SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Variable Grid Method”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

743 records · Page 42

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2021

Case Study: Hybrid Carbon Conversion Using Low-Carbon Energy Sources in Coal-Producing States

The demand for more carbon efficient power sources and a decrease in natural gas prices has decreased the desire for coal power. This decrease in demand has led to massive job losses in coal mining regions over the past decade. The purpose of this project is to develop a hybrid energy system utilizing both a coal power plant and advanced reactor, which is competitive with natural gas by improving on profitability and decreasing carbon emissions. This report details the problem with a summary of the impact on the coal industry and the availability of renewable energy sources in the Appalachian region. Because of the geography of the region, variable renewable energy sources are not available without significant size and siting restrictions. However, biomass in the form of wood waste is abundant and can be used as a carbon neutral energy source. Combining biomass and coal processing, in addition to thermal power plants, can increase system profits and efficiency by providing peaking power and conversion opportunities for secondary markets. The electric load is based on publicly available demand data from Appalachian Power, which services the western Virginia and southern West Virginia in the Appalachian region. The demand information is combined by service, normalized, and scaled to an average demand of 1000 kW, which will be the basis for sizing the hybrid energy system. A traditional screening curve analysis for a coal plant and advanced reactor shows that the least cost design varies significantly based on the assumed discount rate and capital recovery period. An optimization program to size the design in TEAL based on the load curve gives 10 optimal designs, all with a negative resulting net present value (NPV) and a coal plant capacity of less than 15%. Including profits from selling captured carbon at a flat rate results in a positive NPV; however, the coal capacity factor only increases to about 40%. There are limitations with this optimization as well since the price of CO2 is likely to decrease as more is sold to the conversion market. The suggested design will combine coal power, an advanced reactor, and coal and biomass coprocessing to produce a variety of products that can be sold to the conversion market while increasing system efficiency. The analysis of conversion pathways for coal and biomass reveals that multiple options will need to be included in the analysis to produce the optimal system design. Three systems will be optimized and compared to determine the best design based on the figures of merit of total NPV and cost of carbon avoided. The first system will include a coal power plant and an advanced reactor that will sell electricity to the grid to meet demand and sell captured carbon to the conversion market. The second system adds a high-temperature steam electrolysis plant, which will utilize electricity during times of low demand to produce hydrogen and sell it to the conversion market. The third system adds biomass and coal processing with options for hydrocarbon oils, syngas to be produced for the conversion market, and electricity generation to power components within the system or provide peaking power. This analysis will be based on a new approach that combines traditional screening curve methods with a dispatch algorithm that optimizes the system based on the opportunity cost of different production options. The resulting optimization algorithm should provide results with less processing time than HERON’s decision tree method. The results from this analysis will determine an optimal design and reinforce the benefits of coal power when used in a hybrid energy system. The initial results show that the addition of a secondary market for carbon sales could result in a positive NPV and increases the capacity factor of the coal plant as compared to a design with only sales to the electricity market. The addition of more markets and additional coal consumption from biomass coprocessing could increase NPV further, replace carbon in other markets through the sale of biomass-derived hydrocarbons, and demonstrate the value of coal power technology.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2020

Models and Strategies for Optimal Demand Side Management in the Chemical Industries

Deregulation and the increase of renewable electricity generation from wind and solar photovoltaics have transformed the U.S. electricity market. Economic and environmental benefits notwithstanding, the presence of renewables has increased variability and uncertainty on the supply side of the grid. Managing demand, rather than generation – a strategy referred to as “demand response (DR)” – is an attractive approach for mitigating this imbalance. DR efforts aim to reduce electricity usage during peak demand times, lessening stress on the grid. Industrial users are particularly attractive entities for DR participation since they present large, localized loads that can provide significant relief on grid demand and –unlike other large loads, such as buildings – are minimally dependent on human needs and preferences. In this project, we accomplished three main objectives. (1) We developed data-driven low-order DR scheduling-relevant dynamic models of chemical processes. Concurrently, we studied the formulation and solution of the associated optimal DR production scheduling problems. (a) A prototype air separation unit (ASU) model was used to generate simulated operating data for initial modeling efforts, which enabled the later use of industrial data for data-driven modeling. (b) We utilized Hammerstein-Wiener (HW) and Finite Step Response (FSR) models to represent nonlinear plant dynamics. (c) The HW models were linearized using exact linearization so they could potentially be embedded in power system models, which are formulated as mixed integer linear programs (MILPs). (d) We solved DR optimization problems under uncertainty and found that even naïve predictions of electricity price and product demand led to significant cost savings benefits. (2) Our DR scheduling optimization problem formulations are amenable to real-time solution. (a) We utilized Lagrangian Relaxation (LR) to efficiently solve the optimization problem by decoupling subproblems linked by complicating constraints. (b) We have achieved computation times for the 3-day DR scheduling problem of an ASU as low as 1.88 minutes. (3) Our representations of the DR behavior of chemical process as grid-level batteries were embedded in power system models. (a) For a small-scale grid, we found that incorporating the dynamics of the chemical plant in the optimal power flow calculations resulted in better resource management leading to up to 15% and 46% cost reduction for the grid and chemical plant operations, respectively, during periods of power line congestion. We have published several works dedicated to modeling and solving DR optimization problems from the user side. These were published in top peer-reviewed journals and are summarized in this report. The most recent work (and papers in preparation) considers DR scheduling from the grid side. Future efforts will consider networked plants (e.g., air separation units operating on a common pipeline) for DR participation, which is expected to amplify the capabilities of industrial DR participants to perform load-shifting. Our consideration of uncertainty in DR has inspired future directions in this area as well: we plan to develop multistage methods to fully account for the effects of uncertainty in DR scheduling.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Global Methane Budget 2000–2020

