Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “GO Competition”

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.

13 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 1

The ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 1, from 2018 to 2019, focused on the basic Security Constrained AC Optimal Power Flow problem (SCOPF) for a single time period. The Challenge utilized sets of unique datasets generated by the ARPA-E GRID DATA program. Each dataset consisted of a collection of power system network models of different sizes with associated operating scenarios (snapshots in time defining instantaneous power demand, renewable generation, generator and line availability, etc.). The datasets were of two types: Real-Time, which included starting-point information, and Online, which did not. Week-Ahead data is also provided for some cases but was not used in the Competition. Although most datasets were synthetic and generated by GRIDDATA, a few came from industry and were only used in the Final Event. All synthetic Input Data and Team Results for the GO Competition Challenge 1 for the Sandbox, Trial Events 1 to 3, and the Final Event along with problem, format, scoring and rules descriptions are available here. Data for industry scenarios will not be made public. Challenge 1, a minimization problem, required two computational steps. Solver 1 or Code 1 solved the base SCOPF problem under a strict wall clock time limit, as would be the case in industry, and reported the base case operating point as output, which was used to compute the Objective Function value that was used as the scenario score. The feasibility of the solution was provided by the Solver 2 or Code 2, which solves the power flow problem for all contingencies based on the results from Solver 1. This is not normally done in industry, so the time limits were relaxed. In fact, there were no time limits for Trial Event 1. This proved to be a mistake, with some codes running for more than 90 hours, and a time limit of 2 seconds per contingency was imposed for all other events. Entrants were free to use their own Solver 2 or use an open-source version provided by the Competition. Containers, such as Docker, were considered to improve the portability of codes, but none that could reliably support a multi-node parallel computing environment, e.g., MPI, could be found. For more information on the competition and challenge see the "GO Competition Challenge 1 Information" and "GO Competition Challenge 1 Additional Information" resources below.

ACOPF↗
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 2

The ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 2, from 2020 to 2021, expanded upon the problem posed in Challenge 1 by adding adjustable transformer tap ratios, phase shifting transformers, switchable shunts, price-responsive demand, ramp rate constrained generators and loads, and fast-start unit commitment. Furthermore, Challenge 2 was a maximization problem while Challenge 1 was a minimization problem. Specifically, the economic surplus, defined as the benefit of serving load minus the cost of generation, is being maximized. It was expected that the objective value of a given solution should be positive, representing economic gain, but negative objectives from poor solutions were possible. The two code submission feature of Challenge 1 was maintained. Additionally, Divisions 3 and 4 within the competition permitted on/off switching of transmission lines (Divisions 1 and 2 did not). After the initial release of the Problem Formulation on 7/20/2020, ARPA-E Director Lane Genatowski announced Challenge 2 on 9/12/2020. The final May 31, 2021, version of the Problem Formulation was 97 pages long with 299 equations. The Challenge proceeded with 2 non-prize Events and 2 prize Events. Teams receiving Challenge 1 FOA awards and prize money were required to use the prize money to fund their Challenge 2 efforts (Georgia Institute of Technology, Global Optimal Technology, Inc., Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Lehigh University, Northwestern University, Artelys, Columbia, Pearl Street Technologies, Pennsylvania State University, and University of Colorado Boulder). For more information on the competition and challenge 2 see the "GO Competition Challenge 2 Information" resource below. Challenge 1 and Challenge 3 information can be found in the resources linked below.

