Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Policy support”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Quick Talk: Resilient Communities, Maryland

Groundswell, Inc., in partnership with the Maryland Energy Administration (MEA), Ayika Solutions, the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL), and the Baltimore Office of Sustainability, is advancing a vision for resilient, community-centered energy systems in Maryland. This effort aligns with Groundswell's commitment to a clean energy economy that equitably benefits all communities, closing gaps in representation, wages, and access to wealth generation, savings, and local jobs within a diverse energy supply chain. Project Vision and Objectives The project emphasizes "energy resilience," defined as a community’s capacity to anticipate, adapt to, and swiftly recover from power disruptions through inclusive planning and technical solutions. The approach centers on Resilience Hubs—designated community facilities equipped to support residents before, during, and after power-related disruptions. These hubs offer emergency resources, coordinate communications, and deliver essential services while reducing carbon emissions, ultimately enhancing residents' quality of life. Additionally, Resilience Hubs foster social connections, support disaster preparedness, and provide spaces for community programming and everyday use. The goals of Resilient Communities Maryland include: Developing a replicable framework for community energy resilience, applicable beyond Maryland. Defining community-led indicators of social impact and resilience. Establishing equitable decision-making processes in project design and implementation. Informing MEA of practical, community-based resilience strategies to shape future state initiatives. Approach Groundswell and its partners prioritize collaborative engagement with local stakeholders, ensuring that solutions are responsive to each community's unique needs. By integrating feedback from residents, local organizations, and government entities, the team has developed a holistic model for resilience that balances immediate benefits, such as improved emergency response, with long-term gains in social equity and environmental sustainability. Key Outcomes This initiative has produced valuable resources and insights, including: A Community Energy Resilience Framework: Designed to guide other communities in establishing energy resilience strategies tailored to their specific needs. Case Studies: Documenting best practices and lessons learned from pilot projects to serve as models for future resilience efforts. Community-Driven Impact Metrics: Highlighting the positive social impacts that resilience initiatives can bring, such as improved social connectedness and local decision-making power. Recommendations for MEA: Offering evidence-based insights to inform policies and funding opportunities that support resilient energy infrastructure in vulnerable communities. Next Steps Groundswell's final report will detail findings, including the potential for scaling resilience hubs across Maryland and other regions, with a focus on equitable access and community-driven outcomes. This project underscores the importance of aligning energy resilience with social equity, reinforcing community agency, and building systems that withstand and recover from future challenges effectively and sustainably.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Understanding the diversity of the West African monsoon system change projected by CORDEX-CORE regional climate models

Understanding real uncertainties in projections is needed to support actions of decision and policy makers. In this study, two state-of-the-art regional climate models with ~ 25 km horizontal resolution forced with three different global climate models are employed to investigate the response of the West African Monsoon (WAM) system under the low (RCP2.6) and high (RCP8.5) emission scenarios. We make a step towards assessing the plausibility of rainfall change (ΔPr) patterns based on the models’ ability to realistically represent the WAM system under the historical period, and by analyzing changes in mechanisms associated with ΔPr patterns. Under global warming, experiments exhibit diverse ΔPr patterns underpinned by different combinations of mechanisms operating simultaneously. A dipole-like surface pressure change between the Sahara Desert and the Guinea Coast appears to be a differentiating factor between experiments featuring homogeneous or increased rainfall over all or a part of the Sahel from those simulating heterogeneous or reduced rainfall over the same domain. This dipole acts by modulating the amount and the extent of deepening of the monsoon flux inland, and hence the latitudinal positioning of the monsoon convective system. This process contributes to moistening the whole or central and eastern Sahel in some experiments while drying the Guinea Coast. The West African Westerly Jet (WAWJ) is responsible for strengthening and moistening the western Sahel under RCP2.6. However, the WAMJ becomes much stronger under RCP8.5 and may have contributed to the drying of the western Sahel by shifting moisture eastwards in addition to the mid-tropospheric moisture divergence through enhanced African Easterly Jet. Furthermore, for experiments expecting wetting (drying) of the Sahel, the strengthening (weakening) of the tropical easterly jet may have contributed to the projected intensification (reduction) of WAM rainfall by favoring uplift (downlift) above 600 hPa. It also emerges that the ΔPr patterns from REMO2015 experiments are likely more plausible than those from RegCM4-v7. The impacts of strong warming on the regional hydrological cycle are further investigated and we found that changes gradually intensify with the level of radiative forcing, highlighting the importance of mitigating warming as recommended by the Paris agreement.

