Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “operating expenditures”

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.

114 records · Page 7

Flue-Gas Desulfurization Effluent Management using an Innovative Low-Energy Biosorpotion Treatment System to Remove Key Contaminants

Among the most critical water contaminants of concern affecting wide geographical regions and a number of industries and natural systems is selenium. Selenium found in surface, ground and wastewater in originates from natural sources, as well as industrial sources such as petroleum refineries, electronics manufacturing, pesticides, and coal power plants and mining also contribute to selenium contamination in water in the US. At high concentrations, selenium is toxic to human and wildlife. There are a number of technologies that have been used to treat selenium and other similar contaminants in water. Biological treatment of selenium has been used in the past to reduce soluble SeVI and/or SeIV to insoluble Se0, which is then filtered in the same vessel. The insoluble selenium (Se0) is then backwashed from the system and solids are separated for subsequent disposal, if they meet the leaching and water content criteria. In order to promote biological reduction to insoluble Se0, heating of bioreactor is needed in some applications, and excess food source (electron donor) is added so that all selenium can be filtered. An additional disadvantage of these systems is the significant amount of water lost due to extensive and frequent backwash and rinse cycles. When comparing the advantages and energy requirements of the various treatment technologies, RO membrane filtration immediately stands out due to the excessive energy expenditure needed to pump water across the membrane although RO is an effective way to remove selenium. In addition, RO requires extensive pretreatment, such as MF membrane, and frequent maintenance, rendering it an expensive option that may be out of reach for certain applications. In fact, although the performance was good during the pilot testing by the NSMP Working Group for treatment naturally occurring selenium in the surface water, the high electricity requirements and significant reject water stream made it an infeasible alternative. While conventional ion exchange maybe an effective treatment option, it requires frequent regeneration of the resin when applied to highly contaminated water, which leads to several tons of contaminant-laden, high-salinity brine that needs to be disposed off-site each day. One of the water systems in the west coast currently uses ion exchange for selenium treatment and has been trucking selenium laden hazardous brine waste weekly in the last several years. Pneumatic pumping and rinse water pumping required for ion exchange also increase the energy usage. In comparison, adsorption process is a passive treatment system where contaminated water comes in contact with an adsorption media in a vessel. Typically, there is no mixing, backwash, or recycle pumping required, thus significantly reducing the energy usage. A passive single-use adsorption system does not require backwash, thereby generating small amount of process waste, and producing the highest water yield among the alternatives. The energy and water efficiencies, and applicability for SeVI and SeIV are summarized in Table 1. Despite these benefits though, adsorption typically does not work for the most oxidized form of selenium (SeVI). The innovative biosorption process integrates both process to increase the treatment efficiency while minimizing energy, chemical, and time required to treat both SeVI and SeIV. Additional advantages include simple partial biological reduction with reduced on-site waste generation, which lead to water and electricity savings, and less operational need compared to biological treatment alone. This makes biosorption especially suitable for remote areas, where liquid backwash and brine disposal may be cost prohibitive or infeasible.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

Metallurgical Analysis of the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) Carrier Lifting Bails (Rev.1)

