SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “private sector”

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.

196 records · Page 11

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2022

From Farm to Flight: CoverCress as a Low Carbon Intensity Cash Cover Crop for Sustainable Aviation Fuel Production. A Review of Progress Towards Commercialization

Thlaspi arvense L. (Field Pennycress; pennycress) is being converted into a winter-annual oilseed crop that confers cover crop benefits when grown throughout the 12 million-hectares U.S. Midwest. To ensure a fit with downstream market demand, conversion involves not only improvements in yield and maturity through traditional breeding, but also improvements in the composition of the oil and protein through gene editing tools. The conversion process is similar to the path taken to convert rapeseed into Canola. In the case of field pennycress, the converted product that is suitable as a rotational crop is called CoverCress™ as marketed by CoverCress Inc. or golden pennycress if marketed by others. Off-season integration of a CoverCress crop into existing corn and soybean hectares would extend the growing season on established croplands and avoid displacement of food crops or ecosystems while yielding up to 1 billion liters of seed oil annually by 2030, with the potential to grow to 8 billion liters from production in the U.S. Midwest alone. The aviation sector is committed to carbon-neutral growth and reducing emissions of its global market, which in 2019 approached 122 billion liters of consumption in the U.S. and 454 billion liters globally. The oil derived from a CoverCress crop is ideally suited as a new bioenergy feedstock for the production of drop-in Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), renewable diesel, biodiesel and other value-added coproducts. Through a combination of breeding and genomics-enabled mutagenesis approaches, considerable progress has been made in genetically improving yield and other agronomic traits. With USDA-NIFA funding and continued public and private investments, improvements to CoverCress germplasm and agronomic practices suggest that field-scale production can surpass 1,680 kg ha -1 (1,500 lb ac -1 ) in the near term. At current commodity prices, economic modeling predicts this level of production can be profitable across the entire supply chain. Two-thirds of the grain value is in oil converted to fuels and chemicals, and the other one-third is in the meal used as an animal feed, industrial applications, and potential plant-based protein products. In addition to strengthening rural communities by providing income to producers and agribusinesses, cultivating a CoverCress crop potentially offers a myriad of ecosystem services. The most notable service is water quality protection through reduced nutrient leaching and reduced soil erosion. Biodiversity enhancement by supporting pollinators’ health is also a benefit. While the efforts described herein are focused on the U.S., cultivation of a CoverCress crop will likely have a broader application to regions around the world with similar agronomic and environmental conditions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Cost Efficient and Highly Weather-Resistant Solar Panel Backsheet Produced through Continuous Co-Extrusion Processing