CORDEX-CORE↗
DOE OSTI2026

A systematic analytical framework for multi-source municipal solid waste characterization for energy recovery

Advancing municipal solid waste (MSW) management from disposal-oriented practices toward circular, value-driven systems requires standardized methodologies capable of identifying material composition and resource recoverable potential at the point of generation. Despite extensive research, MSW characterization remains fragmented due to inconsistences in sampling methodologies, waste sorting categories, and temporal coverage across previous studies which limit cross-site comparability, reproducibility, and constrain the reliable evaluation of potential resource recovery pathways. This lack of consistency has hindered the development of a unified framework for MSW characterization and resource assessment. This study introduces a standardized, field-validated protocol for MSW sampling and composition analysis that ensures consistent, traceable data across diverse waste sources. The protocol integrates randomized spatial sampling, systematic material sorting, and controlled subsampling for multi-site and multi-season field campaigns. Validation included MSW collection from residential, grocery, restaurant, and school MSW streams across five U.S. states, including Maryland, Idaho, Virginia, Ohio, and Mississippi, to demonstrate the protocol’s ability to identify source-based composition patterns relevant to resource recovery applications. Grocery and restaurant streams were dominated by food waste and high-moisture organics, while school waste contained higher paper content and residential waste showed greater heterogeneity. Aggregation into energy-relevant fractions highlighted practical recovery pathways via anaerobic digestion or gasification, supporting data-driven planning, policy, and circular economy strategies for sustainable waste management across waste sources.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Ensemble Simulations on Leadership Computing Systems

Scientific productivity can be enhanced through workflow management tools, relieving large High Performance Computing (HPC) system users from the tedious tasks of scheduling and designing the complex computational execution of scientific applications. This paper presents a study on the usage of ensemble workflow tools to accelerate science using the Summit and Frontier supercomputing systems. The research aims to connect science domain simulations using Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) supercomputing platforms with ensemble workflow methods in order to accelerate HPC-enabled discovery and boost scientific impact. We present the coupling, porting and optimization of Radical-Cybertools on three applications: Chroma, NAMD and LAMMPS. The tools augment traditional HPC monolithic runs with a pilot scheduler. Lessons-learned are discussed for physics, biology and materials science applications. We discuss intrinsic limitations of coupling and porting ensemble workflow tools to applications that run on large HPC systems. The origins of technical challenges and their solutions developed during the implementation process are discussed. Data management strategies, OLCF’s policies for ensembles, and natively supported workflow tools are also summarized.

Georgiadou, Antigoni [ORNL] (ORCID:000000020977631↗
DOE OSTI2020

Improved Advanced Biomass Logistics Utilizing Woody and other Feedstocks in the Northeast and Pacific Northwest (Final Report)

Willow and poplar short rotation woody crops (SRWC) have shown promise with regards to environmental benefits and rural development but wide adoption lags due to underdeveloped markets and supply systems. High costs associated with harvesting, handling and transportation (40-60% of delivered cost) have impeded expansion. A better understanding of these systems will create opportunities to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and realize environmental benefits and impacts. The project’s goal was to lower the delivered cost of hybrid poplar in the Northwest and willow in the Northeast by optimizing harvesting and logistics supply systems while maintaining or improving biomass quality along the supply chain. Over 3,400 Mg of biomass and 300 ha of willow and poplar were monitored over a range of crop and field conditions. Feedstock quality as affected by storage and preprocessing were shown to improve or maintain feedstock quality. Modeled harvesting costs ranged from $38–61 Mg -1 dry; when including delivery and preprocessing feedstock costs ranged between $79-83 Mg -1 dry for willow and $106-116 Mg -1 dry for poplar. Costs for willow minimized when hot water extraction and high-moisture densification preprocessing were used. Models also suggest that social and regional factors could further reduce costs. Results will give guidance to feedstock growers, harvesting and logistic operations, biorefinery project developers, and policy makers developing SRWC to support a growing bioeconomy.

