Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Contributor Last Name”

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.

ESS-DIVE Reporting Format for Dataset Package Metadata

ESS-DIVE’s (Environmental Systems Science Data Infrastructure for a Virtual Ecosystem) dataset metadata reporting format is intended to compile information about a dataset (e.g., title, description, funding sources) that can enable reuse of data submitted to the ESS-DIVE data repository. The files contained in this dataset include instructions (dataset_metadata_guide.md and README.md) that can be used to understand the types of metadata ESS-DIVE collects. The data dictionary (dd.csv) follows ESS-DIVE’s file-level metadata reporting format and includes brief descriptions about each element of the dataset metadata reporting format. This dataset also includes a terminology crosswalk (dataset_metadata_crosswalk.csv) that shows how ESS-DIVE’s metadata reporting format maps onto other existing metadata standards and reporting formats.Data contributors to ESS-DIVE can provide this metadata by manual entry using a web form or programmatically via ESS-DIVE’s API (Application Programming Interface). A metadata template (dataset_metadata_template.docx or dataset_metadata_template.pdf) can be used to collaboratively compile metadata before providing it to ESS-DIVE.Since being incorporated into ESS-DIVE’s data submission user interface, ESS-DIVE’s dataset metadata reporting format, has enabled features like automated metadata quality checks, and dissemination of ESS-DIVE datasets onto other data platforms including Google Dataset Search and DataCite.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

FY22 Grid Modernization & Energy Storage Program: Accomplishments & Impacts

Sandia’s Grid Modernization and Energy Storage program works to advance a national vision of a secure, resilient, and sustainable electric system for all users. Our achievements reflect a strategic approach combining technology development; modeling, simulation, and data analytics; and partnered demonstrations and outreach to further the adoption of advanced grid and storage technologies. Our FY22 efforts leverage the strengths of our partnerships—spanning Sandia’s core science and technology competencies as well as external technology leaders—to develop the solutions today which enable the grid of tomorrow. Much of the material in this report comes from the separate 2022 Accomplishments Report compiled by our Energy Storage subprogram team, a cornerstone of our grid research and achievements. The Grid Energy Storage Program at Sandia is focused on making energy storage cost-effective through research and development (R&D) in new battery technologies, advanced power electronics and power conversion systems, improved safety and reliability for energy storage systems, analytical tools for the valuation of energy storage, and the validation of new energy storage technologies through demonstration projects. During the 2022 fiscal year, Sandia executed R&D work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Electricity – Energy Storage Program under the leadership of Dr. Imre Gyuk. This report indicates key areas of research and engagement and summarizes the impact of Sandia’s contributions through notable accomplishments, journal publications, patents, and technical conferences and presentations. It is provided with the hope that readers discover ways we can further team to create our modern grid and apply the outcomes of our efforts. The bulk of work described herein is funded by the DOE Office of Electricity and key programs within the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. As we indicated in our report from last year, the contributors to our successes are too numerous to name here, though our team wishes to express our deep gratitude to the numerous program and project sponsors at the US Department of Energy, who often function equally as technical collaborators; our many partners in industry, academia, utilities, and other national labs; and fellow researchers and business partners at Sandia whose leadership and creativity have enabled the accomplishments described herein.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Retrofitting Holcim Ste. Genevieve Cement Plant with CO2 Capture Plant Using Air Liquide Cryocap™ FG Technology

