SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Technology Evaluation for Environmental Risk Mitigation”

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.

At least 19 records

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2026

Full-scale validation gaps and opportunities for low-head hydropower: a review and perspective

Hydropower is undergoing technological innovation as future development increasingly targets low-head sites (<10 m), primarily through retrofits, rehabilitation, and upgrades of existing infrastructure. This shift toward smaller systems creates a timely opportunity: unlike conventional large projects, many emerging low-head technologies may be small enough for direct full-scale validation. Full-scale testing is particularly important for environmental mitigation technologies, including fish passage, sediment continuity, and water-quality improvements, whose performance is difficult to assess reliably using reduced-scale models. Yet adoption remains constrained by the limited risk-bearing capacity of small hydropower owners, discouraging manufacturers from bringing unvalidated technologies to market. This review and perspective paper examines hydropower trends driving innovation, selected emerging technologies, conventional testing methods, and current U.S. testing capabilities as a case study. We then evaluate the gap between existing capabilities and the needs of low-head powertrains and environmental mitigation measures. Many technologies exceed existing facility flow capacities; in the U.S., the highest combined head–flow capability is limited to 5.66 m3/s, compared with median and 90th-percentile low-head turbine-unit flows of 14.3 and 60 m3/s. To mitigate this gap, we advocate repurposing large, retired, or underused hydraulic infrastructure as full-scale testing facilities to reduce first-adoption risk and support sustainable low-head hydropower deployment.

Tseng, Chien-Yung [Colorado State University, Fort↗

DOE OSTI2024

Advanced Laboratory and Field Arrays (ALFA)/Lab Collaboration Project (LCP) for Marine Energy (Final Scientific/Technical Report)

The objective of the Advanced Laboratory and Field Arrays (ALFA) project was to reduce the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCOE) of Marine and Hydrokinetic (MHK) energy by leveraging research, development, and testing capabilities at Oregon State University, University of Washington, and the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. ALFA is a project within the Pacific Marine Energy Center (PMEC; formerly NNMREC), a multi-institution entity with a diverse funding base that focuses on research and development for marine renewables. The ALFA project aimed to accelerate the development of next-generation arrays of wave energy conversion (WEC) and tidal energy conversion (TEC) devices through a suite of field-focused R&D activities spanning a broad range of strategic opportunity areas identified in the Funding Opportunity Announcement: • Device and/or array operation and maintenance (O&M) logistics development; • High-fidelity resource characterization and/or modeling technique development and validation; • Array-specific component technology development (e.g. moorings and foundations, transmission, and other offshore grid components); • Array performance testing and evaluation; and • Novel cost-effective environmental monitoring techniques and instrumentation testing and evaluation. The objective of the Lab Collaboration Project (LCP) was to accelerate the development of next-generation marine energy conversion systems. The LCP aimed to achieve these project objectives in collaboration with the national laboratories by: • Developing concept generation and assessment tools; • Improving access to existing testing resources; • Validating collision risk models between fish and turbines; and • Advancing analysis and simulation capabilities for wave-WEC interactions and PTO analysis in nonlinear ocean waves. The ALFA portion of the project was comprised of six overarching technical tasks: • Task 1: Debris Modeling, Detection and Mitigation; • Task 2: Autonomous Monitoring & Intervention; • Task 3: Resource Characterization for Extreme Conditions; • Task 4: Robust Models for Design of Offshore Anchoring and Mooring Systems; • Task 5: Performance Enhancement for Marine Energy Converter (MEC) Arrays; and • Task 6: Evaluating Sampling Techniques for MHK Biological Monitoring. The LCP was divided into four overarching technical tasks: • Task 7: Project Management and Reporting • Task 8: Novel Design and Assessment Methodologies for Wave Energy Converter Design (Wave- SPARC) • Task 9: Testing Access for Commercial Marine Renewable Energy Technology Developers • Task 10: Quantifying Collision Risk for Fish and Turbines • Task 11: Nonlinear Ocean Waves and PTO Control Strategy Each ALFA/LCP task listed above functioned as a separate and discreet project. A final Technical Report was written for each individual task and these reports were uploaded to OSTI, after receiving DOE approval. The following document is a compilation of each of these final, approved reports arranged as individual chapters.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Computational Tools and Workflows for Quantitative Risk Assessment and Decision Support for Geologic Carbon Storage Sites: Progress and Insights from the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership

The 2005 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on CCS raised the profile of CO2 capture and storage (CCS) as an important technology for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. CCS is now recognized as a key component of most climate change mitigation scenarios. Since publication of that report the international research, development, and deployment (RD&D) community has advanced key technical aspects, clarified regulatory requirements, explored value chain and infrastructure solutions, and developed incentive paradigms to enable and promote large-scale deployment of CCS. These efforts have included research to better characterize geologic storage resources, to improve injection performance and storage efficiency, to assess and manage subsurface environmental risks, and to advance monitoring technologies to assure system conformance. These efforts have helped to build confidence in the viability of geologic carbon storage (GCS), but stakeholder concerns about long-term risks and liability associated with GCS remain a hurdle to broad acceptance and large-scale deployment of CCS. Since 2010, the U.S. DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) – a research collaboration between five contributing national laboratories – has worked to establish and demonstrate methods and tools to quantify and manage the subsurface environmental risks associated with GCS, amidst uncertainty. This work supports the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management Carbon Transport and Storage Program’s goal of advancing safe and secure commercial-scale GCS deployment. To address the technical challenge of simulating the physical response of the GCS site to large-scale CO2 injection, NRAP has adopted an approach that relies on coupling computationally efficient reduced-order and/or data-driven proxy models of important system components (i.e., storage reservoir, sealing caprock, leakage pathways, intermediate formations, overlying groundwater aquifers, and the atmosphere) in integrated assessment framework. That integrated model of the physical system is complemented with fit-for purpose functionality to support site characterization and risk-related decisions. The recently released NRAP Phase II toolset includes the Open-Source Integrated Assessment Model (NRAP-Open-IAM) for evaluation of trends in leakage risk and potential impact, tools to support monitoring design optimization (Designs for Risk Evaluation and Management – DREAM v3.0 and Passive Seismic Monitoring Tool - PSMT), and tools for state of stress evaluation (State-of-Stress Analysis Tool - SOSAT) and forecasting induced seismicity risk. The NRAP team has also released a pair of reports describing conceptual workflows to incorporate physics-based, quantitative risk assessment into many of the design, planning, operation, and closure decisions for GCS projects. An online catalogue highlights published studies where these tools and methods are demonstrated. In this presentation, the utility of these products to assess risks and address key stakeholder questions will be highlighted through examples, and related insights about the safety and security of geologic carbon storage in qualified storage sites will be discussed. The prospect of rapid, large-scale deployment of GCS technology to aggressively reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions requires careful consideration of interference between multiple commercial-scale storage projects within a basin. Going forward, NRAP is expanding and adapting site-scale risk quantification tools and methods to enable assessment of risks and inform management decisions for basin-scale deployment. Increasingly, this work will leverage next-generation approaches for surrogate modelling, fast prediction, and advanced visualization enabled by machine learning and artificial intelligence to promote virtual learning, scenario evaluation, and augment risk-based decision making.

quantitative risk assessment, geologic carbon stor↗

DOE OSTI2026

Quantifying mean, variability, and uncertainty in indoor radon exposure in Pennsylvania using random forest and quantile regression forest models

Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that poses a serious health risk as the primary cause of lung cancer in non-smokers. Despite the well-known adverse association with health outcomes, current radon exposure assessments are limited to county-level or average-level estimates, which fail to capture regional variability. This study uses Machine Learning models, including Random Forest (RF) and Quantile Regression Forest (QRF), to estimate the indoor radon concentrations at the ZCTA (Zip code tabulation area)-level and characterize uncertainties in model estimates. Incorporating geological, meteorological, and building-specific data, the models aim to improve radon risk assessment by capturing mean exposure, variability, and extreme concentration levels. Processed radon test data (n = 718,111) were analyzed using average, variability, and quantile prediction methods. Models that estimate the average radon exposure at the ZCTA-level can yield promising model-fit results, but they do not capture the underlying variability of indoor radon exposure within a ZCTA. We utilize volatility analyses to identify characteristics indicative of high variability of indoor radon exposure. We also show that a QRF model can be used to estimate upper quantiles of residential radon exposure, thereby uncovering localized areas of elevated exposure that were not apparent in mean estimates. The results highlighted the need for a deep characterization of exposure risk and show that regions with moderate average exposure levels could still harbor extreme outliers with implications for evaluating health risks. Utilizing multiple radon exposure models allows for a deeper characterization of radon risk within a geographic area and can better identify high-risk areas. The results from this study provide a foundation for developing mitigation strategies and examining associations between radon exposure and health outcomes at fine scales. Future research should extend the geographic scope and incorporate additional environmental risk factors to establish a comprehensive framework for risk assessment.