, biomass↗
DOE OSTI2022

Renewable Energy and Efficiency Technologies in Scenarios of U.S. Decarbonization in Two Types of Models: Comparison of GCAM Modeling and Sector-Specific Modeling

Energy system projections from quantitative models inform actions ranging from short-term and local decisions, such as those about technology and infrastructure deployment, and global and long-term negotiations and targets. Computational limits require model designers to balance coverage and resolution (i.e., breadth versus depth). Some models, such as the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), represent all energy sources and uses with less resolution than models that focus on a single sector's energy use. GCAM balances global supply and demand of all energy carriers projecting prices using internal calculations for energy sources and costs of greenhouse gas mitigation while capturing interlinkages between the energy system, water, agriculture and land use, the economy, and the climate. This globally comprehensive model was used to frame the Long-Term Strategy of the United States: Pathways to Net-Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050, which the White House released in 2021 and has been used to inform national and global economy-wide climate change mitigation discussions and strategy development for decades. Unlike GCAM, sectoral models focus on a portion of the energy sector and with greater detail and resolution. The Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electricity-sector model, for example, projects electricity system capacity expansion and operation with high-fidelity representation of emerging technologies for deep decarbonization, such as variable renewable energy and energy storage, and integration of these technologies into the electric grid. The Transportation Energy and Mobility Pathway Options (TEMPO) transportation-sector model enables analysis of household choices, with a focus on adoption, charging, and use of electric vehicles. The Scout buildings-sector model supports detailed consideration of the policies and markets that can accelerate the adoption of electrification and energy conservation measures in buildings. Such sector-specific models are instrumental in informing technology research, sectoral planning strategies, and sector-specific aspects of greenhouse gas mitigation strategies in the United States. The integrated multisector and sector-specific modeling approaches represented by GCAM and these sectoral models are complementary. The integrated multisector approach calculates energy pricing and resource allocation within the model, which is important for consistency when future conditions substantially diverge from current conditions in transformative scenarios. The sector-specific approach facilitates representation of granular details across spatial, temporal, technological, and market dimensions that enable exploration of particular interactions and trade-offs. This report presents the results of recent work to explore the differences and trade-offs between these approaches by comparing GCAM with the sector-specific ReEDS, TEMPO, and Scout models. The report compares both model structures and results, and it addresses their potential relevance and applications.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Justice Roundtable Series: Energy Justice Metrics

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), and National Governors Association (NGA) hosted a State Energy Justice Roundtable (Roundtable) in April 2022. Participants included federal and state decision-makers, members of community-based organizations, and subject-matter experts. The Roundtable members explored current state efforts to articulate and incorporate energy justice concerns into energy-related decision-making. Participants established connections with one another to better understand the current landscape of existing resources, learn about emerging efforts, and identify ongoing support opportunities for advancing energy justice.This paper is one of five authored by the host organizations on topics that were the focus of the Roundtable. Each paper summarizes key themes, emerging efforts, and group takeaways that were discussed at the Roundtable and should assist state members in developing and meeting their own state goals around energy justice. The papers all include the same discussions of background, introduction, and reading list so they can be read separately. Each paper is written from the perspective of one association and includes options for its members to take actions that could support more equitable state energy policies and programs. The five papers cover: (1) Participation in decision making (NARUC), (2) Customer affordability and arrearages (NARUC), (3) Energy justice metrics (NARUC), (4) Equity in clean energy research and development (NASEO), and (5) Equitable distributed energy resource (DER) access (NGA). The resources and recommendations listed in these papers are not meant to be exhaustive, as this field of study continues to evolve. Although this brief is focused on electricity, energy justice considerations extend to all energy needs and services, including the impact of energy extraction, processing, and distribution functions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Justice Roundtable Series: Customer Affordability and Arrearages

