SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This training provides an overview of possible ownership models as well as key considerations for selecting the best ownership model to achieve a community's goals.
This slide deck provides an overview of community solar. It introduces community solar programs and their benefits, explains different ownership models, and ends with the best practices to keep in mind when starting a locally owned community solar project.
The Excel-based CHECT tool estimates the LCOC ($/kWh) by charger type (Level 1, Level 2, and DC fast charging) for a given charging hub scenario. CHECT requires users to input certain charging hub scenario parameters, including the number of chargers, daily utilization, and charger replacement frequency by charger type. Additional inputs such as the charging schedule, local utility rates, capital/operational costs, and financial inputs can be customized by the user, or the tool can generate results using appropriate default values from literature for the charging hub scenario and service location(s). Using the above inputs, CHECT performs a robust techno-economic analysis to generate the LCOC by charger type, broken down by cost category (e.g., capital, operational, utility, taxes) for various combinations of charging hub types (multiunit dwelling or public) and ownership models (residential, utility, or private company). It also outputs the annual discounted cash flows and determines the most sensitive input variables. In addition, the tool allows users to easily compare the LCOC across various ownership models or across different states.
Our research explores innovative solutions to address the challenge of battery disruptions in electric vehicles (EVs) on highways. We propose a centralized fleet ownership model where a company manages a fleet of Mobile Charging Drones (MCDs) guided by a k-VRP (Vehicle Routing Problem) framework. This model is designed to tackle a multi-objective optimization issue with three primary goals: reduction of the overall operating costs, decrease in the cumulative waiting time, and minimization of the combined operating costs and waiting times. This approach extends beyond the usual VRP constraints, encompassing specific limitations for both MCDs and disrupted EVs (DEVs). Additionally, our study delves into the concept of decentralized fleet ownership through the lens of crowdsourcing. Preliminary numerical analyses indicate that the capital cost of MCDs is a significant factor on the charging service, and the system performance is sensitive to DEV owner's value of time (VOT) when VOTs are relatively low.
This report explores how distributed solar stakeholders can plan and align economic development with existing community priorities while advancing new solar projects. Because the amount of local community influence drives community economic development, we note the need for investment in community ownership models, which are scarce today. This report seeks to outline the current barriers to community-led economic development through distributed solar, best practices for implementation, and recommendations for sector stakeholders.
This report explores how distributed solar stakeholders can plan and align economic development with existing community priorities while advancing new solar projects. Because the amount of local community influence drives community economic development, we note the need for investment in community ownership models, which are scarce today. This report seeks to outline the current barriers to community-led economic development through distributed solar, best practices for implementation, and recommendations for sector stakeholders.
This presentation discusses financing strategies and examples for a range of Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grant-eligible clean energy initiatives. Beginning with a brief overview of project development and financing, it will address public and private funding sources, ownership models, and key considerations to help practitioners choose among different approaches. The discussion will include examples from three project categories: strategic and planning activities, incentives and structured finance, and direct infrastructure investment.
Advances in computing and simulation technology during the 1980 s promoted the development of multiple simulations for on-orbit human spaceflight operations at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Johnson Space Center (JSC). By the late 1980 s, it became increasingly clear that redundancy risked leading to inefficiencies in dissemination and incorporation of models across simulations, institutional organizations, and spaceflight programs. Software development tools, such as the Trick Simulation Environment, began to emerge providing a generalized framework for the development, integration, and operation of simulations. Throughout the 1990s, engineering, operations, and training simulations began to migrate to Trick in order to take advantage of a common simulation environment. Due to forecasted reductions in funding to the Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) programs in the early 2000s, the common framework that arose from this simulation migration was formalized as the Common Model Architecture (CMA). The CMA was established in order to further reduce redundancy, while promoting model sharing and enhancing model integrity. A minimal set of standards for data flows, functional interactions, and model organization based on Trick were defined for those features found to be most important in facilitating model interaction. Model-providing organizations within NASA JSC took ownership of models for their specific areas of expertise, and agreements were reached on common model sharing and usage. This paper describes the evolution of commonality enabled by the Trick Simulation Environment at JSC leading to the CMA, the standards defined by the CMA, a recent CMA simulation example, and potential application of the CMA to NASA s new Exploration program.
The Energy 101: Energy Financing Training presentation, developed for the Energy Technology Innovation Partnership Project (ETIPP), provides an overview of energy project financing. It covers fundamental concepts, technologies, considerations, case studies, and additional resources.