The efficient generation and delivery of ‘clean energy” through photovoltaic (PV) technology relies heavily on the cost, performance and reliability of solar panels, along with the individual components used in assembly of those panels. In order to continue towards the Department of Energy’s (DOE) goals of driving costs down, the lifetime of high-output power generation equipment (i.e. solar modules) must be extended to reduce costs associated with power output degradation and replacement of failed or degraded panels. One of the major sources of module failures in the past 30 years has been the failure of the solar panel backsheet. Failure of this component causes severe output losses due to oxidation and yellowing of the module while creating safety concerns as the major electrical insulation of the module is compromised. Tomark-Worthen LLC was formed in 2012 with the goal of designing and manufacturing novel PV backsheets and encapsulants that would be produced in the United States of America and exceed expectations of domestic and international module producers. These backsheets would improve upon known backsheet design failures (i.e. Isovoltaic’s AAA backsheet) and create domestic manufacturing jobs in the PV sector. This goal became a reality with a first-generation product in 2018 and now, with the support of the DOE, Tomark-Worthen has launched a second-generation product known as PhotoMark® Reflections™ 205-3 and 360-3. This 2+ year effort began in late 2017 with a screening of potential polymeric materials and backsheet structural designs. Performance evaluations of each material provided the necessary data needed to select the proper material combinations and move forward into the design of the manufacturing process. These decisions were made by teaming with a local university, well-respected government laboratories, and private research organizations who provided the tools necessary to predict long-term performance of these materials in much shorter periods of time. Once the go/no-go criteria were met at the mid-point of the project, the effort transitioned to predicting 30+ year performance, achieving certifications, and improving manufacturing efficiencies designed to lower costs in order to be competitive in a cost-driven market. Major project accomplishments include recognition of the new backsheet by Underwriters Laboratories (UL) and international certification for 1000V and 1500V modules by TUV Sud. Both 1000V and 1500V products have been proven on several module manufacturing lines and initial customer orders have been received by both domestic and international module producers. Accelerated exposure testing has shown that the performance of this backsheet exceeds the prior polyamide-based backsheet known to fail in the field. Cost-models and initial customer orders have shown the ability to produce this backsheet at a cost acceptable to many domestic manufacturers, while International costs for standard backsheet remains extremely low. Tomark-Worthen remains one of the only U.S. companies manufacturing backsheet domestically and this has drawn interest from many domestic module manufacturers looking to improve their material supply logistics by avoiding long lead times and custom’s headaches while avoiding current tariffs on Chinese-made components. Along with the launch of a new PV backsheet, this project has provided a critical deliverable to the PV R&D community. This deliverable is the knowledge that not all polyamide-containing backsheets are doomed to failure as the earlier versions did. There has been a fear amongst the PV community to consider these materials due to the failure of one design. This effort has brought a new level of interest to the scientific community as it has been shown that polyamides can be used successfully in a well-designed backsheet. As we move forward from this project, we are excited to see how backsheet technology and manufacturing in the U.S. will continue to progress and grow.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Demonstrating Advanced Nuclear Energy Solutions for Net Zero

Background/Objectives. The aggressive goals being set by nation states, communities, and private industry for decarbonization of grid electricity, industrial heat sources, and transportation around the world are imperative to mitigating the devastating effects that we are seeing from climate change. Although many of these goals focus on accomplishments by 2035 or 2050, the decisions that we make today won’t just impact the landscape of energy systems for the next 20 or 30 years—they will shape the world’s environment for centuries to come. That means that we can’t just focus on technologies that will get us to 2050, but technologies that will withstand our energy demands over that long-ranging future. Success will require us to utilize all of the clean energy resources that we have available to meet demands for electricity, heat, and steam, and we will need energy carriers such as hydrogen that do not emit additional greenhouse gases at the point of use. Nuclear energy, ranging from technologies in service today to advanced, higher temperature and modular systems that will be in service this decade, will provide a robust complement to renewable energy resources that operate variably. Researchers across the U.S. Department of Energy laboratory complex are working to advance multiple aspects of these clean energy solutions, with many focusing on integrated energy system solutions that leverage all available clean energy assets to meet wide-ranging energy demands. Approach/Activities. Nuclear energy is a proven, zero-emission option during operation that can provide consistent, dispatchable power to meet electricity demands while also providing high-quality heat that can meet energy demands beyond the electricity sector. Energy system design should seek to maximize these assets. As a dispatchable energy source with a small land utilization footprint, nuclear energy can be collocated with renewable resources, and the smaller systems that will be deployed this decade (ranging from a few megawatts to hundreds of megawatts) can be installed right where that energy is needed. Integrated nuclear and renewable systems will enhance power grid reliability and resilience, and they will help stabilize the grid through their increasingly flexible operation. Licensing, installation, and broad adoption of these advanced nuclear energy systems are expected to progress significantly in the 2020s, but this may be longer than desired by some stakeholders wishing to implement impactful clean energy decisions today. However, one must recall that nuclear energy systems will operate for 80 or more years, as is being demonstrated by current fleet nuclear systems. The nuclear community is extremely thorough in reviewing these systems with regard to safety and security; these efforts ensure that the deployed systems will continue to provide reliable, resilient energy over that operational lifetime. That investment of time up front will ensure that we can support energy demands over the centuries to come. While advanced nuclear technologies move through this process, communities and private industry may choose to install renewable generation systems that can later be coupled to the complementary nuclear systems as they become available—thus moving closer to the net zero goals in the near term. Choosing technologies and deployment configurations that allow small modular nuclear powerhouses to be added to these “energy parks” as they become available will ensure that advanced technologies can be readily adopted to support growing demands for clean energy. Results/Lessons Learned. The primary focus of integrated energy systems (IES) research is to assess the technical and economic potential of novel multi-input, multioutput solutions that are expected to enhance energy system flexibility, reliability, and resilience as we pursue a clean energy transition. Various energy applications and product streams beyond electricity are being evaluated, ranging from generation of potable water to production of hydrogen, fertilizers, synthetic fuels, and various chemicals. In early FY23 Idaho National Laboratory (INL) will commission thermal energy generation systems that emulate nuclear fission energy input using electric heating and will allow for integrated system testing with thermal energy storage, hydrogen production via high temperature electrolysis (HTE), and power systems hardware to demonstrate operation of a clean energy park within a microgrid or larger grid infrastructure, supporting up to 450 kW of heat input via electric heating and demonstrating operation of HTE systems at the multi-hundred kW scale. This presentation will highlight the wide array of RD&D being conducted at INL and partner laboratories to develop and deploy nuclear and renewable-based IES that will be key to achieving our net zero goals, including both computational and experimental demonstrations. By working with key collaborators in industry, analytical st