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), and National Governors Association (NGA) hosted a State Energy Justice Roundtable (Roundtable) in April 2022. Participants included federal and state decision-makers, members of community-based organizations, and subject-matter experts. The Roundtable members explored current state efforts to articulate and incorporate energy justice concerns into energy-related decision-making. Participants established connections with one another to better understand the current landscape of existing resources, learn about emerging efforts, and identify ongoing support opportunities for advancing energy justice. This paper is one of five authored by the host organizations on topics that were the focus of the Roundtable. Each paper summarizes key themes, emerging efforts, and group takeaways that were discussed at the Roundtable and should assist state members in developing and meeting their own state goals around energy justice. The papers all include the same discussions of background, introduction, and reading list so they can be read separately. Each paper is written from the perspective of one association and includes options for its members to take actions that could support more equitable state energy policies and programs. The five papers cover: (1) Participation in decision making (NARUC) (2) Customer affordability and arrearages (NARUC) (3) Energy justice metrics (NARUC) (4) Equity in clean energy research and development (NASEO) (5) Equitable distributed energy resource (DER) access (NGA). The resources and recommendations listed in these papers are not meant to be exhaustive, as this field of study continues to evolve. Although this brief is focused on electricity, energy justice considerations extend to all energy needs and services, including the impact of energy extraction, processing, and distribution functions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

State Energy Justice Roundtable Series: Participation in Decision Making

The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO), and National Governors Association (NGA) hosted a State Energy Justice Roundtable (Roundtable) in April 2022. Participants included federal and state decision-makers, members of community-based organizations, and subject-matter experts. The Roundtable members explored current state efforts to articulate and incorporate energy justice concerns into energy-related decision-making. Participants established connections with one another to better understand the current landscape of existing resources, learn about emerging efforts, and identify ongoing support opportunities for advancing energy justice. This paper is one of five authored by the host organizations on topics that were the focus of the Roundtable. Each paper summarizes key themes, emerging efforts, and group takeaways that were discussed at the Roundtable and should assist state members in developing and meeting their own state goals around energy justice. The papers all include the same discussions of background, introduction, and reading list so they can be read separately. Each paper is written from the perspective of one association and includes options for its members to take actions that could support more equitable state energy policies and programs. The five papers cover: • Participation in decision making (NARUC) • Customer affordability and arrearages (NARUC) • Energy justice metrics (NARUC) • Equity in clean energy research and development (NASEO) • Equitable distributed energy resource (DER) access (NGA). The resources and recommendations listed in these papers are not meant to be exhaustive, as this field of study continues to evolve. Although this brief is focused on electricity, energy justice considerations extend to all energy needs and services, including the impact of energy extraction, processing, and distribution functions.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Renewable Energy and Efficiency Technologies in Scenarios of U.S. Decarbonization in Two Types of Models: Comparison of GCAM Modeling and Sector-Specific Modeling

Energy system projections from analytic models inform actions ranging from short-term and local decisions, such as technology and infrastructure deployment, to global and long-term negotiations and targets. Computational limits require the designers of these models to trade off between coverage and resolution. Some models, such as the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM), represent all energy sources and uses but at a relatively coarse level of resolution. GCAM balances global supply and demand of all energy carriers by endogenously projecting prices for energy sources and costs of greenhouse gas mitigation while capturing interlinkages between the energy system, water, agriculture and land use, the economy, and the climate. This global model was used to frame the Long-Term Strategy released by the White House in 2021 and has been used to inform national and global economy-wide decarbonization discussions and strategy development for decades. Other models instead focus on a portion of the energy sector with greater detail and resolution. The Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electricity-sector model, for example, projects capacity expansion with an emphasis on integration of variable renewable energy into the grid of the future. The Transportation Energy and Mobility Pathway Options (TEMPO) transportation-sector model enables analysis of household choices in adoption, charging, and use of electric vehicles. The Scout buildings-sector model supports detailed consideration of the policies and markets that can accelerate the adoption of energy conservation measures in buildings. Such sector-specific models are instrumental in informing technology research, sectoral planning strategies, and sector-specific aspects of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation strategies in the United States. These global and sector-specific modeling approaches can complement each other. The global approach ensures consistent, endogenous energy pricing and resource allocation, which can substantially diverge from current conditions in transformative scenarios, while the sector-specific approach facilitates representation of granular details across spatial, temporal, technological, and market dimensions that enable exploration of particular interactions and trade-offs. This report presents the results of recent work to explore the differences and tradeoffs between these approaches by comparing GCAM with the sector-specific ReEDS, TEMPO, and Scout models. The report compares both model structures and results, and discusses their potential relevance and applications.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Conus-Wide Mapping of Water Availability and Cost

