Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “legislation”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Initial Evaluation of Microreactor Disposition Options

The United States Department of Energy is supporting the U.S advanced reactor industry through funding, legislation and regulatory development to actively pursue several microreactor design concepts. The Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is strategically positioned to support demonstration of microreactor technology in the next three to five years. This report provides and initial evaluation of the disposition options for microreactor spent nuclear fuel (SNF) generated as part of the microreactor technology demonstration program. Currently available information constitutes the basis for the options identified and discussions thereof. In the absence of detailed microreactor design information, assumptions were made to facilitate the identification of disposition options Particulars pertaining to any component of an identified disposition pathway are naturally highly microreactor design specific and in general such details are not provided. The diverse nature of potential microreactor SNF is reflected in the diverse nature of DOE owned SNF stored at INL. Therefore, it is anticipated that DOE currently stores and manages fuels that can serve as analogs for most microreactor fuel concepts. As such disposition options for microreactor SNF are expected to be much the same as that for these existing fuels. Two generic microreactor concepts have been selected for the purposes of this options assessment. The selected reactor concepts are a tristructural isotropic (TRISO) fueled high temperature gas reactor concept and a sodium/potassium bonded heat pipe reactor with uranium oxide fuel. Both concepts are assumed to be using high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) as the initial fuel composition. Interim storage, treatment and neutralization, material recovery, packaging and extended dry storage options are identified these reactors. The disposition options include existing INL facilities and capabilities and new facilities and capabilities developed as part of the microreactor program or as part of DOE's overall strategy for the eventual transfer of all SNF at INL to a permanent repository.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Flexible FlueCO2

Carbon dioxide (CO2) emission reductions remain a significant challenge on the path to clean energy. There are increasing legislative, social, and environmental factors motivating CO2 emissions reduction from power plants with carbon capture and storage (CCS). CCS in natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plants is critical to achieve a net-zero carbon electricity grid. Enhanced 45Q tax credits provide new incentives, but currently available technologies are unable to profitably operate in grids with deep variable renewable penetration which require flexible NGCC operation. Luna Labs has developed the FlueCO2 membrane to enable a profitable NGCC-CCS process. The FlueCO2 membrane couples steam transport across the membrane to CO2 transport in the opposite direction, enabling high capture efficiencies and low energy costs even at low CO2 concentrations. The dual-phase membrane can operate in the range of typical flue gas temperatures and pressures and does not require temperature or pressure cycling. Luna Labs’ FlueCO2 technology enables flexible and profitable operation of NGCC plants with lower capital investment and impact on electricity prices. In this Phase 1 project, Luna Labs utilized experimental testing, modeling, process simulation, and standardized costing methodologies to evaluate the techno-economic value of a 650 MW greenfield NGCC plant with FlueCO2 (NGCC-FlueCO2). Key design requirements for operation were established and plant performance under load-leveling conditions was validated through computational fluid dynamics and process modeling. Luna Labs developed a dynamic modeling tool which modeled plant operational modes across a variety of tax structures and electricity pricing scenarios to project the overall Net Present Value (NPV) of the NGCC-FlueCO2. FlueCO2 minimizes the impact of CCS integration on plant operation by integrating directly into the NGCC heat recovery steam generator (HRSG). By tapping into the plant’s low-pressure (LP) steam, operators can divert LP steam to the greenfield NGCC and/or CCS process in response to dynamic markets. Since FlueCO2 will not significantly affect HRSG (or NGCC) operation, CCS only turns off during peak power demand (>$250/MWh). Under baseload conditions, FlueCO2 lowers the capital (37%), energy (36%) and carbon capture (<$40/tonne) costs and can increase the overall plant lifetime NPV by approximately ~$1B in comparison with NGCC solvent-based capture reference cases (NETL Case 31B). Luna Labs has shared its costing tools with several interested partners and customers, which follows a generalizable approach to costing analysis.

