SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “power capacity”

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.

At least 109 records · Page 6

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRS1993

Power management and distribution technology

Power management and distribution (PMAD) technology is discussed in the context of developing working systems for a piloted Mars nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) vehicle. The discussion is presented in vugraph form. The following topics are covered: applications and systems definitions; high performance components; the Civilian Space Technology Initiative (CSTI) high capacity power program; fiber optic sensors for power diagnostics; high temperature power electronics; 200 C baseplate electronics; high temperature component characterization; a high temperature coaxial transformer; and a silicon carbide mosfet.

Dickman, John Ellis↗

DOE OSTI2024

A Tutorial on the Control of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines: Stability Challenges and Opportunities for Power Capture

Climate change is a serious threat facing humanity. The United States (U.S.) and many other countries are increasing the amount of electrical power generated from renewable energy sources in an effort to combat climate change and ensure energy independence. The U.S. has set goals to achieve a 100% decarbonized electric grid by 2035 and a net-zero emissions economy by no later than 2050. Renewable energy currently accounts for about 20% of the U.S. power grid. According to the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), in the U.S. in 2021, wind and solar photovoltaic generation supplied 9.1% and 4% of total electricity generation, respectively, and the latest publicly available data show that hydropower represented 6.6% of all electricity generated in the U.S. in 2019. As wind farms have been built in many of the best wind resource areas on land, the U.S. and many other countries are turning to offshore wind for further growth of wind power capacity. Further, the U.S. has committed to deploy 30 GW of offshore wind by 2030, a significant increase from the 0.04 GW of installed offshore wind in the country as of the end of 2023. Many other countries have also established ambitious goals or plans to increase the amount of installed offshore wind power.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1985

Design of traction drives

Traction drives are among the simplest of all speed-changing mechanisms. Because of their simplicity and their ability to smoothly and continuously adjust speed, they are excellent choices for many drive system applications. They have been used in industrial service for more than 100 years. Today's traction drives have power capacities which rival the best gear and belt drives due to modern traction fluids and highly fatigue-resistant bearing steels. This report summarizes methods to analyze and size traction drives. Lubrication principles, contact kinematics, stress, fatigue life, and performance prediction methods are presented. The effects of the lubricant's traction characteristics on life and power loss are discussed. An example problem is given which illustrates the effects of spin on power loss. Loading mechanism design and the design of nonlubricated friction wheels and rings are also treated.

Loewenthal, S. H.↗

DOE OSTI2021

Land-Based Wind Market Report: 2021 Edition

The U.S. Department of Energy's 2021 edition of its land-based wind market report provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. wind power market, with a focus on 2020. You can find a report, data file and presentation on the Files tab, below. Additionally, several data visualizations are available on the Visualizations tab. Highlights of this year’s update include: -Wind comprises a growing share of electricity supply: U.S. wind power capacity grew at a record pace in 2020, with 25 billion dollars invested in 16.8 GW of capacity. Wind energy output rose to account for more than 8% of the entire nation’s electricity supply, and is more than 20% in 10 states. At least 209 GW of wind are seeking transmission interconnection; 61 GW of this capacity are offshore wind and 13 GW are hybrid plants that pair wind with storage or PV. -Wind project performance has increased over time: The average capacity factor among recently built projects was over 40%, considerably higher than projects built earlier. The highest capacity factors are seen in the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country. -Turbines continue to get larger: Improved plant performance has been driven by larger turbines mounted on taller towers and featuring longer blades. In 2010, no turbines employed blades that were 115 meters in diameter or larger, but in 2020, 91% of newly installed turbines featured such rotors. Proposed projects indicate that total turbine height will continue to rise. -Low wind turbine pricing has pushed down installed project costs over the last decade: Wind turbine prices are averaging 775–850 dollars/kW. The average installed cost of wind projects in 2020 was 1,460 dollars/kW, down more than 40% since the peak in 2010, though stable for the last three years. The lowest costs were found in Texas and the (non-ISO) West. -Wind energy prices remain low, around 20 dollars/MWh in the interior of the country: After topping out at 70 dollars/MWh for power purchase agreements (PPAs) executed in 2009, the national average price of wind PPAs has dropped. In the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country, recent pricing is around 20 dollars/MWh. In the West and East, prices tend to average 30 dollars/MWh or more. These prices, which are possible in part due to federal tax support, fall below the projected future fuel costs of gas-fired generation. -Wind PPA prices are often attractive compared to wind’s grid-system market value: The value of wind in wholesale power markets is affected by the location of wind plants, their hourly output profiles, and how those characteristics correlate with real-time electricity prices and capacity markets. The market value of wind declined in 2020, following natural gas prices lower and averaging under 15 dolalrs/MWh in ERCOT, MISO, NYISO and SPP; higher values were seen in CAISO, ISO-NE and PJM. -The average levelized cost of wind energy is down to 33 dollars/MWh: Levelized costs, which exclude the impacts of federal tax incentives, vary across time and geography, but the national average stood at 33 dollars/MWh in 2020—down substantially historically, though consistent with the previous two years. Levelized costs were lowest in ERCOT, SPP, and the (non-ISO) West. -The health and climate benefits of wind in 2020 were larger than its grid-system value, and the combination of all three far exceeds the current levelized cost of wind: Wind generation reduces power-sector emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. These reductions, in turn, provide public health and climate benefits that vary regionally, but together are economically valued at an average of 76 dollars/MWh-wind nationwide in 2020. -The domestic supply chain for wind equipment is diverse: For wind projects recently installed in the U.S., domestically manufactured content is highest for nacelle assembly (>85%), towers (60-75%), and blades and hubs (30-50%), but is much lower for most components internal to the nacelle.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Land-Based Wind Market Report: 2022 Edition