Background: New demands for water can be satisfied through a variety of source options. In some basins surface and/or groundwater may be available through permitting with the state water management agency (termed unappropriated water), alternatively water might be purchased and transferred out of its current use to another (termed appropriated water), or non-traditional water sources can be captured and treated (e.g., wastewater). The relative availability and cost of each source are key factors in the development decision. Unfortunately, these measures are location dependent with no consistent or comparable set of data available for evaluating competing water sources. With the help of water managers, water availability was mapped for over 2500 watersheds throughout CONUS. These values are unique in that they account for institutional factors (i.e., water rights, compacts, treaties, instream flows) that locally limit water use. Five water sources were individually examined, including unappropriated surface water, unappropriated groundwater, appropriated water, municipal wastewater and brackish groundwater. Associated costs to acquire, convey and treat the water, as necessary, for each of the five sources were estimated. These metrics were developed to support regional water planning and policy analysis with initial application to electric transmission planning in the western US. Problem: These data were originally developed in 20141 and updated in 20182. New datasets on which these data depend have been published. As such, there is need to update the water availability and cost data. There is also need to map this same data to a county resolution and to publish the data in a more accessible place. Organization of the dataset: Data are organized according to five primary water sources: • Unappropriated fresh surface water • Unappropriated fresh groundwater • Appropriated water • Recycled wastewater, and • Brackish water

Tidwell, Vincent [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2022

Global Carbon Budget 2022

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize data sets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC), mainly deforestation, are based on land use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The ocean CO2 sink (SOCEAN) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based data products. The terrestrial CO2 sink (SLAND) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. The resulting carbon budget imbalance (BIM), the difference between the estimated total emissions and the estimated changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere, is a measure of imperfect data and understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2021, EFOS increased by 5.1 % relative to 2020, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (9.9 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is included), and ELUC was 1.1 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 10.9 ± 0.8 GtC yr−1 (40.0 ± 2.9 GtCO2). Also, for 2021, GATM was 5.2 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.5 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1), SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 3.5 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1, with a BIM of −0.6 GtC yr−1 (i.e. the total estimated sources were too low or sinks were too high). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2021 reached 414.71 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2022 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2021 of +1.0 % (0.1 % to 1.9 %) globally and atmospheric CO2 concentration reaching 417.2 ppm, more than 50 % above pre-industrial levels (around 278 ppm). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2021, but discrepancies of up to 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extratropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the strength of the ocean sink over the last decade. This living data update documents changes in the methods and data sets used in this new global carbon budget and the progress in understanding of the global carbon cycle compared with previous publications of this data set. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2022 (Friedlingstein et al., 2022b).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Global Carbon Budget 2024

Abstract. Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesize datasets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO2 emissions (EFOS) are based on energy statistics and cement production data, while emissions from land-use change (ELUC) are based on land-use and land-use change data and bookkeeping models. Atmospheric CO2 concentration is measured directly, and its growth rate (GATM) is computed from the annual changes in concentration. The global net uptake of CO2 by the ocean (SOCEAN, called the ocean sink) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based fCO2 products (fCO2 is the fugacity of CO2). The global net uptake of CO2 by the land (SLAND, called the land sink) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. Additional lines of evidence on land and ocean sinks are provided by atmospheric inversions, atmospheric oxygen measurements, and Earth system models. The sum of all sources and sinks results in the carbon budget imbalance (BIM), a measure of imperfect data and incomplete understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ±1σ. For the year 2023, EFOS increased by 1.3 % relative to 2022, with fossil emissions at 10.1 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 (10.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr−1 when the cement carbonation sink is not included), and ELUC was 1.0 ± 0.7 GtC yr−1, for a total anthropogenic CO2 emission (including the cement carbonation sink) of 11.1 ± 0.9 GtC yr−1 (40.6 ± 3.2 GtCO2 yr−1). Also, for 2023, GATM was 5.9 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (2.79 ± 0.1 ppm yr−1; ppm denotes parts per million), SOCEAN was 2.9 ± 0.4 GtC yr−1, and SLAND was 2.3 ± 1.0 GtC yr−1, with a near-zero BIM (−0.02 GtC yr−1). The global atmospheric CO2 concentration averaged over 2023 reached 419.31 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2024 suggest an increase in EFOS relative to 2023 of +0.8 % (−0.2 % to 1.7 %) globally and an atmospheric CO2 concentration increase by 2.87 ppm, reaching 422.45 ppm, 52 % above the pre-industrial level (around 278 ppm in 1750). Overall, the mean of and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2023, with a near-zero overall budget imbalance, although discrepancies of up to around 1 GtC yr−1 persist for the representation of annual to semi-decadal variability in CO2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows the following: (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the mean ocean sink. This living-data update documents changes in methods and datasets applied to this most recent global carbon budget as well as evolving community understanding of the global carbon cycle. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2024 (Friedlingstein et al., 2024).

