Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “annual update”

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

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2020 Transportation Update

Consistent cost and performance data for various transportation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' transportation analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes powertrains such as gasoline, diesel, natural gas, hybrid, plug-in hybrid, battery electric, and fuel cell, as well as fuels such as gasoline, ethanol, diesel, biodiesel, natural gas, electricity, and hydrogen.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2024 Electricity Update

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation and storage technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, distributed wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, commercial battery storage, residential battery storage, pumped storage hydropower, nuclear, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2024 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

battery storage↗

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2022 Electricity Update

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' renewable energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation and storage technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, distributed wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, commercial battery storage, residential battery storage, pumped storage hydropower, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for nuclear and conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2022 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

capacity factor↗

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2023 Electricity Update

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' renewable energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation and storage technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, distributed wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, commercial battery storage, residential battery storage, pumped storage hydropower, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for nuclear and conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2023 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

capacity factor↗

Annual Technology Baseline: The 2021 Electricity Update [Slides]

Consistent cost and performance data for various electricity generation technologies can be difficult to find and may change frequently for certain technologies. With the Annual Technology Baseline (ATB), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory annually provides an organized and centralized set of such cost and performance data. The ATB uses the best information from the Department of Energy national laboratories' renewable energy analysts. The ATB has been reviewed by experts and it includes the following electricity generation technologies: land-based wind, offshore wind, utility-scale solar photovoltaics (PV), commercial-scale solar PV, PV plus storage, residential-scale solar PV, concentrating solar power, geothermal power, hydropower, utility-scale battery storage, coal, and natural gas. EIA data for nuclear and conventional biopower are included for reference. This webinar presentation introduces the 2021 update to the ATB Electricity data and documentation.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes

The Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates national and state-level impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, conducted an assessment of the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. A previous PNNL study evaluated the impact of the Building Energy Codes Program. A 2016 study looked more broadly at overall code impacts and this report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced emissions at the state level and at aggregated levels. In 2021, DOE conducted an interim and limited update to its 2016 study to evaluate potential building code updates using the 2016 methodology. That interim update includes estimated savings resulting from updates to the model energy codes, including the ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (ASHRAE 90.1-2016) and 2019 editions, as well as the 2018 and 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). In 2023, DOE developed a fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2019 and 2021 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, annual floorspace additions, state code adoption dates, and emission factors, among others. This current version is another fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2022 and 2024 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, state code adoption dates, emission factors, and renewable energy contribution among others. Energy codes follow a three-phase cycle that starts with the development of a new model code, proceeds with the adoption of the new code by states and local jurisdictions, and finishes when the new code is implemented and builders, architects, and engineers are required to comply with the new provisions. The development of new model code editions creates the potential for increased energy savings. After a new model code is adopted, potential savings are realized in the field when new buildings (or additions and alterations) are constructed to comply with the new code. The contributions of all three phases are crucial to the overall impact of codes and are considered in this assessment. Figure ES.1 schematically describes the analysis framework. Energy savings are expressed in terms of energy use intensity (EUI) in the figure.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

