SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “arraying algorithms”

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.

1,244 records · Page 70

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) 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.

CERF↗

DOE OSTI2022

Connecting the Radiative Influences of Aerosol upon the Mass Flux Profiles of Shallow Cumuli across the Southeast Atlantic Ocean Basin and its Boundaries (Final Report)

The Atlantic Ocean covers approximately 25% of Earth’s surface and the atmosphere above it is home to a complex array of clouds and aerosols that have important influences on regional and global weather and climate. These influences must be accurately depicted in short range, medium range, seasonal, and climate forecast models. Conditions over the tropical Atlantic are particularly complex due to continental scale plumes of dust from the Sahara Desert and smoke from agricultural burning in Africa that drift across the Atlantic Ocean basin toward the Americas. These plumes are often found meandering in the lower atmosphere above shallow tropical clouds that form above the ocean surface, presumably mingling with these clouds on occasion due to convective mixing processes. Elevated dust and smoke particles absorb incoming sunlight and substantially warm the marine atmosphere in the layer in which they are present. This warming may alter the thermal stability of the marine atmosphere and may throttle or enhance the development of clouds, change their internal structure and the rate at which they precipitate. Alternatively, it may isolate the lower atmosphere from drier layers above enabling water vapor to accumulate near the ocean surface potentially leading to the development of deeper convection. Our study was organized around the principal concept of determining the impact of African smoke and dust plumes upon cloud development at ASI and understanding how a popular shallow convection parameterization used in models responds to the presence of this aerosol. We analyzed observations collected during the US Department of Energy (DOE) Layered Atlantic Smoke Interactions with Clouds (LASIC) campaign using the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program’s Mobile Facility #1 (AMF-1), which was deployed to Ascension Island (ASI) in Southeastern Atlantic for a one-year period. Ascension Island is immediately downwind from an African source of these plumes, but far enough removed to enable the lower atmosphere to have reacted to their presence. A main goal of our study was to compute radiative heating rate profiles over Ascension Island and along the trajectory from the biomass burning regions along coastal Africa to Ascension Island. To compute the radiative heating rate due to aerosols and clouds, we employed observed profiles of temperature, humidity, and clouds from LASIC alongside aerosol optical properties from the Modern-era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications Version 2 (MERRA-2), as input for the Rapid Radiation Transfer Model (RRTM). Radiative heating was also assessed across the southeast Atlantic Ocean using an ensemble of back trajectories from the Hybrid Single Particle Lagrangian Integrated Trajectory (HYSPLIT) model. We were successful in this effort and the resulting publication is already being cited despite its relatively short lifetime in the literature. The second part of our study involved the process-level representation of the clouds observed over the Southeastern Atlantic in models. Our initial task, upon which the balance of this portion of the study depended, was to evaluate the representativeness of the clouds observed by AMF-1. What orographic influence did Ascension Island have on the measured cloud structure? We set out to answer this question by trying to separate observations that were clearly indicative of orographic forcing from those that were representative of open ocean. The siting of AMF-1, which was 340-m above sea-level on the slope of a steep escarpment, proved demonstrably problematic for cloud process measurements. Despite considerable effort using multiple approaches including artificial intelligence (AI), we were unable to successfully compensate for the orographic forcing present at the AMF-1 site on ASI and, hence, produce process-level summaries of the convective mass flux representative of open ocean over the Southeastern Atlantic. Even though the project has officially ended, we are making a final attempt using two new types of clustering algorithm (i.e., AI) on the recommendation of a former student, who is an expert in this area. Since we have only recently begun to test these new AI schemes, the recommendations from the second part of our project outlined below are based on our experience at the time of this report.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