Lee, Heechan [ORNL]↗

DOE OSTI2025

Process and environmental safety of thermochemical conversion of biomass

Biomass presents a promising opportunity for converting waste into valuable energy, fuels, and chemicals through various thermochemical processes, including hydrothermal carbonization, hydrothermal liquefaction, pyrolysis, gasification, and combustion. However, these processes operate under extreme conditions, introducing significant safety hazards that necessitate meticulous management to prevent accidents. This review discusses potential hazards, risk mitigation strategies, and safety management practices, emphasizing the importance of integrated safety measures into the design and operation of these processes. It also highlights the critical need for robust safety engineering and environmental management strategies tailored to each thermo-chemical process. As these processes transition from laboratory to industrial scale, there is an imperative to develop a clear and concise pathway for emerging industries to achieve regulatory compliance, achieve safety certification, and enable effective stewardship of potential fugitive emissions. By addressing safety and environmental concerns, stakeholders can optimize economic benefits, rural development, and achieve sustained domestic energy generation benefits offered by biomass conversion technologies. Further research on plant design optimization, operational safety, environmental evaluation standardization, and innovative waste management solutions will support the safe and effective scaling of these technologies, ultimately contributing to sustainable management and resource recovery.

09 - BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Optimize the Autonomous Sensor Fish Device for Understanding Interactions of Aquatic Animals with Marine and Hydrokinetic and Hydro Systems (CRADA 476) Final Report

This project at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) enhances our understanding of how aquatic life interacts with marine renewable energy (MRE) and hydropower systems through the development and testing of advanced sensor technology. The Marine Sensor Fish (MSF) and its smaller variants, the Sensor Fish Mini (SF Mini) and Flexible Sensor Fish (FSF), measure critical environmental stressors, such as shear forces, pressure changes, and strike impacts, that are essential for assessing the risks posed by energy devices, including tidal turbines, hydropower installations, and other MRE infrastructure. Rigorous field testing has shown that these tools are effective in capturing detailed data on turbulence, pressure variations, strike impacts, and other stressors near these devices, providing valuable insights into the conditions faced by aquatic species. Economically, these tools offer renewable energy developers a practical solution for streamlining environmental assessments and ensuring regulatory compliance, ultimately reducing costs associated with evaluating and mitigating ecological impacts. This research also benefits the public by promoting the growth of renewable energy sources that protect aquatic ecosystems, advancing both sustainable energy production and environmental stewardship.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Optimizing Carbon Capture, Transport, and Storage: Overcoming Challenges with Machine Learning and Cost-Benefit Analysis

Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) is a critical strategy for reducing CO₂ emissions and mitigating climate change. However, its widespread deployment faces numerous challenges across the capture, transport, and storage phases. These challenges include the technical complexity of predicting subsurface behaviors during CO₂ injection, ensuring long-term storage integrity, optimizing transportation networks, and balancing the economic and environmental trade-offs. Addressing these issues requires an integrated approach combining advanced subsurface modeling with system-level analyses to assess costs, risks, and benefits. This presentation provides an overview of studies conducted by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) to tackle these challenges. NETL’s efforts encompass cutting-edge research in subsurface fluid behavior machine learning predictions, alongside the development of innovative tools for system optimization and economic evaluation. By bridging technical expertise and strategic analysis, NETL aims to advance the deployment of CCUS technologies to support global decarbonization efforts. Presented at the Carnegie Mellon University CEE IESS Student Seminar October 4, 2024.