University Coalition for Fossil Fuel Energy Research

Following a nationwide open competition, the University Coalition for Fossil Energy Research (UCFER) was established in October 2015 through a cooperative agreement between Penn State and the Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Penn State lead UCFER with the objective of advancing basic and applied research for clean and low-carbon energy based on fossil fuels in support of the DOE’s mission. UCFER focused on research that improves the efficiency of production and use of fossil energy resources, while minimizing the environmental impacts and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Penn State lead a team of nine universities (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Pennsylvania State University, Princeton University, Texas A&M University, University of Kentucky, University of Southern California, The University of Tulsa, University of Wyoming, and Virginia Polytechnic and State University) during the competition stage, adding seven more universities in 2017 (Carnegie Mellon University, Louisiana State University, The Ohio State University, University of North Dakota, University of Pittsburgh, University of Utah, and West Virginia University). This Coalition exhibited a wide geographical distribution across the U.S. bringing a wide variety of fossil energy expertise. This national university alliance was a major collaborative effort with NETL to address specific topics of R&D in NETL’s mission area, which involved one or more of NETL’s five core competencies (Geologic and Environmental Systems, Materials Engineering and Manufacturing, Energy Conversion Engineering, Systems Engineering and Analysis, and Computational Science and Engineering). The first five to six months of the project was the definitization stage. During this period, Penn State worked closely with NETL to finalize the Coalition organizational structure and By- Laws, prepare a statement of substantial involvement and a statement of project objectives, and develop operations and membership plans. A major component of this stage included preparing an execution plan to solicit research, evaluate proposals, recommend selected projects to NETL, and award projects. In addition, a plan was prepared to monitor projects, review projects, disseminate knowledge from research projects and develop an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. This included developing a website and several databases. The first of six rounds of solicitations started in mid-2016. Projects from the sixth solicitation started February 1, 2021, and ended January 31, 2023. Projects that were selected represented twelve technology lines. Approximately $16.6 million in funding was available for the six solicitations. Most of the funding was provided by DOE, Office of Fossil Energy (DOEFE) with the DOE Fuel Cells Technologies Office (DOE-FCTO) providing funding for a few projects. Coalition universities submitted 259 proposals in response to the solicitations, requesting approximately $67.0 million in funding, and forty-three projects were selected. However, one project withdrew after the principal investigator left the university. The management of the Coalition projects was a major activity by Penn State. Managing the Coalition projects consisted of monitoring the projects, reviewing the projects through annual technical review meetings, disseminating knowledge from the research projects, and developing an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. Penn State’s OMT monitored projects to ensure that all milestones (technical, schedule, budget) were met, expenditures were allowable, cost share (when applicable) were reported, and all technical reports were submitted. The OMT also posted the technical reports electronically on a secure members-only website for access and review by the Coalition members. Disseminating knowledge from the research projects was done through a website, newsletters, various meetings, conferences, journal articles, publicity/press releases, and project summaries that were prepared after each project was completed. Penn State kept NETL apprised of UCFER progress through quarterly reports (thirtyone were submitted by Penn State), verbal and written communications, yearly updates at the annual technical review meetings, and cost accrual reports. The UCFER project had a significant impacty. The UCFER program established the first national university alliance in fossil energy research with a major collaboration effort with DOE NETL that addressed specific topics in NETL’s research and development mission areas. It generated inter-university collaborations, which was another program interest. Twenty-two out of 259 proposals contained collaborations (≈8.5%) and three of forty-two funded projects involved inter-university collaborations (≈7.0%). The forty-two funded projects provided support at fourteen universities involving 269 personnel. Research was conducted by 106 faculty, 115 graduate and undergraduate students, forty-six research staff and post-doctoral scholars, and two visiting scholars. Students and post-doctoral scholars were also on-site at NETL through CRADAs. In addition, non-Coalition participants included six universities and sixteen companies and national laboratories. The non-Coalition participants were involved as subcontractors, providers of cost share, performed unpaid consultation and sample analysis, served as advisory board members, or were providers of samples and materials for testing. UCFER also produced visibility in that fifty-six refereed journal articles were published, fifty-seven conference papers and twenty-three posters were prepared, 190 presentations were given, eight patent applications were filed, two books/book chapters were written, and ten software codes were developed. Collaboration between NETL and the individual projects was a major requirement for all funded projects. This included NETL staff time to support collaboration, consultation, technical guidance, sample preparation and analysis, internships at NETL, on-site testing and equipment usage by Coalition participants at NETL, co-mentoring students, and coauthoring journal articles and conference papers. Collaboration was impacted by COVID-19 in that not all on-site activities could be performed. NETL personnel were coauthors on eight of the conference papers (fourteen percent of the conference papers that were prepared) and seventeen of the journal articles (thirty percent of the journal articles that were prepared). A website was developed for an online proposal solicitation and review process and to provide exposure to UCFER. A website analysis highlighted the large amount of member and general public interest in UCFER by interpreting access statistics from March 2016 through June 2023. Visitors to the site originated from many different organizations, businesses, and countries. The website provided a means to disseminate information to both the general public and the UCFER members and was successfully used for outreach activities. In addition, NETL required that RFP release, proposal submission, and proposal reviews all be performed online. Penn State successfully developed these capabilities in a secure section of the website, which were used throughout the UCFER project. It is recognized that each project had its technical successes. In addition, highlighted successes were compiled and summarized from the research projects. Information was requested from the PIs of completed projects. In addition, Penn State’s Operations Management Team reviewed subcontract reports to identify project successes. Examples of information requested from PIs included (not all-inclusive): new projects that have been funded as a result of UCFER funding; new commercial products; establishment of a new center; new patent; new software; best paper awards; highly-cited work; and graduate student successes. A total of forty-eight highlighted successes were reported.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

2022 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies

These data provide the 2022 update of the Electricity Annual Technology Baseline (ATB). Starting in 2015 NREL has presented the ATB, consisting of detailed cost and performance data, both current and projected, for electricity generation and storage technologies. The ATB products now include data (Excel workbook, Tableau workbooks, and structured summary csv files), as well as documentation and user engagement via a website, presentation, and webinar. Starting in 2021, the data are cloud optimized and provided in the OEDI data lake. The data for 2015 - 2020 are can be found on the NREL Data Search Page. The website documentation can be found on the ATB Website.

