Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “collaborative partnerships”

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

PCOR partnership initiative to accelerate CCCUS deployment

The Plains CO 2 Reduction (PCOR) Partnership Initiative, led by the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), was a 5-year collaborative effort under the U.S. Department of Energy’s Regional Initiative to Accelerate CCUS (carbon capture, utilization, and storage). With support from the University of Wyoming School of Energy Resources (UW SER), the University of Alaska Fairbanks Institute of Northern Engineering (UAF INE), and a broad network of public and private stakeholders, the program focused on overcoming regional challenges to CCUS across ten U.S. states and four Canadian provinces. This report summarizes the notable findings of the EERC and its collaborators through the 5-year PCOR Partnership Initiative phase. The EERC developed and demonstrated a risk-based area of review (AOR) workflow for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Class VI carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage permitting.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Clearing a Path to Commercialization of Marine Renewable Energy Technologies Through Public–Private Collaboration

Governments are increasingly turning toward public–private partnerships to bring industry support to improving public assets or services. Here, we describe a unique public–private collaboration where a government entity has developed mechanisms to support public and private sector advancement and commercialization of monitoring technologies for marine renewable energy. These support mechanisms include access to a range of skilled personnel and test facilities that promote rapid innovation, prove reliability, and inspire creativity in technology development as innovations move from concept to practice. The ability to iteratively test hardware and software components, sensors, and systems can accelerate adoption of new methods and instrumentation designs. As a case study, we present the development of passive acoustic monitoring technologies customized for operation in energetic waves and currents. We discuss the value of testing different systems together, under the same conditions, as well as the progression through different test locations. The outcome is multiple, complementary monitoring technologies that are well suited to addressing an area of high environmental uncertainty and reducing barriers to responsible deployment of low-carbon energy conversion systems, creating solutions for the future.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

Batteries Annual Progress Report (FY2019)

The Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) of the Department of Energy (DOE) conducts research and development (R&D) on advanced transportation technologies that would reduce the nation’s use of imported oil and would also lead to reductions in harmful emissions. Technologies supported by VTO include electric drive components such as advanced energy storage devices (primarily batteries), power electronics and electric drive motors, advanced structural materials, energy efficient mobility systems, advanced combustion engines, and fuels. VTO is focused on funding early-stage high-reward/high-risk research to improve critical components needed for more fuel efficient (and cleaner-operating) vehicles. One of the major VTO objectives is to enable U.S. innovators to rapidly develop the next generation of technologies that achieve the cost, range, and charging infrastructure necessary for the widespread adoption of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs). An important prerequisite for the electrification of the nation’s light duty transportation sector is development of more cost-effective, longer lasting, and more abuse-tolerant PEV batteries. One of the ultimate goals of this research, consistent with the current vehicle electrification trend, is an EV which can provide the full driving performance, convenience, and price of an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle. To achieve this, VTO has established the following overarching goal (Source: FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification1): …identify new battery chemistry and cell technologies with the potential to reduce the cost of electric vehicle battery packs by more than half, to less than $100/kWh (ultimate goal is $60/kWh battery cell cost), increase range to 300 miles, and decrease charge time to 15 minutes or less by 2028. VTO works with key U.S. automakers through the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) – an umbrella organization for collaborative research consisting of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA), the Ford Motor Company, and General Motors. Collaboration with automakers through the partnership known as U.S. Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle Efficiency and Energy Sustainability (U.S. DRIVE) attempts to enhance the relevance and the success potential of its research portfolio. VTO competitively selects projects for funding through funding opportunity announcements (FOAs). Directly-funded work at the national laboratories are awarded competitively through a lab-call process. During the past year, VTO continued R&D in support of PEVs. Stakeholders for VTO R&D include universities, national laboratories, other government agencies and industry (including automakers, battery manufacturers, material suppliers, component developers, private research firms, and small businesses). This document summarizes the progress of VTO battery R&D projects supported during the fiscal year 2019 (FY 2019).