Shih, Chung Yan↗

DOE OSTI2024

Cybersecurity for the Operational Technology Environment (CyOTE) (Final Technical Report)

Electric grids have historically been susceptible to both physical attacks and environmental hazards but the implementation of smart grids, remote management, and self-healing networks, has now made the grid vulnerable to cyber attacks. To address risks introduced by routable connectivity, utilities must establish dynamic solutions to identify, protect, detect, respond to, and recover from cyber security threats and vulnerabilities. In response to the evolving threat landscape U.S. Department of Energy-Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response (DOE CESER) initiated the Cybersecurity for the OT Environment (CyOTE) pilot program, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) effort designed to leverage U.S. intelligence capabilities to prevent, detect, or mitigate a cyber attack on utility operational technology (OT) networks. As part of the CyOTE pilot, The Southern Company (Southern Company or Southern) researched, evaluated and deployed emerging Commercial off the Shelf (COTS) technologies and cyber security monitoring architectures to provide previously unrealized network visibility and situational awareness through deep packet inspection and data analytics. This Final Scientific/Technical Report documents the objectives, methodology, lessons learned, and results of Southern Company’s participation in the CyOTE pilot from December 2018 to September 2023.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration: Phase III (Final Scientific/Technical Report)

The Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration (SWP) is one of 7 regional partnerships formed in 2003 under the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships (RCSPs) initiative. The overall purpose of the initiative was to help determine and implement the technology, infrastructure, and regulations most appropriate to promote carbon storage in different regions of the country. Covering Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and parts of Texas, Wyoming, and Kansas, the SWP evaluated regional carbon storage and utilization potential and focused on technologies and sites that could complement the region’s strong position in energy production. The project progressed through three phases: • Phase I (2003–2005): Characterized regional geologic formations and CO 2 sources, assessed sequestration potential, and identified pilot test sites. • Phase II (2005–2013): Conducted small-scale field tests to validate sequestration methods, including geologic and terrestrial projects. • Phase III (2008–2022): Demonstrated large-scale CO 2 injection at a commercial oil field to test monitoring, verification, and long-term storage strategies. This report covers Phase III. The final project site, the Farnsworth Unit (FWU) in Texas, provided real-world testing of reservoir characterization, monitoring, and risk evaluation tools and processes that could be used in any commercial scale carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) project. Extensive data collection and analysis helped refine best practices for reservoir characterization, injection monitoring, and storage verification. The SWP contributed to national databases, DOE best practice manuals, and regional geological assessments to support future sequestration efforts. Key lessons learned include the importance of robust data management, strategic site selection, regulatory navigation, and effective industry collaboration. The project’s findings will inform ongoing and future carbon storage initiatives. Task 1 (Regional Characterization) • The SWP continued to participate in national outreach efforts and NATCARB. • The SWP evaluated multiple potential sites before selecting the FWU as the primary field test location. Task 2 (Public Outreach and Education) • The SWP contributed to national databases, DOE best practice manuals, and regional geological assessments to support future sequestration efforts. Task 3 (Permitting and Regulatory Compliance) • The SWP ensured compliance with federal and state regulations, including National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. • The SWP obtained all necessary permits for drilling, injection, and monitoring activities. Task 4 (Site Characterization and Planning) • The SWP developed work plans for four key activities: characterization, simulation, monitoring and verification, and risk evaluation. • The SWP collected and synthesized legacy data from multiple sources to build initial static geological models and dynamic reservoir models demonstrating project feasibility. • The SWP conducted an initial risk evaluation and developed mitigation plans. Task 5 (Field Operations and Data Collection) • The SWP drilled, logged, and cored three characterization wells to gather critical subsurface data. • The SWP conducted multiple geophysical surveys, including 3D seismic, crosswell seismic, and vertical seismic profiling, to improve reservoir characterization. Task 6 (Monitoring and Verification) • The SWP performed extensive geological characterization using data from characterization wells and seismic surveys. • The SWP established a surface monitoring network to track CO 2 flux in soil gas, groundwater chemistry, and near-surface atmospheric CO 2 levels. • The SWP built and refined reservoir models to study the effects of relative permeability on simulation behavior and improve calibration with experimental data. Task 7 (Risk Assessment and Model Refinement) • The SWP conducted multiple studies to evaluate reservoir integrity, predict CO 2 plume behavior and improve predictive modeling capabilities. • The SWP refined geological models and used them to enhance the accuracy of simulation models. • The SWP continued quantitative risk assessment of top-ranked risks and strengthened the link between qualitative and quantitative risk methodologies.