ACOPF↗
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA E GO Competition

A Nonlinear Programming SC-ACOPF Framework with Parallel Computing Capabilities

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Supporting ARPA-E Power Grid Optimization (Final Report)

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Arizona State University (ASU), Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Texas A&M University (TAMU), The University of Texas at Austin (UT), and the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW-M) supported the ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition by providing a common problem formulation, data format, datasets, evaluation mechanism, scoring, rules, and results that resulted in the awarding of $\$9.24$ million dollars to teams from academia, industry, and national labs for solving three sets of increasingly difficult non-linear, security- constrained AC Optimal Powerflow (AC-OPF) optimization problems in order to increase the efficiency of the US Electric Grid. It is estimated that a 1% increase in efficiency can save $\$1$ billion. Current industry practices typically use a linear DC model (DC-OPF) in order solve the OPF problem within the time constraints of the operation schedule. The GO Competition challenges the best power engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientists to make possible operational decisions based on accurate physical models. To accomplish this, the GO Competition created a series of Challenges and funded teams to produce the best solver. Challenge 1 was to solve the security constrained Alternating Current Optimal Power Flow (ACOPF) problem. Challenge 2 extended that to by adding adjustable transformer tap ratios, phase shifting transformers, switchable shunts, price-responsive demand, ramp rate constrained generators and loads, and fast-start unit commitment (UC). Furthermore, Challenge 2 was a maximization problem while Challenge 1 was a minimization problem. While Challenge 3 was being developed, the entrants were invited to find better solutions to the Challenge 2 synthetic datasets with no restrictions on time, hardware, or algorithms. The Challenge 2 solutions turned out to be very good. Challenge 3 expanded the Challenge 2 problem further by using multiperiod dynamic markets, including advisory models for extreme weather events, day-ahead markets, and the real-time markets with an extended look-ahead. These problems included active bid-in demand and topology optimization. Together the Challenges used nearly 30 million CPU hours. Since each team was working on the same problem, using the same data, and running on the same hardware, fair comparisons could be drawn as to the best solver. The datasets were varied enough, however, that the best solver for one dataset was not necessarily the best at another, so cumulative scores were used. The process was managed by the PNNL maintained website https://GOCompetition.energy.gov, where Entrants could find information about the problem, the data, the rules, submit their solver for evaluation, and see the scores of all the competing teams on a Leaderboard. Interest was world-wide but only American teams were eligible for prizes. The Competition has produced 34 journal articles 115 papers and been cited over 500 times in the literature, including 12 dissertations (4 from foreign countries; Columbia (2), Germany, and Italy) and 3 from the DOE ExaScale project. Software developed by Pearl Street Technologies for Challenges 1 and 2 is now deployed by Southwest Power Pool (SPP) and Midcontinent Independent Service Operator (MISO). Other teams have received inquiries from venture capitalists. Google DeepMind has thanked the Competition for making the datasets developed for the Competition public. They are using it to train machine learning models. The larger datasets have billions of unknowns to be solved for, but only a small percent matter in the final solution. Knowing what unknowns are important can dramatically speedup the solution.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

State of Innovation 2025: Progress in Accelerating Next-Generation Cement and Concrete Technologies

The cement and concrete sectors are entering a decisive period as next-generation technologies advance from laboratory research to demonstration, early deployment, and first-of-a-kind commercial plants. Building on the 2024 State of Innovation report, the 2025 outlook highlights both the rapid acceleration of innovation and the urgent need for coordinated action across the value chain. Venture capital activity into the cement and concrete space stabilized following the record surge of 2022-2023, yet landmark financings, such as Sublime Systems' $200 million round and Terra CO2's $124 million Series B, signal continued investor confidence in companies approaching commercialization. Corporate procurement has become a powerful new catalyst, with Microsoft, Amazon, and CRH (Cement Roadstone Holdings) Ventures providing long-term commitments that underpin the first wave of next-generation cementitious products. The sector is shifting from early-stage experimentation toward the scaling of well-capitalized leaders capable of bridging the critical "capitalization gap." Early innovators continue to expand the toolkit through novel binders, electrochemical cements, biogenic limestone, and carbonate mineralization pathways. Going into 2026, cost competitiveness, durability validation, and scalability enabled by resilient supply chains remain the decisive factors for market adoption. At the 2025 Next Generation Cement and Concrete Critical Technologies Meeting, attendees emphasized dual-track funding strategies that integrate federal grants with private capital as key to enabling market breakthrough. State programs and corporate demand are sustaining momentum, while successful companies increasingly demonstrate both economic value and reduced dependence on imported materials. The National Concrete Pavement Technology Center and others underscored that broad integration of next-generation materials will hinge on standards compatibility, verified field performance, and workforce readiness. Colorado continues to serve as a proving ground through pilot programs that combine supplier training, phased implementation, and real-world data to de-risk innovation and provide replicable models for other regions. The 2025 Cement and Concrete Critical Technologies Workshop reinforced that scaling next-generation materials will require alignment among technology innovation, performance validation, and market demand. Stakeholders must move beyond siloed efforts toward collaborative frameworks that coordinate standards, funding, and infrastructure deployment. As a neutral convener and technical validator, the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) plays a pivotal role in bridging innovation and market adoption through collaborative research, technology validation, and entrepreneurship programs. By uniting innovators, incumbents, policymakers, contractors, and investors, NLR and its partners are helping chart a credible pathway toward widespread commercialization in the decade ahead.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Water-stable direct air capture of CO 2 with microcapsules of task-specific ionic liquid and their electrothermal regeneration

