Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “peer review report”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

2023 IEDO Peer Review Report

On behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonization Office (IEDO), we are pleased to share the report from our 2023 peer review. Peer review provides us with invaluable insight into our office strategy and program direction from a diverse group of external thought leaders. The findings and actionable recommendations from peer review inform our decision making and help us maintain a constant state of evolution and growth.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Global Perspective of Energy Storage (2019 Annual Peer Review Report)

This report provides information about the DOE Office of Electricity Energy Storage Peer Review held in 2019 and includes posters reviewed in these categories: postdoctoral, validated reliability and safety performance, equitable regulatory environment and analytics, applied materials (Materials I), power electronics, industry acceptance, partnerships, and Materials I.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

2019 Project Peer Review Report

This document summarizes the evaluations provided by an independent external panel of experts at the 2019 U.S. Department of Energy Bioenergy Technologies Office's Peer Review meeting on March 4–7, 2019 in Denver, CO. BETO manages a diverse portfolio of technologies covering the full spectrum of bioenergy production, from the feedstock source to end use. BETO systematically prioritizes research and development (R&D) into technology opportunities across a range of emerging scientific breakthroughs and technology-readiness levels. This approach supports a diverse R&D portfolio while developing the most promising and widely applicable technologies, testing technologies as integrated processes, and verifying integrated processes at the engineering scale. These technologies will use a broad variety of currently underused domestic biomass and waste resources to produce increasing volumes of biofuels, bioproducts, and biopower. The biennial peer review process enables external stakeholders to provide feedback on the responsible use of taxpayer funding and develop recommendations for the most efficient and effective ways to accelerate the development of a bioenergy industry. BETO completed these reviews in 2019. This report includes the results of both the Project Peer Review meeting held in March 2019 and the Program Management Review meeting held in July 2019.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2024

2023 Project Peer Review Report

The Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) within the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy supports the research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of technologies aimed at mobilizing domestic renewable carbon resources for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions across the U.S. economy. BETO systematically prioritizes RD&D into technology opportunities across a range of emerging scientific breakthroughs and technology readiness levels in the subprogram areas illustrated in Figure 1. This approach supports a diverse portfolio while developing the most promising and widely applicable technologies, testing technologies as integrated processes, and demonstrating integrated processes to support scale-up. These technologies will use a broad variety of renewable carbon resources to produce increasing volumes of biofuels and bioproducts. More information on BETO’s mission, goals, and strategic approaches can be found in the Bioenergy Technologies Office Multi-Year Program Plan. The biennial Peer Review process enables external stakeholders to provide feedback on the responsible use of taxpayer funding and develop recommendations for the most efficient and effective ways to accelerate the development of a bioenergy industry. This report includes the results of the Project Peer Review meeting held on April 3–7, 2023, in Denver, Colorado.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Geothermal Technologies Office 2022 Peer Review Report

The Geothermal Technologies Office (GTO) gathered a community of talented researchers and scientists for an in-depth review of GTO-funded research projects that continue to push boundaries and contribute towards the nation’s clean energy future.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

WPTO Peer Review 2019 Report

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) hosted the 2019 Project Peer Review on October 8-10, 2019 in Alexandria, Virginia. The majority of projects in WPTO's Fiscal Year 2017‒2018 research and development (R&D) portfolio were presented to the public and systematically reviewed by external subject-matter experts from industry, academia, and federal agencies.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2024

2023 Peer Review Final Report

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy requires each of its programs to conduct periodic peer reviews to enhance EERE program planning. May 16–18, 2023, the Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technologies Office (AMMTO) held an in-person peer review of its program activities in which an independent panel of experts provided AMMTO with feedback on how well the new office’s programs align with its overarching goals and mission statement, identified possible course correction, and shared information. This review marks AMMTO’s first in-person peer review since the Advanced Manufacturing Office evolved into AMMTO and the Industrial Decarbonization and Efficiency Office. A detailed summary of observations, findings, impact, and recommendations is contained in the following report.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Water Power Technologies Office 2019 Peer Review Final Report

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy’s (EERE’s) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO, or “the office”) 2019 Peer Review was held on October 8–10, 2019, in Alexandria, Virginia. The purpose of the peer review was to evaluate DOE-funded projects for their contribution to the mission and goals of the office, to assess progress made against stated objectives, and to assess the office’s overall management and performance. All programs within EERE are required to undertake rigorous, objective peer reviews covering their key projects, as well as 80%–90% of their funded active project portfolio every two years.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Summary of Technical Peer Review on the Risk Assessment Framework proposed in Report INL/RPT-22-68656 for Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems

This report summarizes the peer review activities initiated by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during fiscal year (FY) 2023 for the evaluation and improvement of the methodology developed under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a technical basis to support effective and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. A framework was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk-informed capability to quantitatively and accurately estimate the risk impact of plant modernization, considering the introduction of high safety-significant safety-related (HSSSR) DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing risk-informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of HSSSR DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. The R&D efforts of this project from FY 2019 through FY 2022 were focused on methodology improvement and demonstration of the proposed framework for the risk assessment and design optimization of safety-critical DI&C systems. Collaborations with the nuclear industry have been initiated to support the reliability and risk assessment of their DI&C systems by using the proposed framework. In FY 2023, the framework has reached to a point for a technical peer review and obtain stakeholder feedback. This peer review activity includes coordination of the reviews performed by a group of industry stakeholders, documentation of the peer review suggestions, providing resolutions and responses to the peer review comments. The objective of this technical peer review is to obtain representative feedback on the proposed framework to improve the technical qualities of its methodology and readiness for deployment to the industry. Feedback may identify potential areas for improvement and further development. The Subject Matter experts were invited to review the latest project report documenting the methodology developed in the project and provide evaluations of the technical qualities of the proposed framework and relevant methods. The reviewed project report is “An Integrated Framework for Risk Assessment of High Safety-significant Safety-related Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems in Nuclear Power Plants: Methodology and Demonstration” INL/RPT-22-68656 (short as “INL/RPT-22-68656” in this report). This peer review report documents the technical questions provided for technical peer review and introduces the technical peer reviewers from the stakeholders including nuclear utilities, regulators, and universities. Comments from technical peer reviewers and the resolutions and responses to these comments are outlined. Insights and lessons learned from the technical peer review are summarized in conclusions and future work. The primary audience of this report are DI&C designers, engineers, and probabilistic risk assessment (PRA) practitioners. This includes stakeholders, such as the nuclear utilities and regulators who consider the deployment and upgrade of DI&C systems, DI&C software developers and reviewers, and cybersecurity specialists.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program: 2019 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; April 29 - May 1, 2019, Arlington, Virginia

The fiscal year 2019 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen and Fuel Cells Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR) was held from April 29 to May 1, 2019, in Arlington, Virginia. This report is a summary of comments by AMR peer reviewers about the hydrogen and fuel cell projects funded by DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
DOE OSTI2023

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program: 2022 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; June 6-8 2022

This document summarizes peer review comments and scores for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Program 2022 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR), held virtually June 6-8, 2022. The report also provides a brief overview of the Program, highlights key accomplishments since the previous AMR (held in June 2021), and summarizes activities and accomplishments within each Program office. Five Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office subprogram chapters provide summaries of key activities and accomplishments since the preceding AMR, summaries of projects presented orally during this year's AMR, and a summary of peer reviewer comments on the subprogram.

AMR↗
DOE OSTI2022

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program: 2021 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; June 7-11, 2021

This document summarizes peer review comments and scores for the fiscal year 2021 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR), held virtually June 7-11, 2021. In response to direction from various stakeholders, including the National Academies, this review process provides project- and program-level evaluations of DOE-funded research, development, demonstration, and analysis of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.

AMR↗
DOE OSTI2024

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program: 2023 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; June 6-9, 2023

This document summarizes peer review comments and scores for the fiscal year 2023 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR), held June 6-9, 2023. This review process provides project- and program-level evaluations of DOE-funded research, development, demonstration, and analysis of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.

AMR↗
DOE OSTI2020

SETO 2020 Peer Review

This report details the findings of an independent, third-party group of solar industry experts who reviewed SETO's portfolio as a whole. The report covers the reviewers' top-level findings across major research and development areas.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Incorporate More Realistic Surface-Atmosphere Radiative Coupling in E3SM

Over the course of this project, we have successfully carried out proposed studies and reported our findings in leading peer-reviewed journals and national/international conferences. So far, we have published three peer-reviewed articles reporting such findings and contributed to other two peer-reviewed articles. One Ph.D. dissertation has been produced based on the work done in this project. Two additional manuscripts incurred from this project are currently under reviews. We have made 15 presentations at national and international conferences about the results from this project, as well as eight presentations at the E3SM all-hands meeting. We were also selected last year by the BER to continue this line of work, in close collaborations with the E3SM core model developers.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Refining the representations of high-latitude surface-atmosphere radiative coupling in the E3SM (Final project report)

Over the course of this project, we have successfully carried out proposed studies and reported our findings in leading peer-reviewed journals and national/international conferences. So far, we have published 7 peer-reviewed articles reporting these findings and contributed to 1 additional peer-reviewed article. One additional manuscript resulting from this project is currently under review. We have made 22 presentations at national and international conferences about the results from this project. We have also given 3 presentations at the E3SM all-hands or PI meetings to update the E3SM community on our results.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Using Mapping Tools to Prioritize Electric Vehicle Charger Benefits to Underserved Communities