Abstract. Understanding and quantifying the global methane (CH4) budget is important for assessing realistic pathways to mitigate climate change. CH4 is the second most important human-influenced greenhouse gas in terms of climate forcing after carbon dioxide (CO2), and both emissions and atmospheric concentrations of CH4 have continued to increase since 2007 after a temporary pause. The relative importance of CH4 emissions compared to those of CO2 for temperature change is related to its shorter atmospheric lifetime, stronger radiative effect, and acceleration in atmospheric growth rate over the past decade, the causes of which are still debated. Two major challenges in quantifying the factors responsible for the observed atmospheric growth rate arise from diverse, geographically overlapping CH4 sources and from the uncertain magnitude and temporal change in the destruction of CH4 by short-lived and highly variable hydroxyl radicals (OH). To address these challenges, we have established a consortium of multidisciplinary scientists under the umbrella of the Global Carbon Project to improve, synthesise, and update the global CH4 budget regularly and to stimulate new research on the methane cycle. Following Saunois et al. (2016, 2020), we present here the third version of the living review paper dedicated to the decadal CH4 budget, integrating results of top-down CH4 emission estimates (based on in situ and Greenhouse Gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT) atmospheric observations and an ensemble of atmospheric inverse-model results) and bottom-up estimates (based on process-based models for estimating land surface emissions and atmospheric chemistry, inventories of anthropogenic emissions, and data-driven extrapolations). We present a budget for the most recent 2010–2019 calendar decade (the latest period for which full data sets are available), for the previous decade of 2000–2009 and for the year 2020. The revision of the bottom-up budget in this 2025 edition benefits from important progress in estimating inland freshwater emissions, with better counting of emissions from lakes and ponds, reservoirs, and streams and rivers. This budget also reduces double counting across freshwater and wetland emissions and, for the first time, includes an estimate of the potential double counting that may exist (average of 23 Tg CH4 yr−1). Bottom-up approaches show that the combined wetland and inland freshwater emissions average 248 [159–369] Tg CH4 yr−1 for the 2010–2019 decade. Natural fluxes are perturbed by human activities through climate, eutrophication, and land use. In this budget, we also estimate, for the first time, this anthropogenic component contributing to wetland and inland freshwater emissions. Newly available gridded products also allowed us to derive an almost complete latitudinal and regional budget based on bottom-up approaches. For the 2010–2019 decade, global CH4 emissions are estimated by atmospheric inversions (top-down) to be 575 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 553–586, corresponding to the minimum and maximum estimates of the model ensemble). Of this amount, 369 Tg CH4 yr−1 or ∼ 65 % is attributed to direct anthropogenic sources in the fossil, agriculture, and waste and anthropogenic biomass burning (range 350–391 Tg CH4 yr−1 or 63 %–68 %). For the 2000–2009 period, the atmospheric inversions give a slightly lower total emission than for 2010–2019, by 32 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 9–40). The 2020 emission rate is the highest of the period and reaches 608 Tg CH4 yr−1 (range 581–627), which is 12 % higher than the average emissions in the 2000s. Since 2012, global direct anthropogenic CH4 emission trends have been tracking scenarios that assume no or minimal climate mitigation policies proposed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (shared socio-economic pathways SSP5 and SSP3). Bottom-up methods suggest 16 % (94 Tg CH4 yr−1) larger global emissions (669 Tg CH4 yr−1, range 512–849) than top-down inversion methods for the 2010–2019 period. The discrepancy between the bottom-up and the top-down budgets has been greatly reduced compared to the previous differences (167 and 156 Tg CH4 yr−1 in Saunois et al. (2016, 2020) respectively), and for the first time uncertainties in bottom-up and top-down budgets overlap. Although differences have been reduced between inversions and bottom-up, the most important source of uncertainty in the global CH4 budget is still attributable to natural emissions, especially those from wetlands and inland freshwaters. The tropospheric loss of methane, as the main contributor to methane lifetime, has been estimated at 563 [510–663] Tg CH4 yr−1 based on chemistry–climate models. These values are slightly larger than for 2000–2009 due to the impact of the rise in atmospheric methane and remaining large uncertainty (∼ 25 %). The total sink of CH4 is estimated at 633 [507–796] Tg CH4 yr−1 by the bottom-up approaches and at 554 [550–567] Tg CH4 yr−1 by top-down approaches. However, most of the top-down models use the same OH distribution, which introduces less uncertainty to the global budget than is likely justified. For 2010–2019, agriculture and waste contributed an estimated 228 [213–242] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the top-down budget and 211 [195–231] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the bottom-up budget. Fossil fuel emissions contributed 115 [100–124] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the top-down budget and 120 [117–125] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the bottom-up budget. Biomass and biofuel burning contributed 27 [26–27] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the top-down budget and 28 [21–39] Tg CH4 yr−1 in the bottom-up budget. We identify five major priorities for improving the CH4 budget: (i) producing a global, high-resolution map of water-saturated soils and inundated areas emitting CH4 based on a robust classification of different types of emitting ecosystems; (ii) further development of process-based models for inland-water emissions; (iii) intensification of CH4 observations at local (e.g. FLUXNET-CH4 measurements, urban-scale monitoring, satellite imagery with pointing capabilities) to regional scales (surface networks and global remote sensing measurements from satellites) to constrain both bottom-up models and atmospheric inversions; (iv) improvements of transport models and the representation of photochemical sinks in top-down inversions; and (v) integration of 3D variational inversion systems using isotopic and/or co-emitted species such as ethane as well as information in the bottom-up inventories on anthropogenic super-emitters detected by remote sensing (mainly oil and gas sector but also coal, agriculture, and landfills) to improve source partitioning. The data presented here can be downloaded from https://doi.org/10.18160/GKQ9-2RHT (Martinez et al., 2024).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Innovating Distributed Embedded Energy Prize (InDEEP): A Lessons Learned Report