The dissolution rates of the aluminum alloys in the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) element carriers and the Material Test Reactor (MTR) L-bundles in the H-Canyon facility have been identified as the possible cause of extended dissolutions that result in significant time and financial expenditures. A study, carried out by Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) to determine relationships between the dissolution rates and the metallurgical properties of the aluminum alloy materials of construction of the HFIR carriers and the L-bundles, considered the dissolution rates of aluminum alloy (AA) series 1100, 6061, and 6063. The study determined that the aluminum alloy compositions played a principal role in the dissolution rate of the carrier/bundle components. Higher dissolution rates were correlated with lower concentrations of the minor element additions in the alloys and with specific element concentrations. Aluminum alloys 1100 and 6063 were found to have similar dissolution rates that were approximately two orders of magnitude (100X) greater than those of AA6061. Based on the results of the dissolution behavior study, a Technical Assistance Request (TAR) was first issued to determine if the replacement of AA6061-T6 with AA6063-T6 is feasible for the HFIR carrier lifting bails. A Technical Task Request was then issued to consider AA6063-T5 as well as other alloys to improve possible supply chain issues. The metallurgical properties of the L-bundle (specifically the end caps) were not evaluated in this report because L-Bundle drawings already allow for the use of AA6063-T6 in all structural components. The HFIR carriers are composed of thin-walled components with significant surface areas that allow for relatively quick overall dissolution times. Conversely, the carrier lifting bails and the supporting constituents are composed of solid bars and thick plate regions with relatively small surface areas that experience longer overall dissolution times. While the MTR L-bundle design includes allowances for the materials of construction to be either AA6061-T6 or AA6063-T6, the HFIR carriers are specified to be constructed fully with AA6061-T6 alloy. This report analyzes the recommendations of the dissolution behavior study to replace the materials of construction of the HFIR carrier lifting bails. The analysis considers the operational requirements of the lifting bail and its supporting structures. To decrease dissolution times, the analysis considers direct replacement of the material as well as reductions in the thicknesses of the components to decrease the mass of the elements. Material reductions are considered on options for using either AA6061 and/or AA6063. The calculations are based on specifications from the American Society of Mechanical Engineer (ASME) and The Aluminum Association, Inc. design codes. The analysis finds that direct replacement of the lifting bail material of construction with AA6063-T6, and AA6063-T5 as well as reductions in the dimensions of the lifting bail components are acceptable. Note that this study considers the structural suitability of the alloys. It does not consider their dissolution rates in the dissolvers.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

2020 Annual Report of Available Drawdowns for Each Oil Storage Cavern in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve

The Department of Energy maintains an up-to-date documentation of the number of available full drawdowns of each of the caverns owned by the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). This information is important for assessing the SPR's ability to deliver oil to domestic oil companies expeditiously if national or world events dictate a rapid sale and deployment of the oil reserves. Sandia was directed to develop and implement a process to continuously assess and report the evolution of drawdown capacity, the subject of this report. A cavern has an available drawdown if after that drawdown, the long-term stability of the cavern, the cavern field, or the oil quality are not compromised. Thus, determining the number of available drawdowns requires the consideration of several factors regarding cavern and wellbore integrity and stability, including stress states caused by cavern geometry and operations, salt damage caused by dilatant and tensile stresses, the effect of enhanced creep on wellbore integrity, and the sympathetic stress effect of operations on neighboring caverns. A consensus has now been built regarding the assessment of drawdown capabilities and risks for the SPR caverns. The process involves an initial assessment of the pillar-to-diameter (P/D) ratio for each cavern with respect to neighboring caverns. A large pillar thickness between adjacent caverns should be strong enough to withstand the stresses induced by closure of the caverns due to salt creep. The first evaluation of P/D includes a calculation of the evolution of P/D after a number of full cavern drawdowns. The most common storage industry standard is to keep this value greater than 1.0, which should ensure a pillar thick enough to prevent loss of fluids to the surrounding rock mass. However, many of the SPR caverns currently have a P/D less than 1.0 or will likely have a low P/D after one or two full drawdowns. For these caverns, it is important to examine the structural integrity with more detail using geomechanical models. Finite-element geomechanical models have been used to determine the stress states in the pillars following successive drawdowns. By computing the tensile and dilatant stresses in the salt, areas of potential structural instability can be identified that may represent "red flags" for additional drawdowns. These analyses have found that many caverns will maintain structural integrity even when grown via drawdowns to dimensions resulting in a P/D of less than 1.0. The analyses have also confirmed that certain caverns should only be completely drawn down one time. As the SPR caverns are utilized and partial drawdowns are performed to remove oil from the caverns (e.g., for occasional oil sales authorized by the Congress or the President), the changes to the cavern caused by these procedures must be tracked and accounted for so that an ongoing assessment of the cavern's drawdown capacity may be continued. A proposed methodology for assessing and tracking the available drawdowns for each cavern was presented in Sobolik et al. (2018). This report includes an update to the baseline drawdowns for each cavern, and provides an initial assessment of the evolution of drawdown expenditure for several caverns

02 PETROLEUM↗

Available Drawdowns for Each Oil Storage Cavern in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (2021 Annual Report)