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Quantum Computing for Biomedical Computational and Data Sciences: A Joint DOE-NIH Roundtable

The overlap of quantum computing and biomedical research, while less explored, presents significant near-term opportunities. The Department of Energy (DOE) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) are interested in exploiting the DOE community’s capabilities and expertise in quantum computing to potentially advance biomedical research, targeting fundamental studies of biological and molecular structures, understanding of human health as well as mental and physical disorders and diseases, and deriving insights from clinical data. NIH’s approach to quantum computing is guided by its Strategic Plan for Data Science, emphasizing the importance of findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) data assets, security and privacy of data, and efficient computing and storage. DOE’s Office of Science (SC), and more specifically the Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program, supports quantum information science (QIS) research, contributing to a unique portfolio of quantum computing and communications expertise. This roundtable was assembled to consider the opportunities and challenges in the near-, medium-, and long-term at the intersection of quantum computing, data science, and biomedical research and how these could be addressed through inter-agency collaboration and multi-disciplinary partnerships.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Building partnerships for development of sustainable energy systems with atmospheric measurements

Atmospheric dynamics often play a critical role in the sustainability and reliability of diverse forms of energy production. This is especially true for the growing number of renewable energy deployments that harness aspects of the environment for power production. While the University of Memphis has a strong research background in energy systems, we have little experience working with the Earth and Environmental Systems Science Division (EESSD) and their associated User Facilities. Of particular interest to us is the Atmospheric Science Research and the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility to address surface-boundary layer interactions and physical phenomena. One of the major challenges for understanding and developing energy systems and management platforms is accurate modeling/forecasting of atmospheric conditions across disparate spatial and temporal scales. These conditions are often required to understand the lowest levels of the atmospheric boundary layer, but are also important to understand higher atmospheric conditions where aerosols affect cloud development. The objective of this work was to develop partnerships with national laboratories for collaboration on environmental science and its intersection with sustainable energy systems, as well as to leverage the ARM user facility data repositories to enhance our research capabilities in energy systems and their inter-dependence on environmental systems for future engagement with EESSD. Specifically, we accomplished these objectives by (1) developing collaborations with Oakridge National Laboratory ARM Data Science and Integration Group which resulted in student internships, (2) employed ARM data to develope modeling of the atmospheric boundary layer optical turbulence, and (3) optimally-sized large-scale renewable energy systems and their associated energy storage systems with ARM repository data.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Unlocking the Tight Oil Reservoirs of the Powder River Basin, Wyoming

The project focused on detailed geologic characterization, geomechanical studies, well completion optimization, stimulation monitoring, and field development strategies. A key aspect involved partnerships with industry and academic collaborators such as Occidental Petroleum, Southern Illinois University, Britt Rock Mechanics and Piri Technologies. Data acquisition included drilling, logging, coring, deployment of fiber optics, and microseismic monitoring. The project emphasized feedback loops for continuous model updating and integration of economic evaluations to guide development strategies.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe Strategic Energy Plan

The Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe's Strategic Energy Plan (SEP) details the outcomes and efforts of a 1.5-year Energy Technology Innovation Partnership Program (ETIPP) project. This collaboration involved the Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, Spark Northwest, the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Project partners supported the Tribe in identifying key energy research focus areas and the Tribe's energy vision. As the technical lead on the project, PNNL led a series of research initiatives to evaluate potential pathways for the Tribe to achieve its energy goals, subsequently providing associated recommendations. The SEP offers a comprehensive analysis encompassing several critical aspects including: -The Tribe's current energy landscape -Availability of renewable resources -Potential microgrid designs, developed by Säzän Group -Critical infrastructure analysis -Electric vehicle integration -An energy workforce development framework, led by Spark Northwest The analysis results come with recommended next steps, categorized by implementation timeframe (short-term, medium-term, long-term) and priority.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Community Solar Policy Screening Workbook for Multifamily Affordable Housing Building Portfolios

This workbook provides a framework to help Multifamily Affordable Housing (MFAH) housing providers evaluate state-level policy landscapes as they relate to MFAH community solar development. By exploring which programs and policies aid in the technical and economic feasibility of MFAH solar projects, building owners can gain an understanding of where in their portfolios to begin developing solar. This workbook also walks through the steps necessary for MFAH building owners to assess their portfolios using this framework. It was developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory for the National Community Solar Partnership (NCSP) Multifamily Affordable Housing Collaborative. Learn more about the NCSP and the Collaborative at https://www.energy.gov/communitysolar/community-solar.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Developing Technology Performance Level Assessments for Early-Stage Wave Energy Converter Technologies: Preprint