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2020

Financing Microgrids in the Federal Sector

Recent high-impact events such as hurricanes and wildfires highlight the need for energy system resilience. One potential impact of these events is the loss of utility grid power to federal sites, negatively affecting the ability to carry out their missions. Depending on the need to sustain critical functions, it may be important to continue operations during an outage of the electric grid, or at least have power restored quickly after the event. One approach to addressing this need is through a microgrid. Microgrids can provide a more reliable solution than the traditional approach of using a backup generator at individual buildings. A microgrid can enhance a site’s electrical power system during normal operations, as well as provide reliable backup power to critical loads when electric utility power is interrupted. Many times, certain components of a microgrid (and potentially the entire system) can be justified economically and paid for out of energy savings or avoided costs. In cases where savings can cover the project costs, one of several privately financed procurement mechanisms may be used to implement the project. Procurement options available to all federal agencies include utility energy services contracts (UESC), energy savings performance contracts (ESPC), and utility services contracts (USC); other mechanisms such as a power purchase agreement (PPA), enhanced use lease (EUL), and utility privatization (UP) may also be useful to agencies that have the authority to use them. Implementing a microgrid in a comprehensive effort that also includes energy efficiency can provide an important savings component, while reducing power requirements for critical loads, thus reducing the cost of the microgrid and associated distributed energy resources (DER). However, it can be difficult to achieve enough savings and avoided costs to cover the entire microgrid system, so leveraging these avoided costs in combination with appropriated funds may be necessary to implement the full project. When a site is deciding if a microgrid is the best solution, activities early in the process include identifying critical loads and existing DERs, conversations with the local electric utility, and implementation options that work best for the agency and site. This paper explores procurement options and agreements that may be useful to federal agencies interested in implementing microgrids at their sites. Microgrid complexities, implementation considerations, and suggestions to get started are also discussed. This information will be most useful to agencies when they are exploring electric energy system resilience options and/or considering different procurement options to meet their needs.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Financing Microgrids in the Federal Sector

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2025

Advancing Urban Water Resilience: Coproducing Knowledge through Civic–Academic Global Partnerships on Water and Climate

