SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “timelines”

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 OSTI2022

A Retrospective Analysis of Distributed Solar Interconnection Timelines and Related State Mandates

Most distributed residential photovoltaic (PV) systems must secure an interconnection agreement prior to operation that ensures the local electrical system will operate safely within the broader electrical grid. PV installers generally submit an interconnection application to the local utility that provides all the necessary details the utility needs to evaluate the proposed system. To encourage timely execution of this process, many states’ utility commissions have established mandates that limit the maximum number of days allowed for utility review and approval of interconnection for certain small, often residential applications. In this paper, we derive the median and range of cycle times for the pre-installation approval phase of the interconnection process (i.e., from application submission to approval by the utility) across 24 U.S. states, using a data set of approximately 170,000 projects. We evaluate the percentage of projects that are approved within respective state-mandated timelines from 2017– 2019. We further evaluate how timelines have evolved since 2012 for a subset of five states: Arizona, California, Colorado, New Jersey, and New York. The analyses are divided into two size ranges: systems that are ≤10 kilowatts (kW), and systems that are 11–50 kW.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Patience is a virtue: A data-driven analysis of rooftop solar PV permitting timelines in the United States

© 2020 The Authors Local permitting can ensure the safe installation and operation of rooftop solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. At the same time, burdensome local permitting processes and local variation in requirements may pose challenges to PV deployment. In this article, we explore new data on the durations between key steps in the PV permitting process in the United States. The data suggest that a typical customer can expect to wait around 25–100 days from permit application until an installed system passes inspection. Permit durations vary significantly across jurisdictions, due in part to differences in local permitting policies. However, permit durations vary as significantly within jurisdictions as across them, in part due to significant variation across installers, suggesting that installer strategies and practices play an important role in permitting timelines. Permit durations have declined over time, reflecting progress from permit streamlining policies and jurisdiction learning-by-doing, though durations have stabilized in recent years. The data suggest that typical PV customers still face long and uncertain permitting timelines in the United States.

O'Shaughnessy, E↗

DOE OSTI2022

Assessment of Economic Impact of Permitting Timelines on Produced Geothermal Power in Imperial County, California

Despite having a large geothermal power potential in the United States, only a small fraction has been developed for power generation. Various barriers, including technical, financial, and regulatory permit delays, are attributed to lower contribution of geothermal energy in the national grid. Unpredictable environmental reviews and permitting timelines are some of the non-technical barriers that can cause delays in geothermal exploration and utilization plans. Our study shows that the geothermal permitting timelines can vary from six months to several years, depending on the presence or absence of biological resources, cultural resources, and sensitive environmental issues at the project site. The potential impacts of these permit barriers can range from investors abandoning geothermal development to making the product (i.e., electricity) more expensive and uncompetitive. In this study, we conducted economic analysis to assess the impact of permitting timelines on cost of produced electricity from geothermal resources using data from existing geothermal plants as well as prospective sites. In this paper, we present collected timelines data, approach, and results of economic impact of permitting timelines on geothermal power. We evaluated the various environmental management and permit review processes by considering a hypothetical geothermal project in the Salton Sea Known Geothermal Resource Area. Because of the variety of the biological and environmental issues and the involvement of local, state, and federal agencies with overlapping jurisdictions, this project could go through one of the many California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review scenarios that range from the least to the most complex in its circumstances. The fastest CEQA/NEPA review timelines would have the project completed in six years. In contrast, the project would substantially need longer time to complete if it were located in an area with significant environmental resources or cultural issues that required permitting from various agencies. With increasing project completion timelines, the simplified levelized cost of electricity (sLCOE) can be 4 to 11% higher with longer CEQA/NEPA review timelines than the sLCOE value with the fastest CEQA/NEPA review timeline. Lengthier CEQA/NEPA review timelines could also result in loss of $64 million to $227 million in potential revenue. Such significant economic impacts could determine the success of a geothermal project.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Blue Room timeline update

The following files are an update to the unclassified timeline in the Blue Room (the classified Weapons museum on the sixth floor of the NSSB). The current timeline ends at 2011; these files will bring the timeline up to the present. The previous timeline also failed to show that the USSR became Russia in 1991, so these files update that major world event. The timeline will be viewed by VIP visitors to the Laboratory