The Department of Energy maintains an up-to-date documentation of the number of available full drawdowns of each of the caverns owned by the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). This information is important for assessing the SPRs ability to deliver oil to domestic oil companies expeditiously if national or world events dictate a rapid sale and deployment of the oil reserves. Sandia was directed to develop and implement a process to continuously assess and report the evolution of drawdown capacity, the subject of this report. A cavern has an available drawdown if after that drawdown, the long-term stability of the cavern, the cavern field, or the oil quality are not compromised. Thus, determining the number of available drawdowns requires the consideration of several factors regarding cavern and wellbore integrity and stability, including stress states caused by cavern geometry and operations, salt damage caused by dilatant and tensile stresses, the effect of enhanced creep on wellbore integrity, and the sympathetic stress effect of operations on neighboring caverns. A consensus has now been built regarding the assessment of drawdown capabilities and risks for the SPR caverns (Sobolik et al., 2014; Sobolik 2016). The process involves an initial assessment of the pillar - to - diameter (P/D) ratio for each cavern with respect to neighboring caverns. A large pillar thickness between adjacent caverns should be strong enough to withstand the stresses induced by closure of the caverns due to salt creep. The first evaluation of P/D includes a calculation of the evolution of P/D after a number of full cavern drawdowns. The most common storage industry standard is to keep this value greater than 1.0, which should ensure a pillar thick enough to prevent loss of fluids to the surrounding rock mass. However, many of the SPR caverns currently have a P/D less than 1.0 or will likely have a low P/D after one or two full drawdowns. For these caverns, it is important to examine the structural integrity with more detail using geomechanical models. Finite-element geomechanical models have been used to determine the stress states in the pillars following successive drawdowns. By computing the tensile and dilatant stresses in the salt, areas of potential structural instability can be identified that may represent red flags for additional drawdowns. These analyses have found that many caverns will maintain structural integrity even when grown via drawdowns to dimensions resulting in a P/D of less than 1.0. The analyses have also confirmed that certain caverns should only be completely drawn down one time. As the SPR caverns are utilized and partial drawdowns are performed to remove oil from the caverns (e.g., for occasional oil sales , purchases, or exchanges authorized by the Congress or the President), the changes to the cavern caused by these procedures must be tracked and accounted for so that an ongoing assessment of the caverns drawdown capacity may be continued. A proposed methodology for assessing and tracking the available drawdowns for each cavern was presented in Sobolik et al. (2018). This report is the latest in a series of annual reports, and it includes the baseline available drawdowns for each cavern, and the most recent assessment of the evolution of drawdown expenditure for several caverns .

02 PETROLEUM↗

Available Drawdowns for Each Oil Storage Cavern in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (2022 Annual Report)

The Department of Energy maintains an up-to-date documentation of the number of available full drawdowns of each of the caverns owned by the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). This information is important for assessing the SPR's ability to deliver oil to domestic oil companies expeditiously if national or world events dictate a rapid sale and deployment of the oil reserves. Sandia was directed to develop and implement a process to continuously assess and report the evolution of drawdown capacity, the subject of this report. A cavern has an available drawdown if after that drawdown, the long-term stability of the cavern, the cavern field, or the oil quality are not compromised. Thus, determining the number of a vailable drawdowns requires the consideration of several factors regarding cavern and wellbore integrity and stability, including stress states caused by cavern geometry and operations, salt damage caused by dilatant and tensile stresses, the effect of enhanced creep on wellbore integrity, and the sympathetic stress effect of operations on neighboring caverns. A consensus has now been built regarding the assessment of drawdown capabilities and risks for the SPR caverns (Sobolik et al., 2014; Sobolik 2016). The process involves an initial assessment of the pillar-to-diameter (P/D) ratio for each cavern with respect to neighboring caverns. A large pillar thickness between adjacent caverns should be strong enough to withstand the stresses induced by closure of the caverns due to salt creep. The first evaluation of P/D includes a calculation of the evolution of P/D after a number of full cavern drawdowns. The most common storage industry standard is to keep this value greater than 1.0, which should ensure a pillar thick enough to prevent loss of fluids to the surrounding rock mass. However, many of the SPR caverns currently have a P/D less than 1.0 or will likely have a low P/D after one or two full drawdowns. For these caverns, it is important to examine the s tructural integrity with more detail using geomechanical models. Finite - element geomechanical models have been used to determine the stress states in the pillars following successive drawdowns. By computing the tensile and dilatant stresses in the salt, areas of potential structural instability can be identified that may represent "red flags" for additional drawdowns. These analyses have found that many caverns will maintain structural integrity even when grown via drawdowns to dimensions resulting in a P/D of less than 1.0. The analyses have also confirmed that certain caverns should only be completely drawn down one time. As the SPR caverns are utilized and partial drawdowns are performed to remove oil from the caverns (e.g., for occasional oil sales , purchases, or exchanges authorized by the Congress or the President), the changes to the cavern caused by these procedures must be tracked and accounted for so that an ongoing assessment of the cavern's drawdown capacity may be continued. A proposed methodology for assessing and tracking the available drawdowns for each cavern was presented in Sobolik et al. (2018). This report is the latest in a series of annual reports, and it includes the baseline available drawdowns for each cavern, and the most recent assessment of the evolution of drawdown expenditure for several caverns.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Catalytic Bio-crude Production in a Novel, Short-Contact Time Reactor