As extreme weather events become more pronounced, the vulnerabilities associated with the urban water supply and wastewater systems in megacities are intensified in multiple interconnected dimensions. These multifaceted water challenges can benefit from enhanced cross-sectoral collaboration and sharing of critical knowledge, which are essential for sustainable and adaptive water governance frameworks. In this context, the Megacity Alliance for Water and Climate (MAWAC)–Europe and North America Region (ENAR) Working Group convened a workshop in March 2023, followed by a subsequent workshop in London, United Kingdom, from 11 to 13 September 2024. These workshops aimed to investigate and devise solutions for the cascading hazards with water systems. The solutions examined various aspects focused on climate adaptation and mitigation, stormwater management, and the governance of water and wastewater systems. Additionally, discussions highlighted the importance of community engagement, economic considerations, equity, and effective communication in addressing these pressing challenges. Over the course of 3 days, experts from academia, government agencies, and industry engaged in meaningful discussions on digital modeling for integrated water management, climate-informed urban planning, and public–private–academic partnerships (Fig. 1). Case studies from cities such as New York, Los Angeles, London, Paris, and Chicago highlighted innovative governance strategies for managing water and wastewater systems, promoting water reuse, planning infrastructure, and fostering stakeholder-driven and stakeholder-informed adaptation. The workshop participants emphasized the need for data-driven decision-making, scalable governance models, and knowledge-sharing networks to enhance urban water governance for sustainability and resilience. This workshop report presents the key takeaways from the 3-day convening, providing a roadmap for integrating scientific research, policy frameworks, and emerging technologies to address water challenges faced by megacities.

Hydrologic models↗

DOE OSTI2022

Advancing Clean Energy Equity

This year’s Financial Innovations Roundtable (June 16-17, 2022) focused on advancing clean energy equity and was co-hosted by the University of New Hampshire's Carsey School of Public Policy and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Clean energy technologies are better than ever, with costs continuing to decline. Yet the low-income and under-resourced communities – particularly communities of color, Native communities, and other traditionally marginalized populations – that are disproportionately impacted by climate and severe weather-related events lag in clean energy investments. Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) have a long track record of providing access to capital to low- and moderate-income communities nationwide. Green Banks, established at state and local levels, use innovative financing to attract private capital and incentivize investments in clean and renewable energy. Together, the nation's network of more than 1,300 CDFIs and 21 Green Banks have the financing expertise and deep market understanding and relationships to finance a transition to clean energy. This event explored how Green Banks and CDFIs can funnel creditworthy projects to market and efficiently raise capital for them. Building on the Carsey School White Paper, Clean Energy Project Development for Low-Income Communities: Strengthening the Ecosystem for Delivering Solar Energy and Deep Efficiency Retrofits (Hangen, 2022), the FIR sought to identify options and create opportunities for Green Banks, CDFIs, and impact investors to collaborate in offering a range of products, approaches, and tools to better serve communities and individuals who have thus far been left out of the transition to clean energy. The event had 101 participants from a variety of sectors including CDFIs, Green Banks, mission-driven clean energy organizations, government agencies, banks, and impact investment professionals.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Novel technologies for emission reduction complement conservation agriculture to achieve negative emissions from row-crop production

Plants remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis. Because agriculture’s productivity is based on this process, a combination of technologies to reduce emissions and enhance soil carbon storage can allow this sector to achieve net negative emissions while maintaining high productivity. Unfortunately, current row-crop agricultural practice generates about 5% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States and European Union. Here, to reduce these emissions, significant effort has been focused on changing farm management practices to maximize soil carbon. In contrast, the potential to reduce emissions has largely been neglected. Through a combination of innovations in digital agriculture, crop and microbial genetics, and electrification, we estimate that a 71% (1,744 kg CO 2 e/ha) reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from row crop agriculture is possible within the next 15 y. Importantly, emission reduction can lower the barrier to broad adoption by proceeding through multiple stages with meaningful improvements that gradually facilitate the transition to net negative practices. Emerging voluntary and regulatory ecosystems services markets will incentivize progress along this transition pathway and guide public and private investments toward technology development. In the difficult quest for net negative emissions, all tools, including emission reduction and soil carbon storage, must be developed to allow agriculture to maintain its critical societal function of provisioning society while, at the same time, generating environmental benefits.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