The U.S. Department of Energy's Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) launched the Innovating Distributed Embedded Energy Prize (InDEEP) in March 2023 to accelerate innovation in Distributed Embedded Energy Conversion Technologies (DEEC-Tec) for ocean wave energy. Administered by the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) with technical support from Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), InDEEP focused on the development of small, distributed, and embeddable energy converters (DEECs) and their integration into scalable DEEC-Tec metamaterials for marine renewable energy applications. Spanning three phases over two years, InDEEP awarded approximately $2.3 million to teams from academia, industry, and startups. Phase I emphasized conceptual design. Phase II moved into the prototyping of individual DEECs. Phase III required integration into functional DEEC-Tec metamaterial prototypes. Across 60 submissions, teams explored a wide range of energy conversion mechanisms - including piezoelectric, variable-capacitance, ionic, and inductive methods. Note, the prize did not include the design nor demonstration of ocean wave energy conversion systems. Rather, the prize only required participants to design and demonstrate individual DEECs and corresponding DEEC-Tec metamaterials. This prize utilized a mix of novel and proven techniques to attract participants from outside marine energy, including an engagement leaderboard, robust recruitment, technical expert mentorship, and a suite of technical trainings. Key insights from the competition emphasized that DEEC-Tec metamaterials must be intentionally designed to produce beneficial emergent behaviors - advantages that go beyond simply combining multiple DEEC units. Top-performing teams showed that thoughtful design of system architecture, coordinated deformation, and systems adaptabilities could unlock meaningful performance gains both at the DEEC system level and DEEC-Tec metamaterial system level. A critical realization was that many DEEC-Tec metamaterials could benefit from being designed to accept lower-frequency energy inputs and shift those into higher-frequencies per each DEEC making up the respective DEEC-Tec metamaterial. Other important takeaways included the need for rigorous and quantitative performance testing, effective integration of power conditioning electronics, and the pivotal role of material science in enabling innovative, adaptive DEEC-Tec-based energy conversion designs. InDEEP also helped establish a growing DEEC-Tec community of practitioners, attracting participants from beyond traditional marine energy sectors. Through a strong support infrastructure, InDEEP fostered early-stage innovation and laid a foundation for future DEEC-Tec-based ocean wave energy conversion solutions - positioning DEEC-Tec as a promising pathway toward scalable, resilient ocean wave energy conversion. Through focused R&D of individual DEECs and their integration into DEEC-Tec metamaterials, alongside a growing, multidisciplinary community catalyzed by InDEEP, there is a strong opportunity to drive a disruptive shift in ocean wave energy conversion design and development. This convergence of novel architectures, emergent behaviors, and collaborative innovation positions DEEC-Tec as a transformative approach, moving the field from rigid, centralized energy conversion-based designs to resilient, modular systems highly adaptable for real-world ocean wave energy conversion applications.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2017