Friedlingstein, Pierre (ORCID:0000000333094739)↗
DOE OSTI2026

Global Carbon Budget 2025

Accurate assessment of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions and their redistribution among the atmosphere, ocean, and terrestrial biosphere in a changing climate is critical to better understand the global carbon cycle, support the development of climate policies, and project future climate change. Here we describe and synthesise datasets and methodologies to quantify the five major components of the global carbon budget and their uncertainties. Fossil CO 2 emissions (E FOS ) are based on energy and cement production data. Emissions from land-use change (E LUC ) are estimated by bookkeeping models based on land-use data. The global atmospheric CO 2 growth rate (G ATM ) is computed from changes in concentration measured at surface stations. The global net uptake of CO 2 by the ocean (S OCEAN ) is estimated with global ocean biogeochemistry models and observation-based fCO 2 -products. The global net uptake of CO 2 by the land (S LAND ) is estimated with dynamic global vegetation models. Additional lines of evidence are provided by atmospheric inversions, atmospheric oxygen measurements, ocean interior observation-based estimates, and Earth System Models. This year, we introduced corrections on the E LUC , S OCEAN and S LAND estimates. The sum of all sources and sinks results in the carbon budget imbalance (B IM ), a measure of imperfect data and incomplete understanding of the contemporary carbon cycle. All uncertainties are reported as ± 1σ. For the year 2024, E FOS increased by 1.1 % relative to 2023, with fossil emissions at 10.3 ± 0.5 GtC yr −1 (including the cement carbonation sink, 0.2 GtC yr −1 ), E LUC was 1.3 ± 0.7 GtC yr −1 , for total anthropogenic CO 2 emissions of 11.6 ± 0.9 GtC yr −1 (42.4 ± 3.2 GtCO2 yr −1 ). Also, for 2024, G ATM was 7.9 ± 0.2 GtC yr−1 (3.73 ± 0.1 ppm yr −1 ), 2.2 GtC above the 2023 growth rate. SOCEAN was 3.4 ± 0.4 GtC yr −1 and S LAND was 1.9 ± 1.1 GtC yr −1 , leaving a large negative B IM (−1.7 GtC yr −1 ), suggesting that the total sink or G ATM is strongly overestimated in 2024. The global atmospheric CO 2 concentration averaged over 2024 reached 422.8 ± 0.1 ppm. Preliminary data for 2025 suggest an increase in E FOS relative to 2024 of +1.0 % (0.2 % to 1.7 %) globally, and atmospheric CO 2 concentration increasing by 2.1 ppm reaching 425.6 ppm, 53 % above the pre-industrial level (around 278 ppm in 1750). Overall, the mean and trend in the components of the global carbon budget are consistently estimated over the period 1959–2024, with a near-zero overall budget imbalance, although discrepancies of up to around 1 GtC yr −1 persist for the representation of annual to decadal variability in CO 2 fluxes. Comparison of estimates from multiple approaches and observations shows: (1) a persistent large uncertainty in the estimate of land-use change emissions, (2) a low agreement between the different methods on the magnitude of the land CO 2 flux in the northern extra-tropics, and (3) a discrepancy between the different methods on the mean ocean sink. This living data update documents changes in methods and datasets applied to this most-recent global carbon budget as well as evolving community understanding of the global carbon cycle. The data presented in this work are available at https://doi.org/10.18160/GCP-2025 (Friedlingstein et al., 2025c).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Systematic Analysis of Drivers and Barriers of Cross-Sectorial Learning Between Nuclear and Oil and Gas Decommissioning Projects - 20139