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2022

Residential Solar Adoption Timelines and Impacts from the COVID-19 Pandemic

In this study we evaluate PII and other PV adoption timelines from 2017-2021. We use project-level data collected by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) for the Solar Time-Based Residential Analytics and Cycle Time Estimator (SolarTRACE). Additionally, we conducted a survey of 171 AHJs about their experiences, challenges, and process changes during the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey findings were supplemented with follow up interviews with 5 AHJs from 4 states. We find that the pandemic moderately increased the duration and variability of pre-install timelines (contract signing to install), particularly in the permit review phase (permit submit to approval). In contrast, post-install timelines (install to final utility interconnection) continued to decline during the pandemic. The net result is that overall project timelines (contract signing to final interconnection) continued to decline during the pandemic. Our findings suggest that AHJs and installers faced challenges throughout the pandemic but ongoing improvements in PII processes - particularly post-install processes - more than offset these challenges. Furthermore, the pandemic may have catalyzed or accelerated a widespread adoption of online/electronic permitting, among other process efficiency improvements.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Redesign of the Timeline Generator at Fermilab using a web-based Flutter Application, GraphQL API and an IOC

Redesign of the Timeline Generator at Fermilab using a web-based Flutter application, GraphQL API and an IOC ABSTRACT = The control system at Fermilab is undergoing an evolution with a shift towards web-based applications with connections to the EPICS infrastructure. The Timeline Generator (TLG) is an application that serves to coordinate events across the lab using different timing links. These links include the Tevatron clock (TCLK), a 10 MHz serial link with events encoded at 20Hz and Ma-chine Data (MDAT), a communication link with states encoded at 720Hz. This paper covers the redesign of the major components of the TLG. This includes a web-based Flutter application for building timelines. A placement service is in use that has a GraphQL interface and uses a timeline input to compute a schedule of events and states. The Flutter application sends this computed schedule to the TLG IOC via a GraphQL interface to the Data Pool Manager (DPM). The TLG IOC runs on an Arria FPGA, the Accelerator Clock Generator (ACLK-GEN), which is responsible for writing the events and states on to the different timing links.

Carmichael, Linden [Fermilab]↗

DOE OSTI2025

Redesign of the Timeline Generator at Fermilab using a web-based Flutter application, GraphQL API and an IOC

The control system at Fermilab is undergoing an evolution with a shift towards web-based applications with connections to the EPICS infrastructure. The Timeline Generator (TLG) is an application that serves to coordinate events across the lab using different timing links. These links include the Tevatron clock (TCLK), a 10 MHz serial link with events encoded at 20Hz and Machine Data (MDAT), a communication link with states encoded at 720Hz. This paper covers the redesign of the major components of the TLG. This includes a web-based Flutter application for building timelines. A placement service is in use that has a GraphQL interface and uses a timeline input to compute a schedule of events and states. The Flutter application sends this computed schedule to the TLG IOC via a GraphQL interface to the Data Pool Manager (DPM). The TLG IOC runs on an Arria FPGA, the Accelerator Clock Generator (ACLK-GEN), which is responsible for writing the events and states on to the different timing links.

Carmichael, Linden [Fermilab]↗

DOE OSTI2022

Economic Impact of Permitting Timelines on Geothermal Power in California, Nevada, and Utah

The United States has great geothermal power potential; however, only a small fraction of this resource has been utilized for power generation. Various barriers, including technical, financial, and regulatory permit delays, are attributed to the lower penetration of geothermal energy into the national grid. Unpredictable environmental reviews and permitting timelines are some of the non-technical barriers that can cause delays in geothermal exploration and utilization plans. This document provides an assessment of the potential economic impact of permitting costs and timelines on geothermal power in California, Nevada, and Utah. Development of geothermal resources requires multi-layered regulatory permitting by local, state, and federal agencies. In this study, we collected and reviewed permit timelines and associated cost data for several existing geothermal power plants as well as for geothermal projects currently undergoing permitting processes for exploration and development activities in California, Nevada, and Utah. We interviewed several geothermal developers and staff from multiple permitting agencies to obtain insight from both sides (i.e., people applying for permits and people processing those applications for California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] and National Environmental Policy Act [NEPA] reviews and other regulatory compliance). The intent of this project was also to identify informative pathways for the geothermal stakeholder community by which the permitting process could be streamlined.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Approach and Model Used to Represent a Timeline Analysis for Security Design Enhancements