Array↗

2023 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies

These data provide the 2023 update of the Electricity Annual Technology Baseline (ATB). Starting in 2015 NREL has presented the ATB, consisting of detailed cost and performance data, both current and projected, for electricity generation and storage technologies. The ATB products now include data (Excel workbook, Tableau workbooks, and structured summary csv files), as well as documentation and user engagement via a website, presentation, and webinar. Starting in 2021, the data are cloud optimized and provided in the OEDI data lake. The data for 2015 - 2020 are can be found on the NREL Data Search Page. The website documentation can be found on the ATB Website.

Array↗

2024 Annual Technology Baseline (ATB) Cost and Performance Data for Electricity Generation Technologies

These data provide the 2024 update of the Electricity Annual Technology Baseline (ATB). Starting in 2015 NREL has presented the ATB, consisting of detailed cost and performance data, both current and projected, for electricity generation and storage technologies. The ATB products now include data (Excel workbook, Tableau workbooks, and structured summary csv files), as well as documentation and user engagement via a website, presentation, and webinar. Starting in 2021, the data are cloud optimized and provided in the OEDI data lake. The data for 2015 - 2020 are can be found on the NREL Data Search Page. The website documentation can be found on the ATB Website.

Array↗

efam: an e xpanded, metaproteome-supported HMM profile database of viral protein fam ilies

Viruses infect, reprogram and kill microbes, leading to profound ecosystem consequences, from elemental cycling in oceans and soils to microbiome-modulated diseases in plants and animals. Although metagenomic datasets are increasingly available, identifying viruses in them is challenging due to poor representation and annotation of viral sequences in databases. Here, we establish efam, an expanded collection of Hidden Markov Model (HMM) profiles that represent viral protein families conservatively identified from the Global Ocean Virome 2.0 dataset. This resulted in 240 311 HMM profiles, each with at least 2 protein sequences, making efam >7-fold larger than the next largest, pan-ecosystem viral HMM profile database. Adjusting the criteria for viral contig confidence from ‘conservative’ to ‘eXtremely Conservative’ resulted in 37 841 HMM profiles in our efam-XC database. To assess the value of this resource, we integrated efam-XC into VirSorter viral discovery software to discover viruses from less-studied, ecologically distinct oxygen minimum zone (OMZ) marine habitats. This expanded database led to an increase in viruses recovered from every tested OMZ virome by ~24% on average (up to ~42%) and especially improved the recovery of often-missed shorter contigs (<5 kb). Additionally, to help elucidate lesser-known viral protein functions, we annotated the profiles using multiple databases from the DRAM pipeline and virion-associated metaproteomic data, which doubled the number of annotations obtainable by standard, single-database annotation approaches. Together, these marine resources (efam and efam-XC) are provided as searchable, compressed HMM databases that will be updated bi-annually to help maximize viral sequence discovery and study from any ecosystem.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗

Design and License Application Development for TRISO-X (Final Scientific Technical Report)

This is the final progress report submitted by X-energy, LLC (XE) to the Department of Energy in support of cooperative agreement DE-NE0008745. This report provides a high-level summary of the work performed during the entire period of performance, running from August 24, 2018 – August 22, 2022. This span of time covers the original 3-year award and a one year no-cost extension. There were five tasks within this project: (1) project management, (2) systems engineering and studies, (3) TRISO-X Facility design, (4) facility license application development, and (5) support to application review. Detailed reporting during execution of the project was provided by a total of 16 quarterly reports, voluntary monthly update presentations, and annual summary presentations. Technical work products include 103 X-energy technical reports, 38 subcontractor (Centrus technical reports), 75 Nuclear Criticality Safety Evaluations/Calculation reports, and 272 miscellaneous design documents (e.g., Engineering Service Orders, Engineering Component Specifications, Procedures, Guidelines/Policies, Design and Interface Requirements documents, and Drawings). All 29 of the X Energy milestones/deliverables were met early or on time and are archived in the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy’s Program Information Control System: Nuclear Energy under Fiscal Year 2018, Work Breakdown Structure F.OA – Industry FOA FY 2018 Awards, F.03 – X-Energy TRISO-X Project. All other work products are available to DOE upon request.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