02 PETROLEUM↗

DOE OSTI2024

Project No. 5: Evaluating Dredged Materials for Energy Storage Applications with Economic and Carbon Benefits (CRADA Final Report)

The New York Power Authority (NYPA) is committed to supporting the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA) through its VISION2030 strategic plan. As a clean energy provider, NYPA is seeking to demonstrate leadership in every aspect of its business by taking a comprehensive approach to sustainability management and integrating sustainability principles into day-to-day decision-making. This effort includes planning for climate resilience through projects that mitigate climate risk in our operations and prioritize climate opportunities in our investments. Canal Corporation, a subsidiary of NYPA, is charged with maintaining minimum water depths for navigation in the Cayuga-Seneca, Champlain, Erie and Oswego Canals. In order to do so, an average volume of 280,000 cubic yards of sediment is dredged annually and held in Upland Disposal Sites (UDS) permitted by the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC). The required on-land storage at UDSes are nearing capacity, and disposal opportunities are costly, both economically and environmentally. Novel energy storage technology developed by NREL provides an opportunity for meeting NYPA's need to find reuse options for dredged materials and commitment to providing clean reliable energy. This would also support NYPA's goal of developing 300 MW of utility scale storage and enabling 150 MW of distributed storage by 2030. NREL will consult NYPA on the environmental and economic impact of reusing dredged materials as useful commodities such as energy storage media, construction sand or industrial uses. Test and material characterization methods will be based on current NREL storage material characterization approaches. NREL worked with NYPA on sample preparation, material testing, test results analysis. Test and material characterization methods were based on current NREL storage material characterization approaches. The team analyzed the environmental and economic impact of reusing dredged materials as useful commodities such as energy storage media, construction sand or industrial uses. The test and analysis works have achieved the project goal in characterizing NYPA dredging materials and verifying their various uses including construction sand and thermal energy storage media. Uses of dredging materials as useful materials will bring economic and environmental benefits and avoid disposal costs.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2024

Assessing the Impacts of CO 2 Reduction and Utilization Technologies on Regional Freshwater Resources

This work, a product of the Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO)-supported multi-lab CO 2 Reduction and Upgrading for e-Fuels Consortium (CO 2 RUe), focuses on advanced research and development and cross-cutting evaluation of environmental, economic, and social sustainability for CO 2 reduction and upgrading for fuels and chemicals. The Consortium develops and de-risks advanced technologies that use renewable electricity to convert CO 2 into e-fuels and commodity chemicals. One key aspect of environmental sustainability consideration is water resources. This report summarizes a three-year study that analyzed the impacts of water consumption in select CO 2 reduction and utilization technologies in two future scenarios using a pair of water indices—water availability index and water stress footprint. The analyses also account for projected electricity grid mixes and their water withdrawal and water consumption demand in grid regions. The work identifies drivers, challenges, and critical areas in water sustainability, along with valuable insights into technological and regional factors. The study also explores the potential of using non-traditional water resources to reduce water stress and increase availability. These findings are intended to support industry stakeholders and BETO with the knowledge needed for informed decision-making, contributing to strategies to mitigate risks associated with the implementation of CO 2 utilization technologies.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Assessing the Impacts of CO 2 Reduction and Utilization Technologies on Regional Freshwater Resources

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Adapting the Technology Performance Level Integrated Assessment Framework to Low-TRL Technologies Within the Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage Industry, Part I

With the urgent need to mitigate climate change and rising global temperatures, technological solutions that reduce atmospheric CO 2 are an increasingly important part of the global solution. As a result, the nascent carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) industry is rapidly growing with a plethora of new technologies in many different sectors. There is a need to holistically evaluate these new technologies in a standardized and consistent manner to determine which technologies will be the most successful and competitive in the global marketplace to achieve decarbonization targets. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno-economic assessment (TEA) have been employed as rigorous methodologies for quantitatively measuring a technology's environmental impacts and techno-economic performance, respectively. However, these metrics evaluate a technology's performance in only three dimensions and do not directly incorporate stakeholder needs and values. In addition, technology developers frequently encounter trade-offs during design that increase one metric at the expense of the other. The technology performance level (TPL) combined indicator provides a comprehensive and holistic assessment of an emerging technology's potential, which is described by its techno-economic performance, environmental impacts, social impacts, safety considerations, market/deployability opportunities, use integration impacts, and general risks. TPL incorporates TEA and LCA outputs and quantifies the trade-offs between them directly using stakeholder feedback and requirements. In this article, the TPL methodology is being adapted from the marine energy domain to the CCUS domain. Adapted metrics and definitions, a stakeholder analysis, and a detailed foundation-based application of the systems engineering approach to CCUS are presented. The TPL assessment framework is couched within the internationally standardized LCA framework to improve technical rigor and acceptance. It is demonstrated how stakeholder needs and values can be directly incorporated, how LCA and TEA metrics can be balanced, and how other dimensions (listed earlier) can be integrated into a single metric that measures a technology's potential.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Rapidly Deployable Acoustic Monitoring and Localization System Based on a Low-Cost Wave Buoy Platform

