Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “terrain assessment”

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.

75 records · Page 5

Idaho National Laboratory Integrated Multisite SSHAC Level 3: Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Assessment

The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) resides on the eastern Snake River Plain (ESRP), part of the Snake River Plain (SRP) with a complex origin and geologic history of volcanism. Much of the Quaternary (last 2.58 million years) volcanism within 400 km of INL is genetically associated with a major thermal anomaly referred to as the Yellowstone hotspot, which is currently located more than 180 km northeast of INL. Near INL, local volcanic sources include silicic domes near its southern border, and numerous dike-fed basaltic vents of the ESRP, some of which are near or within the INL boundaries. Quantitative probabilistic assessments of screened-in volcanic hazardous phenomena for nine different facility complexes at the INL are presented for a Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) Level 3 (SL3) study. The comprehensive, integrated multisite SSHAC study consists of a single regional Probabilistic Volcanic Hazards Assessment (PVHA) that pertains to all nine INL facility complexes, with site-specific information developed at each respective area of interest (AOI), referred to as the "INL facility AOI" (Figure ES-1). Hazard products are generated for specified INL facility AOIs for use by multiple stakeholders from different agencies in risk-informed decision-making regarding site selection, operations, and design of nuclear facilities at INL, consistent with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulatory guidance. The study also serves as the basis for future periodic safety assessments required for existing DOE facilities, such as 10-year evaluations of natural-phenomena hazards. Elements of the INL PVHA including initial characterization, screening, quantitative assessments of eruption and hazard potential, and consideration of facility needs are conducted using the three phases of the SSHAC process: evaluation, integration, and documentation. As per regulatory guidance, the SSHAC framework provided the necessary processes and procedures for the PVHA Technical Integration (TI) team, at three workshops, five formal working meetings and many TI team remote meetings, to conduct initial characterization, screen the volcanic hazards, create PVHA model inputs, exercise those models in the PVHA, consider facility-specific volcanic hazard needs, and perform final hazard calculations. The Participatory Peer Review Panel (PPRP) provided independent oversight and performed process and technical reviews of the PVHA throughout its duration. The study included an extensive New Data Collection and Analyses (NDCA) program developed by the PVHA TI team to reduce uncertainties in hazard-significant elements in the PVHA model. NDCA activities generated 20 reports providing important contributory datasets and results to the project database for characterizing the ESRP. For example, a report compiling the dimensions of ESRP shield volcanoes and lava fields was used to construct volcanic footprints (areas of impact), was compared with data from INL subsurface cores, and was used to validate the results of lava-flow inundation modeling on the contemporary terrain. Another example is the acquisition of aeromagnetic data over INL and its surrounding area, with maps of buried magmatic features (e.g., subsurface volcanoes and swarms of feeder dikes) that informed the PVHA conceptual model of volcanism. The SSHAC evaluation process was used to conduct all elements of the PVHA including initial characterization and screening. Existing data and NDCA activities provided the foundation to develop the tectonomagmatic conceptual model of volcanism for the region of geographical interest in the SRP and Yellowstone hotspot volcanic system, and for considering volcanoes in the western US. Considering Quaternary volcanic sources active during this period, the screening approach identified and evaluated magma compositions, types of eruptive and intrusive phenomena, types of hazardous phenomena, and proximity of sources to INL. The PVHA TI team evaluated 18 types of magmatic sources in terms of 20 potentially hazardous phenomena, resulting in 360 screening decisions. The screening process resulted in 140 screened-in hazardous volcanic phenomena for Quaternary volcanic sources 1) proximal to INL facility complexes in the ESRP (64 basaltic and 54 silicic), 2) regional sources associated with the Yellowstone caldera system and Blackfoot Reservoir volcanic field (7), and 3) more distal sources from thirteen Cascade volcanoes and two volcanoes at Long Valley caldera (CA).

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Shallow Geothermal Resources for Cooling Applications at the University of Hawai‘i

Scientists at Berkeley Lab have teamed up with The University of Hawai‘i at Manoa (UH Manoa) through the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Energy Transitions Initiative Partnership Project (ETIPP) to evaluate the technological and market feasibility of shallow geothermal heat exchanger (GHE) technology for building cooling, energy efficiency, and emissions reduction applications in Hawai’i. The team is assessing the data necessary to model the feasibility of deploying this technology, the actual models that will be used, and what hurdles need to be overcome to install a demonstration case. UH has an abundance of geologic and geothermal data and is looking to the national labs’ expertise to execute this analysis. UH is also interested in investigating policy, regulatory, and business conditions advantageous for implementation of a pilot project, and more broad deployment of this technology in Hawai‘i. In many locations around the world, the demands for heating and cooling are roughly balanced over the course of the year, so GHEs do not cause significant long-term changes in subsurface temperature. This is not the case in Hawai’i, where the demand for heating is very small, meaning that over time, GHEs will add heat to the subsurface. If temperatures increase significantly, GHE systems will not work as designed. Regional groundwater flow has the potential to sweep heated water away from boreholes, thereby maintaining the functionality of the GHE system. Significant regional groundwater flow requires two things: a sufficiently large driving hydraulic head gradient (usually closely related to surface topography), and sufficient porosity and permeability to enable groundwater to flow in large enough quantities to enable near-borehole temperatures to be maintained at ambient values. Hawai‘i’s volcanic terrain offers ample surface topographic variation. The lava itself shows an extremely large range of porosity and permeability, making it crucial to select sites with large enough values of these properties. Numerical modeling of coupled groundwater and heat flow can be used to determine how large is large enough. Both closed-loop and open-loop systems are being investigated. Another option being considered is using cool seawater as the source of chill. Currently work is progressing on two fronts. A hydrogeologic model for a closed-loop system is being developed for the Stan Sheriff Center at the UH Manoa campus, where a subsurface karst system immediately downgradient of the borefield may provide efficient removal of heated groundwater. The team will also develop a technoeconomic model for this site to compare the cost of cooling using a GHE system with the costs of operating the current air conditioning system. At the state scale, geographic information system (GIS) layers of various attributes relevant for GHE are being combined to develop an overall favorability map for employing GHE in Hawai‘i.

Doughty, C↗

Limitations of reanalysis data for wind power applications

Wind energy resource estimates commonly depend on simulated wind speed profiles generated by reanalysis or weather models due to the lack of long time series measurements with sufficient coverage at relevant heights (roughly 90 m above ground). However, modeled data, including reanalyses, can be noisy and display a wide range of biases and errors, variously attributed to terrain effects, poor coverage of assimilated inputs, and model resolution. Wind generation records, if available at high temporal and geographical resolution, can provide a proxy for wind measurements and allow for evaluation of reanalyses and weather model wind time series. We use a 7-year-long data set of hourly, plant-level generation records from over 100 wind plants across Texas to evaluate two commonly used reanalysis data sets (MERRA2 and ERA5). Additionally, we use 1-year of records (2019) to evaluate an operational, high-resolution regional weather modeling product (HRRR v3). We find that across the region, and across all modeling products, the modeled representation of wind generation (i.e., wind speeds at hub heights passed through a power curve) has relatively small mean errors when aggregated daily, but that accuracy and hourly correlation have a strong diurnal sensitivity. Accuracy and correlation systematically decline through the evening and markedly improve after sunrise. These diurnal patterns persist even in the highest resolution model tested (HRRR v3). We hypothesize the nighttime decline in accuracy is mostly due to poorly represented boundary layer conditions, perhaps related to model representation of stability, while other uncertainties (such as wake effects) play a secondary role.

17 WIND ENERGY↗