The global shift toward electric vehicles (EVs) for climate sustainability lacks comprehensive insights into the impact of the built environment on EV ownership, especially in varying spatial contexts. This study, focusing on New York State, integrates data fusion techniques across diverse datasets to examine the influence of socioeconomic and built environmental factors on EV ownership. The utilization of spatial regression models reveals consistent coefficient values, highlighting the robustness of the results, with the Spatial Lag model better at capturing spatial autocorrelation. Further, results underscore the significance of charging stations within a 10-mile radius, indicative of a preference for convenient charging options influencing EV ownership decisions. Factors like higher education levels, lower rental populations, and concentrations of older population align with increased EV ownership. Utilizing publicly available data offers a more accessible avenue for understanding EV ownership across regions, complementing traditional survey approaches.
NLR's Transportation Technology Total Cost of Ownership (T3CO) model provides realistic and robust analysis, capturing the impact of real world duty cycles and their variability in operating and opportunity costs. Case studies show that these contributions to costs can be significant and can alter conclusions about technology cost effectiveness.
The Nine Canyon Long Duration Energy Storage (LDES) Feasibility Study explores the technical and economic viability of deploying advanced energy storage technologies at Energy Northwest's (EN) Nine Canyon (9C) Wind Project site in Benton County, Washington. Supported by the Washington State Department of Commerce and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Electricity under its LDES Voucher Program, the study represents a collaborative effort between EN, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and ARES North America. At the core of this effort is the development of a generalized techno-economic modeling framework and evaluation tool designed to assess the value proposition of LDES projects across a variety of contexts. The modeling tool is technology-agnostic and accommodates user-defined parameters such as rated power, energy duration, round-trip efficiency, capital and operational costs, and dispatch constraints. It also integrates economic inputs, including market prices, energy revenue structures, and financing parameters to evaluate performance through key metrics. The tool provides utilities with a transparent, adaptable platform to support decision-making, investment prioritization, and portfolio planning for various storage technologies. To guide scenario design and interpretation, the study first surveyed the LDES technology landscape, including lithium-ion batteries, flow batteries, non-hydro gravity storage, and thermo-mechanical systems, comparing cost trajectories, technical performance, safety and hazards, materials sourcing and recyclability, and spatial/siting considerations. This literature-grounded review highlights technology trade-offs and reinforces the need to align technology choice with site characteristics, use cases, and project objectives. A companion chapter examines ownership structures (EN ownership, third-party ownership, shared models) and offtake options (energy marketing, capacity/energy PPAs, time-of-use PPAs, block-delivery PPAs, and tolling), where PPAs (power purchase agreements) represent contractual arrangements for buying and selling electricity. The chapter also highlights implications for risk allocation, capital access, operational control, and revenue certainty. The study also evaluates supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) and transmission interconnection pathways, options include upgrading the existing SCADA or deploying a dedicated LDES controller, with attention to protection schemes, data telemetry, cybersecurity, and regulatory coordination with BPA. In addition, an ARES-specific geotechnical and hydrology assessment presented in the appendix screens multiple corridors for slope stability, bearing capacity, cut-and-fill magnitude, and stormwater behavior.
This study examines differences in public interest toward automated vehicle (AV) adoption between burdened communities (BCs) and non-burdened communities (non-BCs). The study uniquely captures travel behavior by integrating the census tract-level community indicators with the 2017–2019 Puget Sound Household Travel Survey. Public interest in AV ownership is modeled as a five-level ordered outcome, ranging from ‘Not interested at all’ to ‘Very interested.’ Segmented ordered logit models and Random Forest are used to identify key drivers and barriers to AV adoption across BCs and non-BCs. Results show that longer commute times, lack of personal vehicles, and concerns about AV performance in adverse weather conditions are significantly associated with higher interest levels toward owning AVs in BCs. In conclusion, the findings offer insights for developing targeted policies to promote AV adoption and address differences between BCs and non-BCs in accessing emerging transportation technologies.
Most U.S. residential rooftop solar customers finance their solar purchases through loans or by buying power from third-party owned systems. Prior research demonstrates how third-party ownership (TPO) models such as leases emerged in the early 2010s and accelerated solar adoption by low- and moderate-income households while driving market concentration in the installation industry. Since 2015, loans have emerged as a prevalent financing alternative, but the potential effects of loans on the customer base and industry remain understudied. Here, we fill that research gap by developing a methodology to identify loan-financed and third-party owned systems in a household-level solar adopter data set. The data suggest that loans accounted for increasing solar market shares from 2017 until reaching as high as 70% in 2022, but that the market has since shifted back to TPO. The data show that TPO adopters in our sample earned about 16%–18% less and loan recipients earned 3%–7% less, at the median, than customers who self-financed systems. These results reaffirm prior research showing that TPO has accelerated low- and moderate-income adoption and that loans have likewise expanded the customer base to a lesser extent. The results suggest that loan-financed systems entail around a 16%–26% price premium that is only partly explained by loan fees. Finally, the data suggest that the emergence of loans has likely reduced market concentration in the rooftop solar industry.