The primary objective of this project is to develop a cost-effective, fit-for-purpose environmental monitoring system, “NoiseSpotter®,” that characterizes, classifies, and provides accurate location information for anthropogenic and natural sounds in near real-time. NoiseSpotter was developed to support the evaluation of potential acoustic effects of marine energy (ME) projects. By utilizing a compact array of three acoustic particle motion sensors, NoiseSpotter triangulates individual bearings to provide sound source localization to within 5% accuracy, allowing the ability to discern ME device sounds relative to other confounding sounds in the environment, while providing location estimates to nearby marine mammals for environmental mitigation purposes. The ME industry needs proven solutions to meet environmental impact assessment needs. The NoiseSpotter® includes off-the-shelf, modular components that are easy to assemble and disassemble. Its acoustic particle motion sensors are commercially available and the data logger and real-time telemetry system is designed to be plug-and-play. The entire system is relatively compact and can be deployed from small vessels. NoiseSpotter’s near real-time capability enables operational monitoring of ME sounds, particularly during early stages of technology adoption to facilitate mitigation of potential noise effects. Widespread adoption of the technology for acoustic monitoring of ME devices requires that it be cost effective; hence the anticipated commercial cost of system hardware is $35,000. This project contributes to reducing barriers to ME testing through support of scientific research focused on reducing or mitigating environmental risks and lowering costs and complexity of environmental monitoring. This project has developed an acoustic monitoring system, NoiseSpotter® (U.S. Patent No. 11,156,734 and U.S. Registered Trademark No. 6,442,313), to detect and characterize baseline noise and sounds from ME operations and support geolocation of detected sounds. The intended outcome of the project is to mitigate concerns about the potential for ME device noise to alter marine mammal or fish behavior. NoiseSpotter® enables cost-effective, near real-time acoustic monitoring of an operational ME device relative to ambient environmental noise and provides a technical basis for ME developers seeking to navigate the permitting process in an efficient manner.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2024

Implementation and Operation of Power Flow Control Solutions for Transmission Systems

Power-flow controls (PFCs) technologies provide a suite of alternatives to more-efficiently direct the flow of power on the grid, improving flexibility and enabling the grid to be more responsive and resilient. PFCs can be used in many cases to mitigate overloads and consequently defer the installation of grid-expansion projects. They can also be suitable options in situations where new transmission lines cannot be built because of environmental constraints, land use, or other types of restrictions. Other uses include mitigation of loop or unintended flows, forcing of contractual or scheduled flows, reduction of congestion, and mitigation solutions during large maintenance or construction projects. While many studies have demonstrated the potential economic benefits of PFC for different types of applications, the implementation implications of using multiple PFCs for system operation and reliability have not been analyzed in detail. The lack of information and practical experience on these aspects hinders adoption of this technology. One use case would be that multiple PFCs are required to coordinate congestion management. In such cases, multiple PFCs are deployed in a meshed power system to control power flows across a wide area. The challenges are associated with PFC interaction—namely, the self and mutual power-flow sensitivity of each PFC, which must be accounted for in the calculation of the respective operating setpoints. This report analyzes implementation and operation that must be considered in evaluating transmission solutions using PFCs. The report first analyzes attributes with which PFC-based solutions should comply, based on the objective and characteristics of each particular use case. It then describes different approaches for coordinated control of multiple PFC devices for different applications, including options to avoid adverse interactions and reduce risks due to inappropriate coordination. Control and operation are illustrated through case studies performed on both generic and actual power system models. This report provides insights for transmission planners and operation engineers about the implementation of PFC-based transmission solutions; consequently, it will help them make informed decisions about the adoption of the technology.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2026