The U.S. Department of Energy's 2022 edition of its Land-Based Wind Market Report provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. wind power market, with a focus on 2021. You can find a report, data file and presentation on the Files tab, below. Additionally, several data visualizations are available on the Visualizations tab. Despite ongoing supply chain challenges, wind energy in 2021 continued to see strong growth, technology improvements, and low prices in the U.S. Key highlights include: Wind comprises a growing share of electricity supply: U.S. wind power capacity grew at a strong pace in 2021, with the 13.4 GW of new additions representing a $\$20$ billion investment and 32% of all newly added U.S. generation capacity. Wind energy output rose to account for more than 9% of the entire nation’s electricity supply. At least 247 GW of wind are seeking transmission interconnection; 77 GW of this capacity are offshore wind and 19 GW are hybrid plants that pair wind with storage or solar PV. Wind project performance has increased over the decades: The average capacity factor among recently built projects was nearly 40%, considerably higher than projects built earlier. The highest capacity factors are seen in the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country. Turbines continue to get larger: Improved plant performance has been driven by larger turbines mounted on taller towers and featuring longer blades. In 2011, no turbines employed blades that were 115 meters in diameter or larger, but in 2021, 89% of newly installed turbines featured such rotors. Proposed projects indicate that total turbine height will continue to rise. Low wind turbine pricing has pushed down installed project costs over the last decade: Wind turbine prices averaged $\$800$–$\$950$/kW in 2021, a 5% to 10% increase from the year prior but substantially lower than in 2010. The average installed cost of wind projects in 2021 was $\$1,500$/kW, down more than 40% since the peak in 2010, though relatively stable in recent years. The lowest costs were found in Texas and the (non-ISO) West. Wind energy prices are on the rise, but generally remain low, around $\$20$/MWh in the interior of the country with higher prices in the West and East. After topping out above $\$75$/MWh for power purchase agreements (PPAs) executed in 2009, the national average price of wind PPAs has dropped—though supply-chain pressures have resulted in increased prices in recent years. In the interior ‘wind belt’ of the country, recent pricing is around $\$20$/MWh. In the West and East, prices tend to average above $\$30$/MWh. These prices, which are possible in part due to federal tax support, fall below the projected future fuel costs of gas-fired generation. Wind PPA prices are often attractive compared to wind’s grid-system market value: The value of wind in wholesale power markets is affected by the location of wind plants, their hourly output profiles, and how those characteristics correlate with real-time electricity prices and capacity markets. The market value of wind increased in 2021, averaging $\$16$/MWh in MISO, $\$19$/MWh in SPP, $\$23$/MWh in NYISO, $\$31$/MWh in ERCOT, $\$33$/MWh in PJM, $\$44$/MWh in ISO-NE, and $\$48$/MWh in CAISO. The average levelized cost of wind energy was $\$32$/MWh for plants built in 2021: Levelized costs, which exclude the impacts of federal tax incentives, vary across time and geography. The national average stood at $\$32$/MWh in 2021—down substantially historically, though relatively stable in recent years. Levelized costs were lowest in ERCOT, SPP, and the (non-ISO) West. The health and climate benefits of wind in 2021 were larger than its grid-system value, and the combination of all three far exceeds the current levelized cost of wind: Wind generation reduces power-sector emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide. These reductions, in turn, provide public health and climate benefits that vary regionally, but together are economically valued at an average of over $\$90$/MWh-wind for plants built in 2021.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Economic solution for low carbon process heat: A horizontal, compact high temperature gas reactor