Microcapsules of the task specific ionic liquid (TSIL) 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium 2-cyanopyrrolide [EMIM][2CNpyr] with composite polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) shells were fabricated for use in CO 2 direct air capture (DAC) conditions. The TSIL was encapsulated using an oil-in-oil emulsion as a templating procedure through two different approaches. In the first approach, a PDMS-polyurea (PU) shell was constructed by interfacial polymerization, while in the second approach, a graphene oxide (GO)-PDMS shell was constructed by cross-linking GO sheets. The composition and structure of both capsule types were fully characterized, and their CO 2 DAC performance was evaluated by gravimetric and breakthrough analysis. Both capsules exhibited competitive capacities, with the PDMS-PU capsules and the GO-PDMS capsules reaching 0.75 mol kg −1 and 0.66 mol kg −1 , respectively. We further demonstrate that both capsule systems can be regenerated with complementary electrothermal methods. Microwave (MW) regeneration was used for the PDMS-PU capsules, effectively releasing absorbed CO 2 in less than an hour. Owing to the electrical conductivity of GO, GO-PDMS capsules were regenerated via radio frequency heating (RF). This work highlights the importance and opportunity of tuning solid–liquid composite performance for advanced applications, including direct air capture of carbon dioxide.

Al-Mahbobi, Luma [Texas A&M University, College St↗
DOE OSTI2024

Solar Prize Round 5 Software Track: Abbreviated Final Technical Report

Solar Prize Round 5 launched two simultaneous tracks, the Hardware Track and the Software Track, to introduce software innovations into the Solar Prize for the first time. The primary goal of the prize is to accelerate the development, validation, and commercialization of innovative solar software solutions that will increase the competitiveness of the U.S. solar industry. This is accomplished with three escalating challenges, called the Ready!, Set!, and Go! Contests, where teams work to develop their concept from idea to potentially marketable product in less than one year. Competitors also have the option to compete in a Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) Contest, which recognizes solutions that enable underserved communities in the United States to overcome systemic solar barriers and share equitably in the societal benefits of solar deployment. The Prize concluded by awarding 2 final winners the Go! Contest prize and a 3rd winner to the JEDI Contest prize in the Software Track, after competing in the prize for a year and demonstrating their success through each phase.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Final Technical Report for Solar Prize Round 6

Solar Prize Round 6 had the primary goal to accelerate the development, validation, and commercialization of innovative solar software solutions that will increase the competitiveness of the U.S. solar industry. This is accomplished with three escalating challenges, called the Ready!, Set!, and Go! Contests, where teams work to develop their concept from idea to potentially marketable product in less than one year. Competitors also have the option to compete in a Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (JEDI) Contest, which recognizes solutions that enable underserved communities in the United States to overcome systemic solar barriers and share equitably in the societal benefits of solar deployment. The Prize concluded by awarding 2 final winners the Go! Contest prize and 1 of those same winners the Go! Contest JEDI prize after competing in the prize for a year and demonstrating their success through each phase.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Innovating Distributed Embedded Energy Prize (InDEEP): A Lessons Learned Report