Innovations in underground hydrogen storage with multiphysics simulations, optimization, and monitoring: A review

Underground Hydrogen Storage (UHS) is a promising solution for large-scale energy storage and a critical component in advancing low-carbon energy system. Ensuring the safety and efficiency of UHS necessitates a comprehensive understanding of multiphysical interactions driven by cyclic pore fluid pressure fluctuations and coupled physicochemical processes. Here, this review examines the key geomechanical responses in UHS, including rock property variations under cyclic loading, fracture evolution and propagation, reservoir stress sensitivity, and fault stability. It also explores the impact of geochemical and microbial reactions on geomechanical characteristics. We provide an in-depth analysis of Thermal-Hydraulic-Mechanical-Chemical (THMC) coupled numerical simulations, highlighting their potential for future multi-scale modeling. Limitations of current machine learning (ML) approaches in addressing UHS challenges are highlighted, emphasizing the need for innovative ML-based methodologies. Operational strategies for hydrogen injection and production are reviewed, focusing on safety, efficiency, and economic viability. The necessity for multi-objective optimization (MOO) to balance storage efficiency, risk mitigation, and cost-effectiveness is also discussed. Current monitoring technologies are evaluated to ensure safe and efficient UHS operations. Finally, this review identifies critical knowledge gaps and underscores the importance of advancing geomechanical understanding under multiphysics-coupling. We highlight the need for ML-driven multiphysics theories, enhanced modeling techniques, and robust optimization strategies to improve UHS performance. This study serves as a comprehensive reference for future research and the large-scale implementation of UHS systems.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2021

Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Recommended Practices for Managing Induced Seismicity Risk Associated with Geologic Carbon Storage

The geologic storage of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is one method to help reduce or eliminate atmospheric CO 2 emissions. The sequestered CO 2 is originally captured from the atmosphere or from a stationary industrial source and subsequently injected into a deep subsurface porous rock formation. To facilitate the successful deployment of field scale carbon storage projects, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is developing tools and protocols for defensible, science-based frameworks to quantify and mitigate risks associated with the long-term storage of CO 2 . This protocol specifically addresses the risk of induced seismicity due to injection in a geologic carbon storage (GCS) site. This integrated and risk-based protocol is a product of the U.S. DOE Fossil Energy’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP), a multi-year collaborative research effort of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL). These recommended practices describe a set of 7 steps to evaluate, manage, communicate, and mitigate the risk of induced seismicity at GCS sites. The base methodology of the recommended practices follows a framework similar to the $\textit{Protocol for Addressing Induced Seismicity Associated with Enhanced Geothermal Systems}$ (Majer et al., 2012), developed for the Geothermal Technology Office of the U.S. DOE. These recommended practices present a framework to systematically assess the induced seismicity risk and quantify the associated uncertainties. These recommendations are based on current research and are sufficiently general to allow for modification and application to a variety of different types of sites. The substance of the recommended practices contained herein includes both technical and non-technical issues, and covers all operational stages of the GCS project lifecycle. They start at the preliminary risk assessment phase, continue through site assessment and characterization, include best practice communication and seismic monitoring plan methodologies, discuss the evaluation and mitigation of seismic hazard and risk, and closes with an exploration of operational management plans, which conclude when the induced seismicity risk abates back to background level. The focus of these recommendations is on actively managing the risks associated with induced seismicity by developing an actionable risk management plan that starts at the project proposal stage and continues through site closure through an iterative assessment and improvement process. The audience of this document is expected to include all interested stakeholders (e.g., operators, project developers, regulators, and the general public) and is expressly written to be accessible to this broad range of partners. This document is intended to disseminate knowledge gained through recent advances in the science of induced seismicity hazard and risk assessments, to provide updates based on recent experience gained by similar corollary injection-induced seismicity cases, and most importantly to establish a uniform framework to carry out a successful induced seismicity risk management plan for carbon storage projects in the future. These recommendations do not directly address any domestic or international regulations or standards. A complementary NRAP report makes recommendations for the assessment and management of environmental subsurface risks associated with unwanted fluid migration at GCS sites (Thomas et al., 2021) and should be referred to in order to address those additional GCS site risks

58 GEOSCIENCES↗