In 2018, nuclear energy generated 55% of United States’ and one third of the world’s carbon free electricity, making nuclear energy a key tool in efforts to mitigate climate change before 2050. However, the current nuclear technology, light water reactors (LWRs), is limited to 300°C, so it cannot be used to decarbonize industrial process heat which accounts for 12% of US greenhouse gas emissions. High temperature gas reactors (HTGRs) can meet the high temperature demand with carbon free nuclear heat. The estimated cost of HTGRs, such as the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP), are even higher than state-of-the-art LWRs. In this paper, we expanded our nuclear cost estimating tool to include HTGRs and find that the NGNP overnight capital costs were 32% higher than an advanced LWR per unit capacity. The higher cost will naturally result in larger risk to cost overrun as recently experienced by larger LWRs in western nations. With a design-to-build mindset to minimize cost and construction risk, we introduce the horizontal, compact HTGR (HC-HTGR). The reactor core and steam generator are mounted horizontally on rails and in-line with one another, decreasing the size of the reactor building relative to the power capacity four times when compared to traditional HTGRs. The HC-HTGR reduced overnight civil structure costs by 42%, indirect costs by 38%, and total capital costs by 20% from NGNP. We discussed the required engineering of new systems for the HC-HTGR including vessel supports, the reactor cavity cooling system, and steam generator design. Finally, we estimated the fuel and operations costs of the HC-HTGR, and a survey of low-carbon industrial process heat technology showed the HC-HTGR can deliver a highly competitive levelized cost of heat in the range of $6.13–12.48/GJ.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

NASA NTRS1994

Review of advanced radiator technologies for spacecraft power systems and space thermal control

A two-part overview of progress in space radiator technologies is presented. The first part reviews and compares the innovative heat-rejection system concepts proposed during the past decade, some of which have been developed to the breadboard demonstration stage. Included are space-constructable radiators with heat pipes, variable-surface-area radiators, rotating solid radiators, moving-belt radiators, rotating film radiators, liquid droplet radiators, Curie point radiators, and rotating bubble-membrane radiators. The second part summarizes a multielement project including focused hardware development under the Civil Space Technology Initiative (CSTI) High Capacity Power program carried out by the NASA Lewis Research Center and its contractors to develop lightweight space radiators in support of Space Exploration Initiative (SEI) power systems technology.

Juhasz, Albert J.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Utility-Scale Solar, 2022 Edition: Empirical Trends in Deployment, Technology, Cost, Performance, PPA Pricing, and Value in the United States [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s “Utility-Scale Solar, 2022 Edition” provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. market, with a focus on 2021. Highlights of this year’s update include: -A record of nearly 12.5 GWAC of new utility-scale PV capacity came online in 2021, bringing cumulative installed capacity to more than 51.3 GWAC across 44 states. -90% of all new utility-scale PV capacity added in 2021 uses single-axis tracking. -Median installed project costs declined to $\$1.35$/WAC (or $\$1.02$/WDC) in 2021. -Project-level capacity factors vary widely, from 9% to 35% (on an AC basis), with a sample median of 24%. The report explores drivers of this variation. -Utility-scale PV’s LCOE fell to $\$33$/MWh in 2021 ($\$27$/MWh if factoring in the federal investment tax credit, or ITC). -PPA prices have largely followed the decline in solar’s LCOE over time, but have recently stagnated and even moved slightly higher. Prices from a sample of recent contracts average around $\$20$/MWh (levelized) in the West and $\$30-40$/MWh elsewhere in the continental US. In 2021, solar’s average market value (defined in the report to include only energy and capacity value) rose by 55% to $\$47$/MWh and exceeded average wholesale prices in 13 of the 17 balancing authorities analyzed. -Adding battery storage is one way to increase the value of solar. Our public data file tracks metadata and PPA prices from 67 PV+battery hybrid projects that are already online or that have secured offtake arrangements. -At the end of 2021, there were at least 674 GW of utility-scale solar power capacity within the interconnection queues across the nation, 284 GW of which include batteries. For more information, and to explore related interactive data visualizations, go to utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition: Empirical Trends in Deployment, Technology, Cost, Performance, PPA Pricing, and Value in the United States [Slides]