The U.S. Department of Energy's Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) launched the Innovating Distributed Embedded Energy Prize (InDEEP) in March 2023 to accelerate innovation in Distributed Embedded Energy Conversion Technologies (DEEC-Tec) for ocean wave energy. Administered by the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) with technical support from Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), InDEEP focused on the development of small, distributed, and embeddable energy converters (DEECs) and their integration into scalable DEEC-Tec metamaterials for marine renewable energy applications. Spanning three phases over two years, InDEEP awarded approximately $2.3 million to teams from academia, industry, and startups. Phase I emphasized conceptual design. Phase II moved into the prototyping of individual DEECs. Phase III required integration into functional DEEC-Tec metamaterial prototypes. Across 60 submissions, teams explored a wide range of energy conversion mechanisms - including piezoelectric, variable-capacitance, ionic, and inductive methods. Note, the prize did not include the design nor demonstration of ocean wave energy conversion systems. Rather, the prize only required participants to design and demonstrate individual DEECs and corresponding DEEC-Tec metamaterials. This prize utilized a mix of novel and proven techniques to attract participants from outside marine energy, including an engagement leaderboard, robust recruitment, technical expert mentorship, and a suite of technical trainings. Key insights from the competition emphasized that DEEC-Tec metamaterials must be intentionally designed to produce beneficial emergent behaviors - advantages that go beyond simply combining multiple DEEC units. Top-performing teams showed that thoughtful design of system architecture, coordinated deformation, and systems adaptabilities could unlock meaningful performance gains both at the DEEC system level and DEEC-Tec metamaterial system level. A critical realization was that many DEEC-Tec metamaterials could benefit from being designed to accept lower-frequency energy inputs and shift those into higher-frequencies per each DEEC making up the respective DEEC-Tec metamaterial. Other important takeaways included the need for rigorous and quantitative performance testing, effective integration of power conditioning electronics, and the pivotal role of material science in enabling innovative, adaptive DEEC-Tec-based energy conversion designs. InDEEP also helped establish a growing DEEC-Tec community of practitioners, attracting participants from beyond traditional marine energy sectors. Through a strong support infrastructure, InDEEP fostered early-stage innovation and laid a foundation for future DEEC-Tec-based ocean wave energy conversion solutions - positioning DEEC-Tec as a promising pathway toward scalable, resilient ocean wave energy conversion. Through focused R&D of individual DEECs and their integration into DEEC-Tec metamaterials, alongside a growing, multidisciplinary community catalyzed by InDEEP, there is a strong opportunity to drive a disruptive shift in ocean wave energy conversion design and development. This convergence of novel architectures, emergent behaviors, and collaborative innovation positions DEEC-Tec as a transformative approach, moving the field from rigid, centralized energy conversion-based designs to resilient, modular systems highly adaptable for real-world ocean wave energy conversion applications.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2026

Change Agent: Energy Storage as a Driver of Regulatory Evolution

Purpose of Review Dividing the electric grid into the functions of generation, transmission, anddistribution enabled the drawing of jurisdictional lines and the application of the U.S.Constitution’s federalist system to energy regulation. Energy storage technologies,which can be placed throughout the grid to increase flexibility, can provide serviceacross all three of those functions. But the jurisdictional boundaries that have beendrawn around those functions have created barriers that restrict energy storagetechnologies from achieving their full potential. This review analyzes regulatory changes made to reduce barriers to storage deployment and their broader impacts on energy regulation in the U.S. Recent Findings Major energy regulations promulgated at the state and federal levels have generally focused on liberalizing the U.S. electric system through deregulation and increased competition. Paradoxically, however, these efforts have erected strict regulatory barriers that prevent energy storage technologies from providing service across multiple functions. A new wave of regulations in recent years has endeavored to reduce and remove those barriers. Summary Energy regulations adopted in recent years to reduce barriers to energy storage functionality in recent years have had deep and far-reaching impacts on U.S. electric regulation. These impacts go beyond storage and affect all energy technologies. This paper traces the development of energy regulation in U.S., the functional barriers that they created that impede energy storage functionality, recent efforts to remove those barriers, and the broader effects of those efforts. It concludes with a brief discussion of remaining barriers that prevent energy storage from reaching their full potential on the U.S. electric grid.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Osmotic and phoretic competition explains chemotaxic assembly and sorting