Kelly, Jesse↗
DOE OSTI2024

U.S. State Renewables Portfolio & Clean Electricity Standards: 2024 Status Update [Slides]

This report provides an overview and status update on U.S. state renewables portfolio standards (RPS) and has been expanded from previous editions to also cover 100% clean electricity standards (CES) adopted by a growing number of states. The report, published in slide-deck form along with accompanying data files, describes recent legislative revisions, key policy design features, compliance with interim targets, past and projected impacts on clean electricity development, and compliance costs. The 2023 edition presents historical data through year-end 2023 and projections out to 2050. Key trends from this edition of the report include the following: -Evolution of state RPS and CES programs: States continue to refine and revise their RPS policies, often by adopting higher targets and/or broader CES policies. Among the 29 states plus DC with an RPS, 16 have RPS targets of at least 50% of retail sales, and 4 states have a 100% RPS. An additional 16 states have adopted a broader 100% CES. -Historical impacts on renewables development: Almost half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity (RE) generation and capacity since 2000 is nominally associated with state RPS requirements. That percentage has declined over time to 35% of all U.S. RE capacity additions in 2023, though in certain regions RPS policies continue to play a dominant role in driving RE growth. -Future RPS and CES demand and incremental needs: The combined demand for clean electricity from RPS and CES policies will grow from roughly 500 TWh today to 1700 TWh by 2050. Accounting for current supplies—including existing nuclear and hydroelectric generation eligible for CES targets—RPS and CES policies will require 900 TWh of new clean electricity by 2050, equivalent to roughly 3x the historical rate of RPS-buildout. -RPS target achievement to-date: States have generally met their interim RPS targets in recent years, with only a few exceptions reflecting unique, state-specific issues. Most CES targets are not yet in force, and so little compliance experience to-date. -REC pricing trends: Prices for NEPOOL Class I RECs remained at roughly $\$40$/MWh over the past year, just below ACP rates in the larger state markets, while PJM Tier I REC prices continued to rise, reaching $\$35$/MWh by year-end 2023 and surpassing ACP levels in some states. Prices for solar RECs remained relatively stable, and continue to exhibit wide variation across states, with the highest prices ($200-450/MWh) in NJ, MA, and DC. -RPS compliance costs: RPS compliance costs average roughly 4% of retail electricity bills across RPS states, though vary widely from state to state, with the highest costs (11-12% of retail bills) in states with solar carve-outs and high SREC prices.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydropower Supply Chain Gap Analysis

In 2022, DOE conducted supply chain "deep dives" for renewable energy technologies, including hydropower (Uria-Martinez, Hydropower Industry Supply Chain Deep Dive Assessment 2022). The deep dive identified several challenges in the current hydropower supply chain. In addition, Nguyen et. al (2022) conducted an analogous deep-dive assessment on large (> 100-MW) power transformers (LPTs), a critical component of hydropower installations, and concluded that the LPTs as well as several upstream components and materials also have domestic supply chain challenges. These deep dives were the initial high-level assessments of these supply chains and were focused on identifying the biggest issues. Both recommended further investigation. In the two years since the deep dives were published, the Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) has focused on improving our understanding of the hydropower supply chain and developing strategies for addressing these challenges. Because the challenges outlined above are most acute for large hydropower systems, most of the report and specifically, this report concentrates on the larger > 100-MW hydropower systems. Early in 2023, DOE's Secretary of Energy asked the Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) to engage the hydropower community and seek input on strategies to secure and encourage domestic manufacturing. WPTO has established three focus areas for engagement: 1) Define the market for planned rehabilitations and new construction of the domestic fleet, 2) Provide insights for policies, incentives, loan programs, and technology investments to encourage domestic content, and 3) Define the existing and required domestic hydropower manufacturing capabilities and workforce. This report summarizes these efforts and complements the earlier work by further exploring the identified challenges and identifying potential actions to address these challenges. Furthermore, we conducted a detailed gap analysis of the domestic hydropower supply chain, down to the component level. From this analysis, we then make specific, actionable recommendations for closing these gaps. Section 2 of the report summarizes recent (i.e., since 2021) legislation impacting hydropower deployment and/or its supply chain. It then describes the efforts of WPTO to assess and improve the hydropower supply chain since the publication of the deep-dive assessments. In Section 3, the report updates the earlier supply chain and market studies, identifying specific capabilities by company and location. Section 4 outlines the hydropower demand signal for both new builds due to clean energy goals as well as refurbishments and upgrading of the current domestic fleet. Section 5 is a detailed gap analysis while Section 6 provides actionable recommendations for closing the gaps. Section 7 concludes the report by linking the recommendations to the identified gaps and discusses future efforts.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

AI-Enhanced Co-Design for Next-Generation Microelectronics: Innovating Innovation (Workshop Report)