Berkeley Lab’s “Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition” provides an overview of key trends in the U.S. market, with a focus on 2020. Highlights of this year’s update include: A record of nearly 9.6 GWAC of new utility-scale PV capacity came online in 2020, bringing cumulative installed capacity to more than 38.7 GWAC across 43 states. 89% of all new utility-scale PV capacity added in 2020 uses single-axis tracking. Median installed project costs declined to $\$$1.4/WAC (or $\$$1.1/WDC) in 2020. Project-level capacity factors vary widely, from 9% to 36% (on an AC basis), with a sample median of 24%. The report explores drivers of this variation. Utility-scale PV’s LCOE fell to $\$$34/MWh in 2020 ($\$$28/MWh if factoring in the federal investment tax credit, or ITC). PPA prices have largely followed the decline in solar’s LCOE over time, but have stagnated more recently. Prices from a sample of recent contracts average just above $\$$20/MWh (levelized). In 2020, solar’s average market value (defined in the report to include only energy and capacity value) exceeded average wholesale prices in 12 of the 17 balancing authorities analyzed (including 4 of the 7 independent system operators across the United States). Adding battery storage is one way to increase the value of solar. Our public data file tracks metadata for more than 150 PV+battery hybrid projects that are already online or that have secured offtake arrangements. At the end of 2020, there were at least 460 GW of utility-scale solar power capacity within the interconnection queues across the nation, 160 GW of which include batteries. For more information, and to explore related interactive data visualizations, go to utilityscalesolar.lbl.gov.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Wind and Weather Variability within the Californian Offshore Wind Energy Areas

Weather variability over the Northeast Pacific (NEP) region and its influence on wind resources within the Californian offshore wind energy areas (WEAs) at Humboldt and Morro Bay are characterized using 20-years reanalysis model and satellite data. The hub-height (180 m) winds at both locations are predominantly northwesterly driven by the NEP high pressure system, with strong coastal gradients in surface pressure, fluxes, planetary boundary layer (PBL) depths and cloudiness. These sharp coastal gradients and strong annual cycles of temperature and moisture advections pose potential challenges in accurately modeling the local wind resource. Hub-height wind speeds and power capacity factors significantly vary for different regimes of PBL depths, surface fluxes and rain area fractions. This highlights the importance of studying the physical mechanisms driving these weather regimes, hence our analysis of how large-scale NEP weather variability drives the local meteorology at the WEAs. Furthermore, at both WEAs, PBL tops and cloud boundaries intersect the rotor layer (80-280 m) more than 30% and 20% of the time, respectively. While PBL depths significantly modulates hub-height winds and power, cloud boundaries do not have a similar impact, likely due to reanalysis errors in simulating cloud boundaries accurately. These findings underscore the challenges in deploying tall wind turbines in shallow cloudy boundary layers, where the interaction between clouds, precipitation, and atmospheric layers can impact turbine efficiency. As turbines grow taller and are deployed in more complex meteorological conditions, understanding these interactions is crucial for improving wind power forecasting and optimizing energy production in coastal regions.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS2019