Next-generation reactors will be able to use risk to inform and performance base the licensing of many aspects of the reactor, facility, and site design, including attributes of physical security. There are several factors related to security, including site topography, reactor design, and physical protection system components, to consider when designing the physical protection system into the overall facility design and plan of operation. With the versatility of advanced reactors, especially micro reactors, methods are needed to simplify and quickly evaluate potential timelines for designing a site configuration. This report describes an approach to generate qualitative and quantitative insights using a risk-informed simulation. The modeling process is described in detail, focusing on three aspects: (1) the facility mission time (the time required to control the plant until safe), (2) the attacker timeline (the time to potential sabotage), and (3) the response timeline (the time to counter the facility attack). The modeling capabilities also are extended to include facility physical phenomena such as thermal-hydraulics and heat transfer to capture realistic representation of dynamic changes to a facility. While the plant models and examples are hypothetical and do not represent a real facility, these modeling approaches could be used for future security-by-design engineering in advanced reactors. The outputs and insights from the modeling approach may be used to modify and optimize the security posture of a facility by efficiently making modifications to the model and seeing the overall impact from the modification. Lastly, use of the approach described in this report can also provide the technical basis for a physical protection program, describing how the facility and security strategy will cope with off-normal events.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Residential and Small Commercial Solar Photovoltaic and Storage Permitting, Inspection, and Interconnection Timelines: A Retrospective Review (2017-2023)

This report is part of the ongoing Solar Time-Based Residential Analytics and Cycle Time Estimator (SolarTRACE) project, led by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The SolarTRACE project utilizes time-stamped project-level data provided by installer-partners to assess nationwide and AHJ- and utility-level PI&I and other solar PV adoption timelines since 2017. Our dataset now covers 22% of residential solar and 33% of residential storage installs in the U.S. since 2017. This report provides an update to our previous 2022 report (Cruce et al., 2022b) and includes: updated 2017 2023 project timelines for residential rooftop solar PV up to 20kW; updated tracking of permitting process changes at nearly 4,000 AHJs nationwide; and first-ever reporting of timelines for residential PV+storage projects up to 20kW.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Risk Informed Timelines (RIT) v.1.0

Risk Informed Timelines (RIT) is a more modern and holistic method for understanding how access delay timelines are developed and utilized in physical security system evaluations. The software utilizes Bayesian methods to combine subject matter expert judgement and small performance test datasets in a consistent and defensible way. It allows a more holistic view of delay performance that provides distributions of task times and task success probabilities to account for tasks that, if failed, would result in failure of the attack. The RIT methodology is meant to enable security risk managers to begin the transition into more comprehensive delay timeline analysis. Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525. SAND2021-8294 O

Noel, ToddG.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Economic Impact of Permitting Timelines on Produced Geothermal Power

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

EV Charging Infrastructure Energization An Overview of Approaches for Simplifying and Accelerating Timelines to Processing EV Charging Load Service Requests