The Artificial Intelligence Enhanced Co-Design for Next Generation Microelectronics virtual workshop was held April 4-5, 2023, and attended by subject matter experts from universities, industry, and national laboratories. This was the third in a series of workshops to motivate the research community to identify and address major challenges facing microelectronics research and production. The 2023 workshop focused on a set of topics from materials to computing algorithms, and included discussions on relevant federal legislation and such as the Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors and Science Act (CHIPS Act) which was signed into law in the summer of 2022. Talks at the workshop included edge computing in radiation environments, new materials for neuromorphic computing, advanced packaging for microelectronics, and new AI techniques. We also received project updates from several of the Department of Energy (DOE) microelectronics co-design projects funded in the fall of 2021, and from three of the Energy Frontier Research Centers (EFRCs) that had been funded in the fall of 2022. The workshop also conducted a set of breakout discussions around the five principal research directions (PRDs) from the 2018 Department of Energy workshop report: 1) define innovative material, device, and architecture requirements driven by applications, algorithms, and software; 2) revolutionize memory and data storage; 3) re-imagine information flow unconstrained by interconnects; 4) redefine computing by leveraging unexploited physical phenomena; 5) reinvent the electricity grid through new materials, devices, and architectures. We tasked each breakout group to consider one primary PRD (and other PRDs as relevant topics arose during discussions) and to address questions such as whether the research community has embraced co-design as a methodology and whether new developments at any level of innovation from materials to programming models requires the research community to reevaluate the PRDs developed back in 2018.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Product Innovation to Increase Low-to-Moderate-Income Customers' Adoption of Community Solar PV

This study aims to comprehensively analyze community solar project preferences for consumers and suppliers by conducting three distinct analyses. First we analyze the predictors of community solar contract adoption to understand how individual priorities affect the probability of adoption. Using an original data set of survey responses from potential community solar customers, we analyzed the predictors of contract adoption by employing a weighted logit model. We find that individuals who were previously familiar with community solar projects were significantly more likely to adopt than those who were not familiar. Secondly, a survey of community solar developers and financiers identified industry perceived barriers to community solar access and inclusion. Thirdly, we gathered payment performance information from community solar initiatives to measure how financial risks are perceived and how they interact with customer demographics. Our study is beneficial to the public by providing insights into the drivers and barriers of community solar adoption and sheds light on the importance of understanding individual priorities in designing effective community solar policies. The community solar industry has changed significantly since the beginning of this project. The industry continues to grow at a rapid rate, with an additional 7 gigawatts expected to come online between 2022 and 2027. With federal pressure to meet climate goals, as the harms of climate change continue to impact everybody, legislators are looking to community solar as a method to achieving their states energy policy goals. These new policies that push for low-to-moderate inclusion, coupled with the increase in community solar capacity illustrate a new era for the community solar industry. A number of policies have arisen in the last few months that push for more inclusive practices including the groundbreaking Solar for All program run by the EPA. The research created a “best practice” contract that can then be used, in conjunction with the manuscript and validated study, to pitch the industry on a more inclusive community solar product.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Board on Earth Sciences and Resources and Its Activities

The National Academies’ Board on Earth Sciences and Resources (BESR) and its standing committees provide an ongoing forum for advancing the understanding and communication of Earth sciences and resource topics, including emerging topics and innovative techniques. BESR activities help to provide evidence-based information to members of the executive and legislative branches of the federal government, the private sector, states and tribes, academia, non-governmental organizations, and the public to support decision-making. BESR and its standing Committee on Solid Earth Geophysics (COSEG), also supported by this award, fulfill this role through development and administration of consensus studies, as well as workshops and other convening activities related to the Earth sciences; overseeing selected activities of the Board’s standing committees, such as disciplinary meetings and webinars; and communicating, sharing information, and providing opportunities for interaction and exchange among technical and non-technical stakeholders. The core support received from DOE helps BESR and COSEG maintain a central body of volunteer experts and National Academies staff who can respond to pressing needs and requests from federal sponsors and other members of the Earth science community, to maintain the health and relevance of the Earth sciences discipline, and to provide the Earth science community with a privileged interface to the government to support scientific and engineering advances and decision making related to Earth sciences and engineering. Initiation and oversight of Earth science activities at the National Academies is an enduring function of the BESR and COSG that helps to ensure development and completion of projects and activities that are responsive to the needs of sponsors and the broader Earth science and research enterprise.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Unlocking load growth at the grid edge: Practices for managing, recovering, and allocating distribution system investments

Utilities and utility regulators are preparing to make significant investments in the electricity distribution system driven by expected load growth in coming years and decades. Regulators will be tasked with vetting investment proposals and implementing cost recovery and allocation mechanisms. In particular, state regulators are anticipating the need to make proactive distribution system investments, building the capability to serve new load in advance of demand. This report focuses on load growth from homes and businesses that adopt electric vehicles and heat pump heating technologies. Through a review of legislation and regulatory dockets in a subset of states, we provide insights into emerging utility and regulatory practices to recover and allocate costs of electrification-driven distribution system investments necessary to accommodate these technologies. Our review focused on utility electrification programs, line extension policies, and proactive investments. Our report is largely descriptive, offering detailed information about approaches different state commissions and utilities have implemented to inform future decision-making.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Energy and economic impacts of U.S. federal energy and water conservation standards adopted from 1987 through 2024