Implementation of an ICS Ransomware Testbed: Scenarios, Variants, and Evaluation Methods

Ransomware attacks on Industrial Control Systems (ICS) have emerged as a formidable threat to the United States’ critical infrastructure, eliciting grave concerns regarding national security. In March 2023, the FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) unveiled its 2022 Internet Crime Report, highlighting a concerning 870 complaints related to ransomware impacting U.S. critical infrastructure. Of the country's 16 critical infrastructure sectors, 14 encountered at least one ransomware attack. Notably, while the Healthcare and Public Health sector suffered the most, reporting 210 attacks, sectors pivotal to ICS networks and governmental organizations were also targeted: the Defense Industrial Base reported 1 attack, Water and Wastewater Systems 3, Chemical 19, Energy 15, Government Facilities 115, and Critical Manufacturing 157. For instance, a ransomware attack on a major chemical company could jeopardize not only its production but also pose environmental risks should systems controlling hazardous materials be compromised. In 2022, three ransomware variants predominantly targeted U.S. critical infrastructure: HIVE, with 87 attacks; ALPHV/BlackCat, with 114; and LOCKBIT, with 149. Several cyber-attacks, such as the MOVEit data breach in May 2023 and the Colonial Pipeline ransomware attack in May 2021, have been so impactful that they commanded national attention. The DarkSide hacking group's assault on the Colonial Pipeline, initiated on May 6th, 2021, stands as one of the most substantial and publicly acknowledged cyber-attacks against U.S. critical infrastructure. The group exploited an exposed Virtual Private Network (VPN) password, paving the way for initial intrusion and subsequent data theft. A mere day later, DarkSide unleashed a ransomware attack that compromised vital accounting and billing systems, prompting an immediate shutdown of the pipeline to mitigate further ransomware proliferation across its network. This crisis spurred a robust response from the U.S. president and regulators, culminating in a national emergency declaration related to the pipeline shutdown on May 9th, 2021. This incident mirrors the 2017 NotPetya ransomware attack that significantly impacted the shipping giant Maersk, highlighting an urgent need for fortified cybersecurity across various industries. Future incidents, akin to the Colonial Pipeline attack, could potentially be mitigated—or entirely averted—should government agencies and private entities scrutinize system vulnerabilities, exploring various ransomware types and entry points. Proactive measures, such as conducting experiments on VPN accounts or auditing passwords to pinpoint duplicate usage across diverse systems and software, might illuminate feasible entry points and vulnerability zones within an organization's systems.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Thermal Reservoir Networks for Modularly Expandable Thermal Microgrids