The advantage of using Technology Performance Level (TPL) in conjunction with Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessments in guiding technology development trajectories to successful outcomes in less time, at less overall cost, and with less encountered risk has been well articulated in the literature. In partnership with industry and international collaborators, a TPL assessment methodology for grid-connected applications has been developed through the application of the systems engineering approach. Metrics under seven different categories have been developed, weighted based on their relative relevance, and combined to yield a composite score. The methodology has been implemented in a spreadsheet tool plus a web application specifically aimed at assessing early stage (TRL 1-3) concepts. The target use cases are (a) technology developers improving their design, to find fatal flaws early, to get feedback on current design, to identify areas of improvement that will yield the highest return on investment, (b) reviewers assessing technologies in competitions or for making funding decisions, (c) investor or project developer doing due diligence, (d) policy makers landscaping the technology domain for formulating R&D strategy. The methodology and the tools are undergoing continuous improvement based on the experience and lessons learnt from applying it to internal and external marine energy technology development projects. The methodology is also being adapted for assessing WECs servicing markets outside the continental grid - broadly categorized as Powering the Blue Economy (PBE) applications. Such applications have vastly different functional requirements entailing a modification of the methodology to account for their higher risk tolerance, reduced price sensitivities, lower power needs, different permitting protocols, etc. This paper presents the latest status of the TPL assessment methodology and tools, describes its adaptation to select PBE markets, and explores its extension to other domains where it could provide a comprehensive and holistic measure of a nascent or disruptive technology's technoeconomic performance potential.

metrics↗

Developing Technology Performance Level Assessments for Early-Stage Wave Energy Converter Technologies

The advantage of using Technology Performance Level (TPL) in conjunction with Technology Readiness Level (TRL) assessments in guiding technology development trajectories to successful outcomes in less time, at less overall cost, and with less encountered risk has been well articulated in the literature. In partnership with industry and international collaborators, a TPL assessment methodology for grid-connected applications has been developed through the application of the systems engineering approach. Metrics under seven different categories have been developed, weighted based on their relative relevance, and combined to yield a composite score. The methodology has been implemented in a spreadsheet tool plus a web application specifically aimed at assessing early stage (TRL 1-3) concepts. The target use cases are (a) technology developers improving their design, to find fatal flaws early, to get feedback on current design, to identify areas of improvement that will yield the highest return on investment, (b) reviewers assessing technologies in competitions or for making funding decisions, (c) investor or project developer doing due diligence, (d) policy makers landscaping the technology domain for formulating R&D strategy. The methodology and the tools are undergoing continuous improvement based on the experience and lessons learnt from applying it to internal and external marine energy technology development projects. The methodology is also being adapted for assessing WECs servicing markets outside the continental grid - broadly categorized as Powering the Blue Economy (PBE) applications. Such applications have vastly different functional requirements entailing a modification of the methodology to account for their higher risk tolerance, reduced price sensitivities, lower power needs, different permitting protocols, etc. This paper presents the latest status of the TPL assessment methodology and tools, describes its adaptation to select PBE markets, and explores its extension to other domains where it could provide a comprehensive and holistic measure of a nascent or disruptive technology's technoeconomic performance potential.

metrics↗

FENIX: An Open-Source Multiphysics Integrated Framework Enabling Collaborative Development of Plasma Facing Component Modeling Capabilities

Advanced modeling and simulation tools have a crucial role to play in accelerating fusion energy deployment as a sustainable power source. Multiphysics, high-fidelity computational tools can help understand, model, and quantify the complex interactions between materials performance, plasma and neutron exposure, and engineering processes. As a result, they accelerate the design, safety analysis, and performance evaluation of fusion systems. This webinar introduces the Fusion ENergy Integrated multiphys-X (FENIX) framework, an open-source multiphysics tool for plasma facing component modeling. FENIX leverages the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE) framework, which has been developed by the United States Department of Energy Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program. FENIX couples various MOOSE capabilities such as heat transfer, thermomechanics, thermal hydraulics, electromagnetics, and plasma kinetics with the MOOSE-based applications Cardinal (neutronics) and TMAP8 (tritium transport). During the webinar, we will present FENIX and discuss how its modularity, openness, software quality assurance processes, and licensing approach supports effective collaborations, including public-private partnerships.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Jupiter Laser Facility Annual Report, FY 2025