This paper presents estimates of the key impacts of U.S. national energy and water conservation standards adopted from 1987 through 2024. The standards for consumer products, commercial and industrial equipment, lighting products, and plumbing products include those set by legislation as well as standards adopted by the Department of Energy (DOE) through rulemaking. In 2024 alone, these standards are estimated to have saved an estimated 6.0 quads of primary energy, which is equivalent to 6.5% of total U.S. energy consumption, and 1.7 trillion gallons of water, which is equivalent to approximately 12% of the annual water withdrawals for public supply in the U.S in 2015. The estimated reduction in CO 2 emissions associated with the standards in 2024 was 270 million metric tons, which is equivalent to 5.6% of total annual U.S. CO 2 emissions from energy consumption. The annual savings in operating costs for households and businesses totaled $\$$105 billion, and the average household saved $\$$576 in operating costs as a result of standards on residential appliances and plumbing products. The estimated cumulative past and future energy and water savings from these standards amount to 307 quads of energy and almost 53 trillion gallons of water. The estimated cumulative CO 2 emissions reduction from the standards come to 10.3 billion metric tons. Accounting for the increased upfront costs of more-efficient products and the energy and water cost savings over the products’ lifetime, the standards have a cumulative net present value of benefit of $\$$3.2 trillion using 3 percent discount rate and $\$$3.5 trillion using 7 percent discount rate when discounting past and future benefits to 2024.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Community Solar for All: Key Findings for State Energy Offices and State LIHEAP Agencies from the Inclusive Shared Solar Initiative

Despite the significant potential for community solar to reduce energy burdens and costs, it has largely remained out of reach for low-income households. While the U.S. community solar market has grown considerably over the last decade, as of December 2022 low to moderate-income (LMI) community solar represented just 2% of the overall market. Effective community solar policies and program decisions can help address this dynamic. State laws, policies, and program rules are critical to the development of community solar programs and projects that are affordable for and cater to the needs of LMI utility customers, who often face disproportionately high energy costs relative to their incomes. This report explores how two sets of state agencies in particular — State and Territory Energy Offices and State Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) Agencies —can help to streamline and prioritize the delivery of affordable and accessible shared solar. State Energy Offices are often involved in community solar policy and program design from inception, whether by supporting the enactment of enabling legislation or informing the development of program rules and regulations. State Energy Offices may also be charged with administering or overseeing the implementation of statewide community solar programs and, through the U.S. State Energy Program and other sources of funding, can provide resources and loans that enhance community, developer, and utility confidence and capacity to build, host, and derive value from projects. Relatedly, as implementers of federal LIHEAP block grants, State LIHEAP Agencies have a deep understanding of the needs of lower-income households and can help inform the design and delivery of community solar programs.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Analysis of Supply Chain Challenges in the U.S. Solar Industry: Focus on Build America, Buy America Act and Inverter Supply Issues

The United States (U.S.) solar industry has been undergoing significant transformation, driven largely by meeting U.S. climate goals while simultaneously maintaining national security. At the forefront of this movement is the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act. The IRA has driven investment in clean energy generation deployments while the BABA Act, enacted under Division G, Title IX of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) establishes domestic content procurement preference for all federal financial assistance obligated for infrastructure projects. While these pieces of legislation aim to reduce reliance on foreign-made solar components and increase domestic production, the sector continues to face notable supply chain challenges. These are particularly pronounced with inverters, a critical component in solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. This report explores the current state of these supply chain challenges, with a specific focus on the impact of the BABA requirements and the associated complexities in inverter manufacturing and supply.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Demonstration and Validation of a Virtual Energy Audit Tool for DoD Buildings

Electricity consumption has been in the spotlight as part of the battle for sustainability resulting in legislative measures to try and reduce the amount of energy used. EISA 432 and the Energy Act of 2020 are two examples that require federal facilities to investigate buildings and find saving opportunities through energy audits. EDIFES solves this problem by providing fully virtual audits. Only five inputs are needed (15-minute interval electricity consumption, location, square footage, number of stories, and building end use) to produce complete energy audits. The virtual audit is automated, making them inexpensive and the small number of inputs allows a large number of buildings to be entered quickly. During this project, EDIFES performed energy audits on hundreds of buildings to ensure proper functionality and workflow. Over 250 DoD buildings received energy audits that then had their results posted to an interactive dashboard with portfolio rankings. Several validation methods were employed. All confirmed that EDIFES's methods worked as expected and with a high degree of accuracy.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

