institute (ERI), in collaboration with the Center for Biofilm Engineering (CBE) and the Department of Civil Engineering (CE), has conducted a long‐term research program aimed at developing a novel cementing agent to address wellbore integrity and reduce the unwanted upward migration of fluids and greenhouse gases from the subsurface. The primary technology developed through this research program is known as ureolysis‐induced calcite precipitation (UICP), which harnesses bio‐chemical processes to precipitate calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ). The same general process can also be called microbially-induced calcium carbonate precipitation (MICP) when microbes provide the process-catalyzing urease enzyme. Both terms are used in this report. Results have conclusively demonstrated that, if properly controlled, UICP can successfully seal fractures, high permeability zones, and compromised cement in the vicinity of wellbores and in nearby caprock. This technology has been successfully deployed to mitigate annular leakage in two test wells and over sixty commercial wells with a 100% success rate. This success in downhole deployment generates consideration of other subsurface applications where UICP could provide benefit to the energy sector, such as shale property modification for unconventional oil and gas recovery. The focus of this research project was to investigate fundamental material and mechanical properties of select shale cores and analyze how these properties change due to engineered mineral precipitation with the intent to control these properties to achieve a range of engineering objectives. Ultimately, the project aim was to identify valuable new areas where application of UICP might contribute to national energy security and environmental protection. The research workplan coupled UICP treatment of core samples, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) characterization, and mechanical strength testing at MSU with advanced X‐Ray micro-computed tomography (μCT) imaging and numerical modeling performed by collaborators at two national laboratories, the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). Experimental results are useful to inform geo-mechanical models which could be applied to predict mineralized rock formation behavior at field scale. Our findings suggest that NMR and μCT methods to detect and quantify biomineral formation in shale fractures are complementary and consistent with each other. Either could be used to estimate the volume of new mineral formed by UICP in shale fractures. The use of surfactants and guar gum to enhance biomineral precipitation in shale fractures merits further research. UICP can, under some conditions, increase the tensile strength of sealed shale fractures beyond that of the intact shale. These findings demonstrate that continued research in this area may be valuable to understanding and improving shale resource recovery techniques.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