Mapping tools can play an important role in incorporating equity into planning, implementing, and evaluating investments in electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, also referred to as EV chargers or electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Federal, state, and local organizations need methodologies for using mapping tools as they pursue equity-focused goals to ensure that the benefits of investments in EV chargers flow to energy and environmental justice (EEJ) underserved communities. This report provides examples of how to apply mapping tools to identify priority locations for installing EV chargers that may benefit EEJ underserved communities through four EV charger planning approaches: corridor charging, community charging, fleet electrification, and diversity in STEM and workforce development. It also explores various methodologies for calculating low-public EVSE density. Ensuring that the benefits of EV charger investments flow to underserved communities involves prioritizing locally identified needs and incorporating community input when choosing charging station locations. Installing EV chargers in a census tract identified as an EEJ underserved community does not inherently mean that those EV chargers provide benefits to residents of that community. In addition, representatives of historically disadvantaged communities or environmental justice communities have concerns that installing EV chargers in their communities could potentially exacerbate or propagate existing inequities. While the methodologies described in this report may help identify priority census tracts for equity-focused EV charger investment, additional community engagement and site evaluation are necessary to determine whether EV chargers are accessible, affordable, and convenient to EEJ underserved community residents and what benefits the local community is looking to realize with EV charger installations. This report is the culmination of many discussions with project leaders from DOE-funded projects deploying EV chargers in communities across the nation, organizations representing EEJ underserved communities, state agencies developing EV investment plans, utilities making major EV investments, and DOE national laboratory experts working in transportation electrification. The authors distributed a draft report for peer review, and reviewer comments are summarized in this report. These methodologies are likely to evolve as more EV charger funding programs are implemented and more real-world data is available to measure the effectiveness of strategies for incorporating equity in EV charger deployment projects. Continued efforts to document best practices and critically evaluate whether equity-focused programs achieve their goals are needed as transportation electrification proceeds at the local, regional, and national levels.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

MARVEL Reactor Fuel Performance Report (Rev.2)

The Microreactor Applications Research Validation and EvaLuation (MARVEL) project is producing a high temperature liquid metal-cooled nuclear test bed at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to ultimately improve the integration of microreactors to end-user applications. This ambitious effort seeks to design, authorize, construct, test, and operate the reactor within five years. In order to construct and operate the MARVEL reactor in a timely manner, the system will utilize materials and component designs which have already been used, qualified, or licensed from previous reactors. The MARVEL reactor will be located at the INL Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) facility in the north high-bay equipment pit and will use the existing 304 stainless steel-clad U-ZrH1.6 pin-type fuel system developed by General Atomics and purchased from TRIGA International. This fuel has been previously qualified under the United States Department of Energy’s (US DOE) Reduced Enrichment for Research and Test Reactors (RERTR) Program. Even though the regulator of the MARVEL reactor is the US DOE, the standards and overall approach recommended by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is well-defined and utilized here. Following NUREG-1537 regulatory guidance, this report documents the authorization case for the MARVEL fuel system’s application to MARVEL and establishes stable and predictable fuel performance during the most thermophysically unfavorable conditions achievable in the MARVEL reactor. To that end, this report provides a comprehensive survey of the known thermophysical properties, performance, and quantitative relationships associated with the MARVEL reactor fuel element and uses this information to determine its mechanical integrity and risk of reaching unacceptable conditions during the most extreme accident scenarios predicted for the reactor using the most conservative assumptions available. The information contained herein is compiled from a combination of historical reports and peer reviewed scientific publication manuscripts. Known mechanisms under which the fuel is susceptible to failure are highlighted and compared to conditions that could exist in the MARVEL reactor during an unanticipated transient or accident scenario. The two scenarios considered for analysis in this report are (1) an unprotected loss of flow accident and (2) a hypothetical unprotected loss of coolant accident during the loss of flow accident. Preliminary 2D steady-state analyses herein indicate that both fuel-cladding chemical interactions and fuel-cladding mechanical interactions are negligible throughout the fuel’s operational cycle under both normal and high temperature accident scenario conditions. Although higher fidelity 3D time-dependent modeling and simulations are planned, the following may be concluded presently. The MARVEL fuel element maintains its geometric stability and structural integrity during the most extreme accident scenarios predicted for the MARVEL reactor. The hoop stress during the unprotected loss of flow accident reaches about -1.27 MPa; this negative stress indicates that it is compressive rather than tensile. The compressive stress is a result of the NaK pressure on the outside of the fuel element, caused by the restricted thermal expansion of the NaK coolant, exceeding the internal pressures generated inside of the fuel element. The hoop stress generated in the cladding during the unprotected loss of coolant accident reaches a maximum of about approximately 10 MPa, which is nearly an order of magnitude less than the predicted yield strength of the cladding under high-temperature accident scenario conditions. Calculations were compared with results from high performance computational simulations using BISON and are in very close agreement. A conservative MARVEL fuel meat peak temperature limit of 900 °C is recommended presently, which is about 180 °C higher than the peak fuel temperature predicted to occur during the most extreme accident. Based on the known properties and behavior of the MARVEL fuel element, the fuel successfully meets its design and safety requirements under normal and most extreme accident conditions with a large safety margin.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