Project and megaproject management in the energy sector have historically focused on the planning and delivery of the construction of infrastructure. Therefore, policies are predominantly oriented to support the construction of infrastructure rather than its decommissioning. However, globally, several facilities have reached (or will soon reach) their end-of-life and need to be decommissioned. These facilities span across the energy sector, including nuclear power plants and oil and gas rigs, whose decommissioning present unprecedented techno-socio-economic challenges. Moreover, globally, their decommissioning cost is estimated to reach hundreds of billions of US dollars and this budget keeps increasing, with limited knowledge-transfer across industries to mitigate the spiraling increase of this figure. Cross-sectorial knowledge-transfer is a way to tackle this matter and improve the planning and delivery of decommissioning and waste management projects. The aim of this research is to build a road-map based on cross-sectorial industrial experience, designed to promote the sharing of good practices between projects both within and across industries dealing with major decommissioning and waste management challenges. To reach this aim, the tacit knowledge of senior practitioners on several large scale nuclear and oil and gas decommissioning projects is made explicit by the means of semi-structured interviews, systematically analyzed through directed content analysis. The results of this analysis include a list of good practices that could and should be transferred to nuclear decommissioning projects, including the need to promote the adoption of incentives explicitly linked to the project deliverables, and to develop long-term plans to support smooth transition from operations to decommissioning. Suggestions about how the knowledge-transfer can be promoted within and across organizations are also discussed. In this way, this research provides practical guidance for project managers and policymakers on how to support the planning and delivery of projects with improved performance. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

State Microgrid Policy, Programmatic, and Regulatory Framework

The purpose of this framework is to provide a resource for PUCs and State Energy Offices as they develop policies, regulations, and programs to support microgrids. Through shared understanding of the roles of these different entities, the framework aims to foster productive collaboration to support microgrid development.

Jones, Kelsey↗
DOE OSTI2021

Nonproliferation and Arms Control Research and Development (NPAC R&D) [Slides]

NPAC R&D focus areas include: Advancing U.S. capabilities to detect and characterize nuclear weapon development activities globally, including material production, the movement of special nuclear materials and nuclear weapons, and the testing or use of nuclear weapons, Supporting the development and testing of policy options and technical capabilities for international nuclear safeguards, arms control / treaty verification, nuclear export controls, and nonproliferation initiatives consistent with U.S. Government goals and objectives to enable monitoring and verification, Utilizing uranium, lithium, and high explosives (HE) materials expertise to support national-level activities in nuclear forensics and nuclear detection technology testing and evaluation, Providing unique training and capacity-building programs, particularly with the Nuclear Detection and Sensor Testing Center (NDSTC), and Engaging internationally to promote nonproliferation and arms control norms and best practices through bilateral and multilateral work.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Evaluating China’s Passenger Vehicle Market under the Vehicle Policies of 2021–2023

China is well known for its determination on large-scale vehicle electrification, which currently is mainly driven by fuel economy and electric vehicle policies mixed with the extensive charging infrastructure support and monetary incentives from the government. This study adopted the New Energy and Oil Consumption Credits (NEOCC) model 2020 version, a vehicle policy analysis tool developed by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, in order to systematically quantify the potential impacts of the “Passenger Cars Corporate Average Fuel Consumption and New Energy Vehicle Credit Regulation”, which is a revised version released in June 2020 for the timeframe 2021–2023, the so-called dual credit policy (2021–2023). It was found that, under the dual credit policy (2021–2023), the sales of hybrid electric vehicles could reach 0.91 million by the end of 2023, which would increase much faster than they did in 2018–2020. The annual sales share of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) could reach 11.7%, and the PEV stocks could achieve 11.70 million by the end of 2023 if it keeps the expansion to the level of how it was in 2017. In addition, the BEVs with long electric range (such as 400 km) and the plug-in hybrid electric SUVs could be the most popular PEV types.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