Field evaluation of remote wind sensing technologies: Shore-based and buoy mounted LIDAR systems

In developing a national energy strategy, the United States has a number of objectives, including increasing economic growth, improving environmental quality, and enhancing national energy security. Wind power contributes to these objectives through the deployment of clean, affordable and reliable domestic energy. To achieve U.S. wind generation objectives, the Wind and Water Power Program within the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) instituted the U.S. Offshore Wind: Removing Market Barriers Program in FY 2011. Accurate and comprehensive information on offshore wind resource characteristics across a range of spatial and temporal scales is one market barrier that needs to be addressed through advanced research in remote sensing technologies. There is a pressing need for reliable offshore wind-speed measurements to assess the availability of the potential wind energy resource in terms of power production and to identify any frequently occurring spatial variability in the offshore wind resource that may impact the operational reliability and lifetime of wind turbines and their components and to provide a verification program to validate the “bankability” of the output of these alternative technologies for use by finance institutions for the financing of offshore wind farm construction. The application of emerging remote sensing technologies is viewed as a means to cost-effectively meet the data needs of the offshore wind industry. In particular, scanning and buoy mounted LIDAR have been proposed as a means to obtain accurate offshore wind data at multiple locations without the high cost and regulatory hurdles associated with the construction of offshore meteorological towers. However; before these remote sensing technologies can be accepted the validity of the measured data must be evaluated to ensure their accuracy. The proposed research will establish a unique coastal ocean test-bed in the Mid-Atlantic for the evaluation of LIDAR-based wind measurement systems to validate the accuracy of remotely measured wind data in marine applications. Specifically, the test-bed will be utilized to systematically evaluate the capability of emerging scanning LIDAR and buoy mounted vertically profiling LIDAR by: (1) Evaluating a fixed scanning LIDAR against land-based 50 and 60 meter high meteorological masts fitted with research quality cup-vane and/or sonic anemometers; (2) Evaluating a buoy mounted vertically profiling LIDAR fixed on land and floating in a sheltered bay against a co-located 60 meter high meteorological mast fitted with a research quality cup-vane and/or sonic anemometers and the fixed scanning LIDAR; and (3) Offshore field evaluation of both LIDAR platforms through a comparison of the fixed scanning LIDAR data and data obtained by the buoy mounted LIDAR located 10 miles offshore. The proposed research will systematically validate Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) based wind measurement systems and assess the temporal and spatial variability of the offshore wind resource in the Mid-Atlantic east of New Jersey. The goal of the proposed project is to address the technical and commercial challenges of the offshore wind energy industry by validating and assessing cost-effective, over ocean wind resource characterization technologies. The objective is to systematically evaluate the capability of both scanning and vertically profiling LIDARs to accurately measure 3D wind fields through comparison with fixed met masts and intercomparison among LIDAR platforms. Once validated, data collected by both buoy mounted vertically profiling LIDARs and shore-based, pulsed horizontally scanning LIDARs can be used to accurately assess offshore wind resources and to quantify the spatial and temporal variability in the offshore wind fields. One of the fundamental research questions to be addressed in phase 1 is the assessment of various measurement and data processing schemes to retrieve accurate wind vectors in the marine environment over large sampling ranges (10 to 12 km) and varying atmospheric aerosol levels. Atmospheric conditions and aerosol content within the coastal ocean region of the Mid-Atlantic seaboard of the US can vary significantly over short time periods in response to frontal passages and extratropical and tropical low pressure system passage offshore of the coast. Since aerosols provide the scattering medium for the determination of LIDAR Doppler shifts in the atmosphere the accuracy and range of LIDAR derived velocity measurements as a function of variation in aerosol content in the marine environment is a key research question to be addressed. In phase 1, it is desired to capture as much variation in atmospheric conditions and aerosol content as possible. To this end, collocated measurements of LIDAR and standard anemometer wind fields will be captured by the project PIs over all four seasons and during specific events (e.g., coastal low pressure system passage) in year 1. Additionally, since the meteorological masts are permanent structures, additional events can be captured over the three year duration of the field research project. All research instruments are owned by Fishermen’s Energy and