Dear JLF community, I cannot believe I am now entering my third year as JLF director — time definitely flies when you are having fun! FY25 was another pivotal year for the Jupiter Laser Facility, marked by both scientific achievement and growing visibility for our community. Building on the successful reopening and refurbishment of the facility, we continued to demonstrate how JLF drives innovation in high energy density and fusion energy science, laser technology, and workforce development. Across Janus, Titan, and COMET, users executed a diverse portfolio of experiments, from dynamic compression and opacity measurements to laser plasma interactions, laboratory astrophysics, and advanced diagnostics. These efforts are highlighted in this report, including the development of new probes that capture the time evolution of plasmas on a single shot, and diagnostics and platforms that are already impacting experiments at NIF and other large facilities. JLF continues to serve as both a testbed for new ideas and a bridge to larger scale campaigns. FY25 also showcased the broader role of JLF within the Laboratory and the national HED science ecosystem. The NIF JLF User Groups Meeting in February brought nearly 180 participants to Livermore and highlighted the scientific progress made during JLF’s first full year of renewed operations. JLF research and users were recognized with Director’s Institutional Awards and Early and Mid Career awards, underscoring the quality and impact of the work performed here. Our team also contributed prominently to national conversations about laser safety, plasma physics, and inertial fusion energy through invited talks, conferences, and professional society leadership. JLF’s integration with LaserNetUS deepened this year as well. We launched a new technical exchange program across LaserNetUS facilities and kicked it off with a JLF team visit to the BELLA Center at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. These exchanges are strengthening operations, sharing best practices, and improving the user experience across the network. Filming for the LaserNetUS “Behind the Scenes” series and participation in the annual LaserNetUS meeting further increased the visibility of our facility and our users. At the same time, JLF continues to play a central role in ambitious new programs, such as the Big Aperture Thulium laser effort funded through one of the DOE Office of Science Microelectronics Science Research Centers, which will use JLF infrastructure to explore next generation high rep rate lasers for EUV and x-ray source development. A core part of our mission remains training the next generation of scientists. In FY25, we welcomed another cohort of summer students, who joined experimental teams on Titan and presented their research at LLNL’s student poster symposium and national inertial fusion energy meetings. JLF users and early career scientists showcased their work at conferences across the country, highlighting experiments performed at the facility. These hands on experiences, and the mentoring provided by our staff and user teams, are central to JLF’s identity as a true user facility. Finally, FY25 reinforced JLF’s role as a focal point for partnerships and outreach. We hosted visits from international collaborators, science leaders, and we shared the story of the facility through venues such as the Big Ideas Lab podcast. These interactions help connect our work to a broader scientific and policy audience and open new pathways for collaboration. As we look ahead, the combination of refurbished hardware, new capabilities like STILETTO and enhanced short pulse performance on Titan, strong partnerships across LLNL and LaserNetUS, and a growing user community positions JLF for an even more ambitious program in the coming years. I am deeply grateful to our technical and operations staff for their dedication, to our LLNL partners for their continued support, and to our users for bringing bold, creative ideas to the facility. I look forward to more experiments, capabilities, partnerships, and groundbreaking science in the years to come! With brightest regards, Félicie Albert, JLF Director.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the $\textit{Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems}$ (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

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↗

Developments in Processing Criteria for Iron Phosphate Waste Form Design for Treating Electrorefiner Salt Wastes

This report describes work done under a Nuclear Energy University Partnership (NEUP) project that included a collaborative effort between Pacific Northwest National laboratory, University of Nevada Reno, University to Utah, and Missouri University of Science and Technology. In this project, the main goals were the following: (1) to assess H3PO4 dechlorination parameters for halide removal from salt simulants, (2) to evaluate crucible compatibility with iron phosphate glass melts, and (3) to evaluate waste form properties within a ternary system of P2O5 (added as H3PO4), Fe2O3 and fission product simulants.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

The Astronomy Commons Platform: A Deployable Cloud-based Analysis Platform for Astronomy

Abstract We present a scalable, cloud-based science platform solution designed to enable next-to-the-data analyses of terabyte-scale astronomical tabular data sets. The presented platform is built on Amazon Web Services (over Kubernetes and S3 abstraction layers), utilizes Apache Spark and the Astronomy eXtensions for Spark for parallel data analysis and manipulation, and provides the familiar JupyterHub web-accessible front end for user access. We outline the architecture of the analysis platform, provide implementation details and rationale for (and against) technology choices, verify scalability through strong and weak scaling tests, and demonstrate usability through an example science analysis of data from the Zwicky Transient Facility’s 1Bn+ light-curve catalog. Furthermore, we show how this system enables an end user to iteratively build analyses (in Python) that transparently scale processing with no need for end-user interaction. The system is designed to be deployable by astronomers with moderate cloud engineering knowledge, or (ideally) IT groups. Over the past 3 yr, it has been utilized to build science platforms for the DiRAC Institute, the ZTF partnership, the LSST Solar System Science Collaboration, and the LSST Interdisciplinary Network for Collaboration and Computing, as well as for numerous short-term events (with over 100 simultaneous users). In a live demo instance, the deployment scripts, source code, and cost calculators are accessible. 4 4 http://hub.astronomycommons.org/

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