Low Power Microrobotics Utilizing Biologically Inspired Energy Generation

The Low Power Microrobotics (LPM) project is a NASA NIAC-funded multi-disciplinary research effort involving the research and advancement of low power electronics, low power mobility and their integration with state of the art microbial fuel cell for power generation. The goal of this project was to advance the capabilities of each of these systems with a 10-year future target of a near one kilogram space exploration vehicle that contains each of these systems. In order to accomplish this task, each system was investigated independently in order to establish the power requirements/limitations while considering how each system affects the other systems. This was performed through numerous trade studies and experimental work, primarily focused around the power capacity of the microbial fuel cell base-lined for this project and how its strengths and limitations affected the design of the remaining onboard systems. Finally an end-to-end system test utilized a microbial fuel cell to charge a super capacitor through an energy harvesting circuit, which was discharged to activate a robotic locomotion system.

Microrobotics↗

DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗

DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗

DOE OSTI2020

Quantifying the reductions in mortality from air-pollution by cancelling new coal power plants

Deep decarbonization paths to the 1.5°C or 2°C temperature stabilization futures require a rapid reduction in conventional coal-fired power plants, but countries are currently building 223 GW of new coal power capacity and plan to build 377 GW more in the next decade. Coal-fired plants are also a major contributor to air pollution related health impacts. Here, we couple an integrated human-earth system model (GCAM) with an air quality model (TM5-FASST) to examine regional health co-benefits from cancelling new coal-fired plants worldwide. Additionally, we find that cancelling all new proposed projects would decrease air pollution related premature mortality between 101,388 - 213,205 deaths (2-5%) in 2030, and 213,414 - 373,054 (5-8%) in 2050, globally, but heavily concentrated in developing Asia. Furthermore, we estimate that strengthening the climate target from 2°C to 1.5°C would avoid 326,351 additional mortalities in 2030, of which 251,011 (75%) are attributable to the incremental coal plant shutdown.

63 RADIATION, THERMAL, AND OTHER ENVIRON. POLLUTAN↗

DOE OSTI2021

Flow Redirection and Induction in Steady State (FLORIS) Wind Plant Power Production Data Sets

This dataset contains turbine- and plant-level power outputs for 252,500 cases of diverse wind plant layouts operating under a wide range of yawing and atmospheric conditions. The power outputs were computed using the Gaussian wake model in NREL's FLOw Redirection and Induction in Steady State (FLORIS) model, version 2.3.0. The 252,500 cases include 500 unique wind plants generated randomly by a specialized Plant Layout Generator (PLayGen) that samples randomized realizations of wind plant layouts from one of four canonical configurations: (i) cluster, (ii) single string, (iii) multiple string, (iv) parallel string. Other wind plant layout parameters were also randomly sampled, including the number of turbines (25-200) and the mean turbine spacing (3D-10D, where D denotes the turbine rotor diameter). For each layout, 500 different sets of atmospheric conditions were randomly sampled. These include wind speed in 0-25 m/s, wind direction in 0 deg.-360 deg., and turbulence intensity chosen from low (6%), medium (8%), and high (10%). For each atmospheric inflow scenario, the individual turbine yaw angles were randomly sampled from a one-sided truncated Gaussian on the interval 0 deg.-30 deg. oriented relative to wind inflow direction. This random data is supplemented with a collection of yaw-optimized samples where FLORIS was used to determine turbine yaw angles that maximize power production for the entire plant. To generate this data, a subset of cases were selected (50 atmospheric conditions from 50 layouts each for a total of additional 2,500 cases) for which FLORIS was re-run with wake steering control optimization. The IEA onshore reference turbine, which has a 130 m rotor diameter, a 110 m hub height, and a rated power capacity of 3.4 MW was used as the turbine for all simulations. The simulations were performed using NREL's Eagle high performance computing system in February 2021 as part of the Spatial Analysis for Wind Technology Development project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Wind Energy Technologies Office. The data was collected, reformatted, and preprocessed for this OEDI submission in May 2023 under the Foundational AI for Wind Energy project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Wind Energy Technologies Office. This dataset is intended to serve as a benchmark against which new artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) tools may be tested. Baseline AI/ML methods for analyzing this dataset have been implemented, and a link to their repository containing those models has been provided. The .h5 data file structure can be found in the GitHub repository under explore_wind_plant_data_h5.ipynb.