This white paper synthesizes an array of crucial grid services provided by BESS technology, assesses its architecture and communications, and presents a case study for analysis against the principles introduced by Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE). Furthermore, in walking through the analysis, this paper presents a framework to evaluate risks and solutions when considering BESS components. Asset owners and buyers could perform this analysis to assess their BESS product implementations, alternative inverter-based resources (IBR), and energy management systems (EMS). Battery systems fulfill various roles contingent on the unique market demands and the specific challenges presented by regional grid infrastructures. These roles also vary due to the differing utility models for ownership and operation, which are adapted to meet regional and local capabilities and requirements. Concerns have been raised regarding the potential for adversaries to exploit knowledge of battery operational patterns to orchestrate decisive attacks. However, the security of operational data for these systems may not be the primary vulnerability, as much of this information is already well-understood within the community. Applying a modest degree of subject matter expertise can often yield valuable predictions regarding how a battery will respond under certain conditions, such as grid emergencies, high or low-temperature days, Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events, and outages. The operational characteristics of batteries are well-documented, and their capabilities, including the risks associated with misoperation and the resulting consequences, are published and understood within the industry. CIE practices represent the next step in gaining functional assurance and providing an acceptable level of risk, regardless of whether a battery vendor can support a trusted and validated supply chain. While this issue has exacerbated supply chain challenges, it is not an isolated condition. This foreign supply route is the primary source of BESS for the U.S. market. Significant efforts are underway through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) to change that. Still, strategic short-term operational mitigations are needed to ensure the security of our operational technology (OT) systems, which are enhanced by instilling trust and are separate from vendors implementing CIE principles.
Secondary electric power generation with minimum engine bleed is discussed. Present and future jet engine systems are compared. The role of auxiliary power units is evaluated. Details of secondary electric power generation systems with and without auxiliary power units are given. Advanced bleed systems are compared with minimum bleed systems. A cost model of ownership is given. The difference in the cost of ownership between a minimum bleed system and an advanced bleed system is given.
A mixed integer linear programming (MILP)–baseddistributed energy management for three-phase unbalancedactive distribution network is proposed. Modern distributionnetworks have becoming more and more active with increasingdeployment of microgrids, distributed energy resources (DERs)as well as controllable loads. Considering various ownership andcontrol models of microgrids, DERs and controllable loads, adistributed energy management was formulated using the alternatingdirection method of multipliers (ADMM) algorithm. ByADMM, the distribution management system (DMS) and theseactive components are coordinated through price signals, whichare adjusted according to the generation-load mismatch per nodeper phase. To enable resolution of the ADMM-based distributedoptimization using more accessible and popular MILP solver,different linearization techniques were proposed to linearize theaugmented Lagrangian terms and other nonlinear terms. Resultsof case studies on a three-phase active distribution network withthree microgrids and several DERs and controllable loads validatedthe effectiveness of proposed MILP-based distributed energymanagement. In addition, the capability of proposed method inmitigating phase power unbalance has been demonstrated.
T3CO (Transportation Technology Total Cost of Ownership), is open source software for modeling total cost of ownership for commercial vehicles with advanced powertrains. T3CO is a modeling framework for determining geospatially and temporally optimized total cost of ownership (TCO) for vehicle powertrain technologies. T3CO runs NREL's FASTSim™ software for a representative set of operating conditions to minimize TCO based on vehicle parameters that affect purchase and operating costs (e.g., fuel/electricity consumption, asset depreciation, opportunity costs associated with charging time) while simultaneously ensuring that firm performance constraints (e.g. zero-to-sixty time, gradeability) are satisfied. T3CO will enable the user to control which powertrain parameters are used in optimizing TCO, and these parameters will be modified by a multi-objective optimization (MOO) algorithm to identify a Pareto-optimal solution set. The optimization algorithm will be modular so that users can choose from many different MOO options or insert their own user-defined optimization tool. NREL T3CO Homepage: https://www.nrel.gov/transportation/t3co.html PyPI package: https://pypi.org/project/t3co/