CARD: CFD for Advanced Reactor Design

Software Tools and Expertise To Address Multiphase Flow Challenges in<p>Research, Design, and Optimization</p><p>This is the annual CARD project update to be presented at the 2024 FECM/NETL Spring R&amp;D Project Review Meeting.</p>

Dietiker, Jeff↗

Collar Properties and Measurement Time Confer Minimal Bias Overall on Annual Soil Respiration Estimates in a Global Database

Abstract Measuring the soil‐to‐atmosphere carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) flux (soil respiration, R S ) is important to understanding terrestrial carbon balance and to forecasting climate change. Such measurements are frequently made using measurement collars permanently inserted into the soil surface. However, differences in measurement duration and frequency, as well as collar properties, may lead to biases in the estimation of annual R S . Using a newly updated global R S database (SRDB‐V5), we investigated the annual R S bias associated with five methodological factors: collar height, collar coverage area, collar insertion depth, measurement duration, and measurement frequency. We found that annual R S was negatively correlated with collar insertion depth, consistent with the idea that collar insertion cuts roots and thus reduces R S . Annual R S was also negatively related with collar height and collar coverage area, perhaps because uniform head‐space mixing is difficult to achieve in larger volume chambers; however, these effects were quantitatively small (bias of ~2% to 10% of mean R S ). We found no correlation of measurement duration or measurement frequency with annual R S . These findings suggest that variation in R S methodology generally introduces minimal bias overall. Therefore, compilations of minimally adjusted annual R S measurements provide a reliable resource for synthesis studies, global annual R S modeling, and investigation of how soil carbon responds to climate change.

Jian, Jinshi↗

Operational Energy Life Cycle Data Development for the National Institute of Standards And Technology (NIST) Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) Neutral Environmental Software Tool (NEST)

For this analysis, regionalized life cycle assessment (LCA) results for environmental impacts (using the Tool for Reduction and Assessment of Chemicals and Other Environmental Impacts [TRACI] 2.1) and cumulative energy demand (using the Federal Life Cycle Analysis Commons Elementary Flow List [FEDEFL] Inventory Methods v1.0.0) were evaluated for the production and utilization of electricity, natural gas, fuel oil, and propane as commodities within residential and commercial buildings. These results can used as a framework for future research into net zero, high-performance buildings, such as done here for the Building Industry Reporting and Design for Sustainability (BIRDS) database by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Engineering Laboratory. The geographical results were assigned to each United States (U.S.) Zone Improvement Plan (ZIP) code based on the ZIP code location and corresponding Balancing Authority Area, natural gas basin, and Petroleum Administration for Defense Districts (PADDs). Additionally, previously developed models were utilized to develop future life cycle profiles. Projections were based on data available from the U.S. Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Outlook 2022 through 2050 (AEO 2022). Electricity LCA models were updated based on AEO 2022 projected annual generation mixes, while the natural gas baseline model was updated based on projected shares of natural gas types (conventional, shale, tight, and coalbed methane). Projections of crude oil production rates and export rates were applied to the petroleum baseline model in five-year increments to investigate their effects on the life cycle profile of fuel oil and propane. While only 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP-100) with climate carbon feedback (CC-FB) and Cumulative Energy Demand are shown in Section 4: Results, the complete results, including Acidification Potential, Eutrophication Potential, Freshwater Ecotoxicity Potential, GWP-100 without inclusion of CC-FB, Human Health Impacts Potentials (Cancer, Non-Cancer), Ozone Depletion Potential, Particulate Matter Formation Potential, and Photochemical Smog Formation Potential, are tabulated for each ZIP code in the Excel worksheets that accompany this analysis. For the Excel spreadsheet tools associated with this report, please go to https://www.netl.doe.gov/energy-analysis/details?id=f8890fac-be55-44ac-aaa9-e2888bfabe93

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Global gridded crop harvested area, production, yield, and monthly physical area data circa 2015

Abstract Here we provide an update to global gridded annual and monthly crop datasets. This new dataset uses the crop categories established by the Global Agro-Ecological Zones (GAEZ) Version 3 model, which is based on the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO) crop production data. We used publicly available data from the FAOSTAT database as well as GAEZ Version 4 global gridded dataset to generate circa 2015 annual crop harvested area, production, and yields by crop production system (irrigated and rainfed) for 26 crops and crop categories globally at 5-minute resolution. We additionally used available data on crop rotations, cropping intensity, and planting and harvest dates to generate monthly gridded cropland data for physical areas for the 26 crops by production system. These data are in standard georeferenced gridded format, and can be used by any global hydrology, land surface, or other earth system model that requires gridded annual or monthly crop data inputs.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