The global cement manufacturing industry is a major contributor to carbon dioxide emissions. The International Energy Agency's "Net Zero Emissions by 2050 Scenario" identifies CCS as a major strategy for meeting that goal. This project is among the first attempts to transfer capture technology developed at coal-fired power plants to the cement industry. The main objective of the project is to execute and complete a front-end engineering and design (FEED) studies for commercial-scale, carbon capture projects that separates 95% of the total CO2 emissions at the Holcim (US) Ste. Genevieve cement manufacturing facility using Air Liquide’s Pressure Swing Adsorption system (PSA) assisted Cryocap™ technology. The Holcim Ste. Genevieve cement plant in Missouri, US, boasts one of the largest single cement production lines in the world, with a capacity of approximately 12,000 t/day. The plant currently uses traditional fuels, namely coal and petcoke. The captured CO2 will be pipeline and geological storage grade. The industrial host site emits approximately 3.0 million tonne CO2/yr. Air Liquide’s Cryocap™ technology has been developed over the last 18+ years for CO2 capture applications. It has been shown to be applicable to a variety of industrial applications (e.g., steel, cement, SMR, Fluidized Catalytic Crackers (FCCs)). Cryocap™ FG consists of a Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) unit coupled with a Cryogenic System. The PSA pre-concentrates the CO2 from the flue gas, while the cryogenic unit enables the CO2 purity to be increased to the desired level. The project team is led by the Prairie Research Institute at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. The tasks include: complete FEED study for retrofitting the industrial facility with a carbon capture system to support developing a detailed cost estimate; business case analysis outlining the anticipated revenue and credits if projects was built and operated; technoeconomic analysis (TEA) outlining how capture system achieves DOE capture goals; and life cycle (LCA) analysis demonstrating zero net carbon emissions. The FEED study was successfully completed. This includes completing the process basis of design; preliminary engineering; outside battery limits (OSBL) detailed engineering including a Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) wastewater treatment system; inside battery limits (ISBL) detailed engineering [1]. An overall project capital cost estimate within a -20%/+30% accuracy was developed. The major contributors to the Total Plant Cost (TPC), by system, are the costs associated with the Outside Battery Limit (OSBL) section of the plant which includes a new river water intake structure and a Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) system. By cost category, the major contributors to the TPC are equipment and subcontractor costs, followed closely by engineering, construction management, home office and contractor fees. The TEA has been created to reflect the findings of the project. It analyzes the economic performance of the Cryocap™ technology by reviewing the estimated capital costs, operating cost, and revenue. The Cost of Capture (COC) associated with the Cryocap™ technology for 95% CO2 capture, when considering NETL 2018 economic assumptions (42/58 debt/equity ratio, 5.15% interest on debt and 1.42% return on equity in real dollars) and 2022 economic assumptions (42/58 debt/equity ratio, 8.82% interest on debt and 4.90% return on equity in real dollars) was found to be much lower than that for the DOE-NETL’s base-line cases. The highest contributors to the COC are annualized capital expenditures (CAPEX) and electricity consumption which can be offset by using lower cost renewable sources. The LCA was conducted using OpenLCA which is an open-source software that is recommended by NETL. The database utilized for this study was a modified version of TRACI 2.1 (developed by the US. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory and modified by NETL). The Cryocap™ FG technology does not consume fuels in significant quantities and does not utilize specialized chemical solvents subject to decomposition, such as those utilized in amine-based carbon capture systems. The Cryocap™ FG technology mainly utilizes electricity as its energy input; hence, its calculated emissions are mainly associated with the generation of electricity offsite and are dependent on the energy matrix of the grid at the time of project implementation. The water consumption impact of the Cryocap™ FG is mostly for makeup of the water lost by evaporation in the cooling tower; however, the carbon capture plant will be equipped with a ZLD system to avoid effluent streams and minimize water consumption. The successful construction and operation of this plant based on this study results will provide a means to demonstrate an economically attractive and transformational capture technology that can be used to retrofit existing plants and be deployed at new plants.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Liquid Engine Test Facilities Assessment

The John C. Stennis Space Center (SSC) requested The Aerospace Corporation to examine the current testing capability of all existing large liquid engine test facilities located in the United States. That information along with projected liquid rocket engine development was used to examine future liquid rocket engine testing facilities needs in the coming decade. Current domestic liquid engine test facilities capabilities, when examined against engine concepts for the coming decade, indicate there are ample facilities offering altitude simulation during test. In addition, it was observed that many contractor facilities have limited ambient test capability of larger thrust engines under current consideration. Finally, it was concluded that diminished contractor participation engine development testing will drive this activity to the government sector. Only three facilities are seen as key contributors to engine testing in the coming decade, namely John C. Stennis Space Center (SSC), Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), and Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). Past rocket engine test experience was evaluated as a possible resource for projecting future engine test needs. A database comprised of various engine models and the level of testing performed to flight qualify those systems for their first flight was constructed. For comparison purposes in this study, development and qualification efforts were totaled and treated as one test program. Based on experience with past Air Force programs, the time on the test stand accounts for typically 50% or more of the total program time. Historical data show that the time to design and develop new engines has increased over the last 40 years, most likely due to scarcer resources in today's funding environment.

Adams, Michael J.↗