The Department of Defense (DoD) faces the substantial challenge of cost-effectively retrofitting one to two installations per month, each comprising approximately 1,000 buildings, to improve resilience, reduce energy consumption, and enhance energy supply security. Achieving these objectives requires optimal system selection and effective risk mitigation during system integration. To address this need, we introduce Platform-Based Design (PBD), a structured, hierarchical methodology adapted from other industrial sectors to the domain of energy system retrofits. We demonstrate the effectiveness of PBD through a techno-economic feasibility study comparing geothermal-coupled thermal energy networks (TENs) with conventional energy systems for heating, cooling, and powering 17 buildings at Joint Base Andrews (JBA) in Maryland. Our analysis illustrates that the PBD approach enables rigorous, data-driven, sequential decision making, resulting in a family of Pareto-optimal systems, among which the TEN emerged as the most promising solution. The selected TEN design integrates geothermal borefields, heat recovery heat pumps, photovoltaic (PV) arrays, and battery storage. Compared to the baseline system – gas heating combined with air-source chillers – the proposed TEN reduces annual imported energy by 74% and peak electricity demand by 45%, achieves a levelized cost of energy of $\$0.210$/kWh, and substantially enhances resilience. Life-cycle costs increase by approximately 6%, and initial investment costs are about 2.5 times higher than the baseline. However, if central plant infrastructure, district loops, and utility-scale PV and battery systems are privately funded and operated, the initial investment would fall below the baseline system cost. Critical to achieving these significant performance improvements were detailed nonlinear dynamic simulations coupling geothermal heat transfer, energy system operation, and realistic feedback control logic. These simulations identified essential design modifications and control strategy refinements that substantially reduced energy use, peak demand, and compressor shortcycling, thereby improving durability and reliability—issues that would have been significantly more expensive to resolve during operation. Additionally, the verification step highlighted sensitivities to key design parameters that could reduce initial investment by approximately $\$2$ million and reduce annual life-cycle costs more than $\$300,000$. We recommend adopting the PBD methodology for future feasibility studies and TEN pilot projects to gain valuable operational experience. Furthermore, we recommend that DoD invest in transferring and scaling the PBD methodology to other installations. This entails developing standardized computational frameworks and component libraries as well as training industry in conducting PBD. Such investments would enable rapid, robust, reliable, and cost-effective retrofits, supporting DoD’s ambitious energy system modernization goals.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2024

MultiSector Dynamics: 2023 Inaugural Workshop Report

Preface The MultiSector Dynamics (MSD) Community of Practice (CoP) hosted an inaugural workshop on October 3-5, 2023 at the University of California, Davis, to bring together members of the MSD community of practice to advance understanding of the co-evolution of human and natural systems, and to build the next generation of tools that bridge sectors, scales, and systems to realize a more resilient and equitable future. The theme of the workshop was "Advancing Complex Adaptive Human-Earth Systems Science in a World of Interconnected Risks". This document outlines the motivation for the workshop, its goals and objectives, the application process, the agenda, overviews of the training sessions offered to the workshop participants and a summary of each breakout session. The MSD workshop report further discusses the feedback from workshop participants and presents some reflections and next steps. The MSD Workshop organizers thank the DOE Office of Science, Earth and Environmental System Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics program area for financial support of its activities through the Integrated Multisector Multiscale Modeling (IM3) project. For more information related to the broader DOE MultiSector Dynamics Program please see https://climatemodeling.science.energy.gov/program-area/multisector-dynamics. D.L.M. and C.M.B. acknowledge support from the Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the US Department of Energy (DOE). Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither theUnited States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, complete- ness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, process, or service by trade name,trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory operated by Battelle for the United States Department of Energy Available from:Office of Scientific and Technical Information http://www.OSTI.gov multisectordynamics.org This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4 Suggested citation: Monier, E., Reed, P.M., Vernon, C.R., Hadjimichael, A., Brelsford, C.M., Burleyson, C.B., Dyreson, A.R., Fletcher, S.M., Giang, A., Gupta, R.S., Jackson, N.D., Jones, A.D., Lamontagne, J.R., McCollum, D.L., Morris, J.F., Moss, R.H., Peng, W., Saari, R.K., Srikrishnan, V., Szinai, J.K., Yoon, J. (2024) MultiSector Dynamics: 2023 Inaugural Workshop Report. MSD-LIVE Data Repository. doi:10.57931/2371710.