RTI has developed a catalytic fast pyrolysis (CFP) process to produce biomass-based hydrocarbon replacement fuels. From a technology perspective, this advanced biofuels process produces liquid transportation fuels that can leverage capital expenditures in the existing petroleum distribution infrastructure. From a business perspective, this technology does not face potential market limitations caused by oxygenate blend limitations for light duty vehicle applications. A promising catalyst has been developed with excellent potential for deoxygenation to produce a hydrocarbon-rich biocrude that is more suitable for upgrading with traditional hydroprocessing technology. The role of the catalyst is to control the chemistry during biomass pyrolysis to produce a biocrude in a single step that has lower oxygen content and is more thermally stable than conventional biomass fast pyrolysis oil. Catalyst properties are optimized to minimize gas and coke production and improve catalytic deoxygenation and biocrude yields. Results from this project have demonstrated that biocrudes from catalytic fast pyrolysis contain <20 wt% oxygen, with the organic fraction as low as 12% oxygen. These oxygen numbers are > 50% lower compared to traditional fast pyrolysis oils. The biocrude produced from our CFP process can be upgraded to gasoline range hydrocarbons. A very conservative approach for upgrading included a preliminary stabilization step followed by a hydroprocessing step. The oxygen content in the upgraded product was decreased by 97% (to less than 3wt %) from the oxygen content of the biocrude sample. Additionally, the acid content was reduced by 99% from the acid content of the biocrude sample. In an optimized integrated process, the CFP step and the hydroprocessing (upgrading) step need to be carefully balanced to maximize the input biomass energy that is recovered in the finished biofuels. Hydrogen utilization and carbon recovery during both catalytic biomass pyrolysis and biocrude upgrading need to be optimized to maximize energy recovery in the finished biofuel. A nominal 1 ton per day (TPD) catalytic biomass pyrolysis system was designed based on the laboratory experimental data. The system was designed to achieve the short residence times (0.5–2 sec) and high heat transfer rates required for maximum liquid biocrude yields while optimizing process integration to maintain catalyst activity by continuous regeneration. The catalytic biomass pyrolysis reactor is a continuously circulating single-loop transport reactor design that is flexible enough to allow sensitivity studies around temperature, residence time, biomass feed rate, and catalyst-to-biomass ratio (i.e., catalyst circulation rate) for process optimization. For a nominal 100 lb/hr feed rate of dry biomass, the products include ~25 lb/hr char and coke, ~20 lb/hr permanent gases, and ~55 lb/hr condensable vapors. Pyrolysis temperatures are 350–600°C, and the system is operated close to ambient pressure. Production of the catalyst developed within the project was scaled up to provide enough material (200kg) for bench-scale testing. The 1TPD bench-scale unit was fabricated, installed and commissioned with this project. Biocrude samples from wood were produced in this unit with the CFP catalyst with material balance > 90%. The intermediate biocrude yields and chemical composition compare well with previous laboratory results and a hydroprocessing strategy for upgrading the resulting biocrude was developed. The experimental results obtained within this project were used to develop a process model for a 2000 TPD commercial facility. Detailed flow sheets were developed for all major unit operations in the process and provided a basis for an economic analysis to develop capital and operating costs. Estimates of the biofuel production costs were used to develop internal rates of return for the yields and compositions measured for the current state of technology at the end of this project and for the yields anticipated for an optimized (nth plant) scenario as additional process improvements are made.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