Microscale objects responding to chemical gradients by migrating toward or away from a preferred species is a simple yet constitutive mechanism by which transport occurs in biological organisms. Synthetic chemotaxis provides key physical descriptions of simplified systems that can be used in biological models, or in the creation of advanced responsive material systems. In this article, we provide a quantitative framework for understanding synthetic chemotaxis of microparticles which involves a competition between phoresis and osmosis. We present separate quantitative measurements of phoresis and osmosis acting on individual taxing particles, finding that phoresis follows the long-predicted v ∼ 1 / r 2 scaling while the osmotic contribution depends on the geometry and details of the system, and must be solved on a case-by-case basis. Through this, we are able to develop a more accurate picture of particle transport at the single particle level. Equipped with this approach, we go on to describe how high concentrations of particles in a symmetric chemical gradient grow close-packed hives that reach a steady-state size tunable through light intensity or particle size. Last, we demonstrate that mixed particles experiencing the same chemical gradient will selectively migrate toward or away depending on the nature of the particle surface, thereby locally sorting out a particular species. We anticipate these results will be important in describing both biological and synthetic chemotaxis in phoretic systems and should bring a wealth of studies that take advantage of competing osmotic flows to illicit unexpected dynamic active behavior.

Science & Technology - Other Topics↗
DOE OSTI2026

Ground and excited state gradients with end-to-end differentiable semiempirical quantum chemistry

Accurate and efficient gradients of molecular energy with respect to nuclear degrees of freedom are essential for geometry optimization and molecular dynamics, including simulations that go beyond the Born–Oppenheimer regime. A common approach involves deriving analytical formulas for new electronic structure methods, which is often conceptually difficult and requires tedious coding. Here, we implement analytical, semi-numerical, and automatic differentiation (AD)-based gradient pathways for semiempirical Hamiltonian models in the PYSEQM software package, leveraging both graphics processing unit (GPU) and central processing unit (CPU) architectures. We further extend these capabilities to excited states calculated using the configuration interaction singles and time-dependent Hartree–Fock ansätze. We benchmark wall time, peak memory usage, and accuracy across three molecular families of varying chemical complexity, including systems of up to a thousand atoms. For ground-state simulations, analytical and AD gradients achieve near-identical GPU runtimes, while semi-numerical gradients are slower on GPU but remain competitive on CPU. For excited states, both analytical and custom AD approaches using implicit differentiation show similar performance and low memory requirements, whereas gradients with full AD are memory-limited. AD gradients match analytical ones in accuracy across all tested systems, aided by a quaternion-based diatomic frame rotation for two-center quantities that ensures smooth energy surfaces. Overall, automatic differentiation emerges as a practical alternative to analytical gradients in semiempirical quantum chemistry, offering high accuracy while allowing seamless integration in AI-driven workflows and popular packages, such as PyTorch and JAX. Our results provide actionable guidance for selecting optimal gradient strategies in large-scale ground- and excited-state molecular dynamics simulations.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Techno-Economic Analysis and Market Potential of Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) Charged With Solar Thermal and Heat Pumps