Guidebook for Federal Funding Opportunities: BIL, IRA, Disaster Preparedness

The United States is making historic investments in infrastructure resilience and renewal through legislation such as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The goal of the Guidebook is to equip regulators to evaluate how federal funding opportunities might best serve ratepayer interests and state objectives.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Energy Resilience Reference Guide Chapter One: Developing A Shared Definition of Energy Resilience

The NARUC Resilience Reference Guide is envisioned as a one-stop primer for state public utility commissions (PUCs) to assist in the development of a shared language, valuation framework, and educational tool on the topic of energy resilience. The resilience of the energy system has increasingly become part of commissions’ regulatory scope so informed decisions are made regarding how to best enhance system resiliency. Several states have already established evaluative resilience criteria (via legislative statute or regulatory directive). This guide is intended to summarize many of the critical topic areas within energy resilience and to facilitate adoption of resilience valuation frameworks by which PUCs can weigh investment decisions regarding energy system resiliency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Energy Resilience Reference Guide Chapter Two: Developing a Shared Framework to Value Resilience Investments

The NARUC Resilience Reference Guide is envisioned as a one-stop primer for state public utility commissions (PUCs) to assist in the development of a shared language, valuation framework, and educational tool on the topic of energy resilience. The resilience of the energy system has increasingly become part of commissions’ regulatory scope so informed decisions are made regarding how to best enhance system resiliency. Several states have already established evaluative resilience criteria (via legislative statute or regulatory directive). This guide is intended to summarize many of the critical topic areas within energy resilience and to facilitate adoption of resilience valuation frameworks by which PUCs can weigh investment decisions regarding energy system resiliency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Energy Resilience Reference Guide, Chapter Three: Climate Resilience Strategies for Regulators

The NARUC Energy Resilience Reference Guide is envisioned as a one-stop primer for state public utility commissions (PUCs) to assist in the development of a shared language, valuation framework, and educational tool on the topic of energy resilience. The resilience of the energy system has increasingly become part of commissions’ regulatory scope so informed decisions are made regarding how to best enhance system resilience. Several states have already established evaluative resilience criteria (via legislative statute or regulatory directive). This guide is intended to succinctly summarize many of the critical topic areas within energy resilience and to facilitate adoption of resilience valuation frameworks by which PUCs can weigh investment decisions regarding energy system resiliency.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Optimizing Alabama’s CO 2 Storage in Shelby County (Project OASIS) - Deliverable Task 7: Risk Assessment

The “Optimizing Alabama’s CO 2 Storage in Shelby County: Project OASIS” CarbonSAFE Phase II Project seeks to build on regional data sets that demonstrate that the subsurface within Shelby County, Alabama has the potential to store commercial volumes of CO 2 safely, permanently, and economically. The primary target CO 2 Storage Complex is the deep Ketona Dolomite located within a 140 square mile area of the Valley and Ridge Region of Alabama. This deep saline reservoir is beneath a confining system encompassing at least 6,500 ft of shales and other low permeability sediments. Project OASIS drilled a deep stratigraphic test well to confirm the geological properties of the confining system and storage reservoir(s) within the Storage Complex. The geological data was incorporated into numerical models to establish the areal extent of the CO 2 plume and help design the storage site and its monitoring system. The project is managed by the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB), an interstate compact organization consisting of governors and state legislative leaders from sixteen southern states, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as an appointee by the President of the United States. The organizational compact provides it with access to state government organizations and legislatures. The Board also maintains an Associate Members program comprised of energy resource companies, utilities, trade groups, academic R&D science and technology experts and energy consultants. Further, the SSEB staff is experienced in managing and coordinating complex energy and environmental programs, from research programs to full-scale design and demonstrations of new and innovative technologies. Project OASIS is a public-private partnership of six entities with multiple principal investigators (PIs). SSEB’s Lead PI and Co-PI are responsible for all aspects of project performance in accordance with the DOE-NETL Cooperative Agreement. SSEB has issued subgrants to Advanced Resources International, Inc., Alabama A&M University, Auburn University, Crescent Resource Innovation, and Oklahoma State University. Advanced Resources International, Inc., issued subgrants to Baker Hughes and Loudon Technical Services for field services

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