AI↗

DOE OSTI2021

A plant-by-plant strategy for high-ambition coal power phaseout in China

More than half of current coal power capacity is in China. A key strategy for meeting China’s 2060 carbon neutrality goal and the global 1.5 °C climate goal is to rapidly shift away from unabated coal use. Here we detail how to structure a high-ambition coal phaseout in China while balancing multiple national needs. We evaluate the 1037 currently operating coal plants based on comprehensive technical, economic and environmental criteria and develop a metric for prioritizing plants for early retirement. We find that 18% of plants consistently score poorly across all three criteria and are thus low-hanging fruits for rapid retirement. We develop plant-by-plant phaseout strategies for each province by combining our retirement algorithm with an integrated assessment model. With rapid retirement of the low-hanging fruits, other existing plants can operate with a 20- or 30-year minimum lifetime and gradually reduced utilization to achieve the 1.5 °C or well-below 2 °C climate goals, respectively, with complete phaseout by 2045 and 2055.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2022

What you get is not always what you see—pitfalls in solar array assessment using overhead imagery

Effective integration planning for small, distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) arrays into electric power grids requires access to high quality data: the location and power capacity of individual solar PV arrays. Unfortunately, national databases of small-scale solar PV do not exist; those that do are limited in their spatial resolution, typically aggregated up to state or national levels. While several promising approaches for solar PV detection have been published, strategies for evaluating the performance of these models are often highly heterogeneous from study to study. The resulting comparison of these methods for practical applications for energy assessments becomes challenging and may imply that the reported performance evaluations overly optimistic. The heterogeneity comes in many forms, each of which we explore in this work: the degree of diversity of the locations and sensors (e.g. different satellites, aerial photography) from which the training and validation data originate, the validation of ground truth (manual annotation of imagery vs known solar PV locations), the level of spatial aggregation (e.g. array-level vs regional estimates), and inconsistencies in the training and validation datasets (e.g. different datasets are used for each study and those data are not always made accessible). For each, we discuss emerging practices from the literature to address them or suggest directions of future research. As part of our investigation, we evaluate solar PV identification performance in two large regions: the entire state of Connecticut and the city of San Diego, CA. In Connecticut, we also use 33,114 known parcel-level solar PV installations from Berkeley Lab’s Tracking the Sun dataset to evaluate parcel-level performance and evaluate capacity estimates using 169 municipalities. We also make our code (which we call SolarMapper), pre-trained models, training data, and predictions publicly available and provide a web portal for interactively inspecting each prediction that was made. Here our findings suggest that traditional performance evaluation of the automated identification of solar PV from satellite imagery may be optimistic due to common limitations in the validation process. The takeaways from this work are intended to inform and catalyze the large-scale practical application of automated solar PV assessment techniques by energy researchers and professionals.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Observed impacts of large wind farms on grassland carbon cycling

Deployment of wind energy is an essential renewable energy source that mitigates climate change and reduces air pollution. Over the last several decades, wind energy development has increased worldwide, expanding from ~20 to ~900 GW (gigawatt) during 2001-2022. Nonetheless, researchers have identified unintended consequences of wind energy on microclimate via turbine-altered surface-atmosphere exchanges of energy, momentum, mass, and trace gases. Based on multi-source observations and models, researchers also have drawn some conclusions that wind farms could warm the land surface, especially at night, at regional and continental scales. Consequently, altered microclimates at wind farms may affect vegetation productivity and carbon sequestration, two critically important ecosystem services related to carbon dynamics; however, such potential impacts and driving mechanisms remain poorly understood. Wind energy deployment is increasing globally to meet carbon neutrality goals, with upscaling of onshore wind power capacity projected to grow from 542 GW in 2018 to 1787 and 5044 GW by 2030 and 2050, respectively. Furthermore, increased demand for wind energy deployment may lead to much larger wind farms in open, expansive landscapes. In turn, a large array of geographically clustered wind turbines could collectively modify local microclimate and amplify turbine-atmosphere interactions, which, if large enough, may produce detectable impacts on ecosystem dynamics. Thus, identifying and quantifying the potential impacts of wind farms on carbon-related ecosystem services may facilitate sustainable wind energy development globally.

17 WIND ENERGY↗