The United States has seen significant growth in electric vehicle (EV) adoption, leading to increased demand for EV charging infrastructure. Over the past decade, EV charging infrastructure site developers, site hosts, and electric distribution utilities have navigated the process to integrate chargers onto the electric grid. Site developers and site hosts have raised the alarm that the integration process for high-powered EV charging projects does not meet the needs of the EV market for timeliness or cost. High-powered charging stations typically require a load service request or an agreement with the local utility to connect to the grid. The process of energizing a new high-powered charging site can be complex and time-consuming, often taking up to 2 years. This timeline is the result of current utility energization processes having been designed for construction projects that take longer to build (i.e., buildings). The specific challenges stem from various factors, including compartmentalization in application processes, the integration of EV charging process approvals with other distributed energy resources (DERs), and the need to ensure grid reliability. The energization process needs to evolve to meet the growing demand for high-powered EV charging. This white paper compiles information gathered through various conversations with key stakeholders, including utilities, utility regulators, EV charging operators, site developers, and authorities having jurisdiction (AHJ) as well as through an extensive literature review. This document identifies the challenges and provides potential solutions to streamline the process of connecting EV charging infrastructure to the power grid in the United States, serving as a starting point for future conversations around these solutions. The solutions noted in this white paper require collaborative efforts among utilities, regulators, and EV charging infrastructure developers to streamline the grid connection process for EV charging infrastructure. They are broadly organized into four areas: 1. Increase data access and transparency: Develop automated load service request tools, integrate hosting capacity and load service request analyses, incorporate EV adoption forecasts, and provide transparency on the processing queue. 2. Improve energization processes and timing: Create fast-track options based on prescreening criteria, provide flexibility or phased approvals in the load service request/interconnection process, build internal knowledge within utilities about EV charging technologies, and provide standardized workforce training. 3. Promote economic efficiency: Right size distribution components to accurately reflect the load requirements of EV charging infrastructure, make proactive investments in grid infrastructure based on EV adoption forecasts and growth projections, and consider energy equity and environmental justice factors such as equitable access to EV charging when planning infrastructure. 4. Improve grid reliability and resilience: Use load management/power control systems (PCS) at EV charging stations, adopt and implement harmonized standards for communication protocols and information models between the EV charging and grid control infrastructure, and address cybersecurity considerations by implementing robust security measures and standards for EV charging infrastructure—with particular emphasis on clarifying the security requirements for the interface to the grid. The objective of the solutions proposed in this white paper is to accelerate the timeline and decrease costs associated with connecting EV charging infrastructure to the grid. Electric utilities, utility regulators, EV charging infrastructure developers, and site hosts will first need to understand which solutions are available in their service territory, and if warranted, which combination of solutions would support their specific needs. Through the successful implementations of solutions at scale detailed here, industry will demonstrate a new and innovative ecosystem where timely deployment and energization of EV charging infrastructure with greater grid resiliency and reliability is a reality.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2021

Hydropower Licensing Timeline and Cost Dataset

This dataset provides timeline dates, lengths, project characteristics, license characteristics, and costs of hydropower licensing and relicensing for 107 randomly selected hydropower projects that have been issued licenses since 1 October 2005. Projects included in this dataset were licensed but not necessarily constructed. These data were analyzed and presented in Chapters 3 (timeline data) and 5 (cost data) of the Levine et al. (2021) report

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

WLCG Transition from X.509 to Tokens. Status, Plans, and Timeline

Since 2017, the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid (WLCG) has been working towards enabling token-based authentication and authorization throughout its entire middleware stack. Following the initial publication of the WLCG Token Schema v1.0 in 2019, OAuth2.0 token workflows have been integrated across grid middleware. There are many complex challenges to be addressed before the WLCG can be end-to-end token-based, including not just technical hurdles but also interoperability with the wider authentication and authorization landscape. This paper presents the status of the WLCG coordination and deployment work, and how it relates to software providers and partner communities. The authors also detail how the WLCG token transition timeline has progressed, and how it has changed since its publication.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

Realization, Timeline, Challenges and Ultimate Limits of Future Colliders

We present a summary of the Snowmass’21 Accelerator Frontier discussions on the future collider facilities for HEP and possible implementation scenarios and challenges. The main findings of the Implementation Task Force on the required R&D duration and construction cost will be discussed. We also take a look into the possible limits of ultimate colliders in terms of energy, luminosity, size, cost, power, and timeline.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Scenario Exploration and Timeline Analysis for Advanced Reactors [Slides]

Slides created to discuss the report "Approach and Model Used to Represent a Timeline Analysis for Security Design Enhancements" (August 2022 INL/ RPT-22-68664) for an upcoming DOE security workshop. Advanced reactors will be able to use risk insights for many design aspects. We need realistic scenarios for input into the licensing basis safety-case. These scenarios must include timing and physics. We need to automate the safety-case creation as much as possible.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

C-NR Sars-Cov-2 (Covid-19) Timeline

At the onset of the pandemic, then C-NR Group Leader, Felicia Taw, asked Roger A. Meade to compile a timeline of covid events. The following entries are announcements, statements, and email messages from the World Health Organization, the LANL homepage, LANL managers and by C Division manager and staff. Although the entries have been slightly edited and streamlined to enhance readability, they retain many of the original markings.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