made available to the PIs though a lease agreement as part of the DOE grant. Energy Fishermen’s Energy will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the scanning LIDAR and met mast anemometers. On a daily basis, environmental data and systems performance indicators will be transmitted from each measurement station to the Fishermen’s project team consisting of both in-house personnel and equipment manufacturer engineers. Data sets include compiled LIDAR files as well as data sets from ancillary sensors. Diagnostic parameters to be monitored include standard deviations of measured values, battery levels and charging systems output, and the operational status. Once data have been confirmed as complete and reliable, files will be transferred to the Garrad Hassan (a subcontractor to Fishermen’s Energy) for incorporation in to the validation database, which is accessible to other scientific team members. Data collection times and durations will be determined by the PI and Co-PIs in consultation with instrument engineers to ensure the capture of data representative of the expected range of mid-Atlantic atmospheric conditions (e.g., temperature, moisture, coastal low pressure systems, tropical systems, rain, snow, fog). The collection and processing of the data is a function of site specific measurement requirements (Kelley et.al. 2007; Hannon et.al. 2008). To determine the optimal profiles of wind speed and direction from the LIDAR radial velocities as a function of azimuth angle, rigorous estimates of the bias and random error of each radial velocity estimate are required. Lockheed Martin Coherent Technologies, Inc., under contract with Fishermen’s Energy, will provide analyses of raw and processed data using various scan patterns to determine optimal performance settings for the pulsed scanning LIDAR. Once optimized, appropriate processing and analyses techniques will be evaluated by Garrad Hassan for use in validating the accuracy of the LIDAR wind field measurements against the standard anemometer measurements from the meteorological masts. The most attractive capability of the scanning LIDAR is the ability to provide high spatial resolution observations in a three-dimensional volume which provides superior statistical accuracy due to the large number of samples obtained. Each radial scan provides measurements in 100 range gates over a distance of 10 to 12 km at an update rate of 5 to 10 Hz and rotation of 2.5° per second. Each rotation at a fixed azimuth requires 2.4 minutes. Depending on the number of azimuths desired a complete scan can take up to 10 minutes or longer to complete. Once collected the radial velocities are processed to produce vector wind velocity estimates based on a set of data distributed in angle and range around points of interest, typically a standard grid within the radial wind map. To calculate wind vectors over a limited spatial area of interest for the comparison of data with other measurement platforms a localized least-squares approach has been applied by Hannon et.al. (2008) and a Variation Assimilation (VAR) processing technique has been applied by Chan and al Assimilation (VAR) processing technique has been applied by Chan and Shao (2006). Additionally, Kelley et.al. (2007) applied a “stare” technique that fixed a scanning LIDAR in both azimuth and elevation angles to measure over collocated sampling volumes of the LIDAR and a 3D sonic anemometer mounted to a fixed mast. Although the stare technique is limited to wind directions aligned with the sampling radial of the LIDAR, it does provide a direct comparison of sampling volumes. Each of the processing techniques described above (and possibly others) will be evaluated to determine the validity of the LIDAR derived wind fields in the marine environment. Numerical methods such as linear regression and comparison of probability density functions of wind fields measured by each instrument platform will be used to assess the processing techniques. Linear regression has the advantage of directly evaluating corresponding pairs of wind data measured by each instrument and can lend insight into deviations and bias between instruments as a function of wind speed. Assessment of the coherency between the probability density function of the wind measured by each instrument provides insight into processes that may not be accurately resolved by each instrument at specific frequencies. Once processed and assessed the most appropriate technique will be utilized to provide valid wind measurements from the pulsed scanning LIDAR. A detailed analysis of the measurement data from the LIDAR and the three meteorological towers and comparison of the coastal wind characteristics from the different systems will be performed by the CO_PI at NREL. This analysis will evaluate how the WT LIDAR performance and measurement of the wind characteristics vary with distance from the LIDAR and by atmospheric conditions; using the tower measurements at different distances (4.8, 9.6, and 19 km) from the LIDAR as a reference. The comparative analysis will include, to the extent possible, evaluation of parameters such as wind speed and direction distributions, wind shear, turbulence intensity and their variations by atmospheric conditions, month or season, and time of day.

17 WIND ENERGY↗