In this project, we developed a techno-economic analysis (TEA) model that can be used to evaluate the viability of a proposed Geological Thermal Energy Storage (GeoTES) design. This MATLAB-based model integrates distinct subsystem models for the reservoir, wells, power cycle, and solar field to capture their distinct characteristics. It applies this approach in simulating GeoTES storage and dispatch operations for durations ranging from hourly to seasonal. Using cases studies based on GeoTES designs provided by industry partners - Premier Resource Management (PRM) and EarthBridge Energy - we validated the TEA model estimations of system performance and costs (such as thermal and electrical power/energy inflow and outflow, capital costs, and levelized costs of energy and storage) for both concentrating solar thermal (CST) and Carnot Battery (CB) pairings with GeoTES (CST-GeoTES and CB-GeoTES). For the CST-GeoTES case, the model was validated against the proposed system designed by PRM. It showed good agreement with PRM's estimations when well and pump costs derived from PRM's estimations were used. When GETEM-based costs were used, there was a slight overprediction due to GETEM's project/site agnostic assumption of these costs. From a sensitivity analysis perspective, the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) of the CST-GeoTES case was most sensitive to well flow rate and the charging temperature. An optimal design scenario resulted in an LCOE of 0.11 $\$$/kWhe. CST-GeoTES can also provide a source of heat to meet seasonal demands. With 12-hour and 24-hour levelized cost of heat (LCOH) of 0.018 $\$$/kWhth and 0.022 $\$$/kWhth, respectively, CST-GeoTES could be competitive in the California market with an average industrial price of natural gas in California between 0.041-0.047 $\$$/kWhth. The levelized cost of storage (LCOS) for CST-GeoTES depends on the energy storage duration. Although the LCOS is relatively higher for shorter durations (e.g., ~0.50 $\$$/kWhe for 1 hour of storage), it is an order of magnitude lower (0.06 $\$$/kWhe) for longer storage durations and competitive with lithium-ion batteries (beyond 12 hours of storage) and molten-salt thermal energy storage (beyond 32 hours). Energy. Three options were explored and applied to the EarthBridge case study: (1) A Carnot Battery design using R125 working fluid with both hot and cold storage; (2) A Carnot Battery design using R125 working fluid with only hot storage; (3) A Carnot Battery using a commercially available heat pump with carbon dioxide (CO2) working fluid and hot storage only. The CB-GeoTES with cold storage only had a slight (round-trip) efficiency advantage over the system without (43.4% vs. 42.8%). This is because the cold storage is limited by the freezing point of water, so the cold storage is not much colder than the environment. The system using commercially available technologies was the least efficient - partly because different cycles were used in the heat pump (CO2) and heat engine (binary cycle) which leads to some inefficiencies. Using the commercially available design, the levelized cost of energy (LCOS) from the model (0.10 $\$$/kWhe) was higher than that estimated by EarthBridge (0.068 $\$$/kWhe). This is because of the low round-trip (38.7%) efficiency of the commercially available design. Sensitivity analysis reveals that the model is most sensitive to electricity price. Including electricity price in the TEA for CB-GeoTES leads to an increase in LCOS from the base value to 0.25 $\$$/kWhe. To determine storage sites suitable for GeoTES, we gathered and analyzed geological, petrophysical, and geophysical data of oil and gas reservoir and aquifers in California and Texas. We down-selected possible sites based on cut-off values for site characteristics (e.g., reservoir temperature, formation thickness, permeability, porosity, depth, and brine salinity) and preliminary costs. Using this approach, the Carrizo-Wilcox, Yegua-Jackson, and Dockum brackish aquifers in Texas were identified as having the highest suitability. Similarly, in the central California region, the White Wolf, Belridge South Tulare, and Belridge South Reef Ridge were the most suitable. Going further, we assessed the storage potential in the selected sites. To do this we developed distributions of reservoir characteristic data and applied a Monte Carlo-based analysis to account for intrinsic uncertainty in the acquired data. The analysis revealed that the Carrizo-Wilcox aquifer had the highest storage potential with a mean capacity of 554 TWhth (i.e., 63 TWhe). The estimated capacity serves as an upper limit of storage potential given that not all fields in the basin will be developed. We participated in multiple outreach activities including conference presentations, panel session discussions, and the facilitation of a GeoTES workshop at the NREL Golden campus.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