Monier, Erwan↗

DOE OSTI2020

Batteries Annual Progress Report (FY2019)

The Vehicle Technologies Office (VTO) of the Department of Energy (DOE) conducts research and development (R&D) on advanced transportation technologies that would reduce the nation’s use of imported oil and would also lead to reductions in harmful emissions. Technologies supported by VTO include electric drive components such as advanced energy storage devices (primarily batteries), power electronics and electric drive motors, advanced structural materials, energy efficient mobility systems, advanced combustion engines, and fuels. VTO is focused on funding early-stage high-reward/high-risk research to improve critical components needed for more fuel efficient (and cleaner-operating) vehicles. One of the major VTO objectives is to enable U.S. innovators to rapidly develop the next generation of technologies that achieve the cost, range, and charging infrastructure necessary for the widespread adoption of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs). An important prerequisite for the electrification of the nation’s light duty transportation sector is development of more cost-effective, longer lasting, and more abuse-tolerant PEV batteries. One of the ultimate goals of this research, consistent with the current vehicle electrification trend, is an EV which can provide the full driving performance, convenience, and price of an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle. To achieve this, VTO has established the following overarching goal (Source: FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification1): …identify new battery chemistry and cell technologies with the potential to reduce the cost of electric vehicle battery packs by more than half, to less than $100/kWh (ultimate goal is $60/kWh battery cell cost), increase range to 300 miles, and decrease charge time to 15 minutes or less by 2028. VTO works with key U.S. automakers through the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) – an umbrella organization for collaborative research consisting of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA), the Ford Motor Company, and General Motors. Collaboration with automakers through the partnership known as U.S. Driving Research and Innovation for Vehicle Efficiency and Energy Sustainability (U.S. DRIVE) attempts to enhance the relevance and the success potential of its research portfolio. VTO competitively selects projects for funding through funding opportunity announcements (FOAs). Directly-funded work at the national laboratories are awarded competitively through a lab-call process. During the past year, VTO continued R&D in support of PEVs. Stakeholders for VTO R&D include universities, national laboratories, other government agencies and industry (including automakers, battery manufacturers, material suppliers, component developers, private research firms, and small businesses). This document summarizes the progress of VTO battery R&D projects supported during the fiscal year 2019 (FY 2019).

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2022

The pursuit of net-positive sustainability for industrial decarbonization with hybrid energy systems

We report signatories of the Paris Agreement are set to miss their climate targets. The net-zero pledges announced to date across many countries and private industries are insufficient to achieve carbon neutrality, which requires implementation of far-reaching and significantly scaled-up climate-positive actions. All technology options that pertain to deep decarbonization and carbon removal must be part of the mitigation portfolio. Transformative action plans must be established in which every individual/organization around the globe is an actor of changes in relation to net-zero goals. Such plans must involve governmental policy support but also encourage voluntary efforts to boost innovations, investments, initiatives, and behavioral changes. Recognition of these efforts is made quantifiable with the concepts of carbon handprint and net positivity. This paper presents a carbon handprint perspective on characterizing the environmental benefits of hybrid energy systems (HESs)—a widely applicable solution to cleaner production leveraging the capabilities of a portfolio of low-carbon energy sources—that provide heat and electricity to industrial processes. First, the carbon handprint and net positivity concepts and their calculation approach are introduced. The state of the art of HES-enabled industrial cogeneration is then surveyed, and the greenhouse gas emission intensities of different energy sources that power HESs are compared. Next, drawing on a case study about a US chemical facility's voluntary initiative to explore replacing its fossil fuel–based cogeneration infrastructure with a clean energy–generated HES, several technically viable scenarios are evaluated—especially those with small modular nuclear reactors—to illustrate how the positive-thinking handprint approach helps encourage and inform the search for widespread influence pathways in pursuit of net-positive sustainability. Finally, current knowledge gaps in the case study are identified, and opportunities to scale up the proposed handprint-based analysis are outlined with consideration of an expanded role of HESs in fulfilling climate objectives.It is envisioned that like-minded decision makers in the industry sector and beyond will adopt this perspective and act synergistically to enhance their environmental stewardship through voluntary actions and make greater contributions to the planet's climate future.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2022

Mitigate: An Adaptive Network Data Anonymization Tool Using Condensation-Based Differential Privacy

Modern network devices collect a large amount of data that can be analyzed to identify bottlenecks, anomalies, cyber-attacks, etc. Therefore, there is often a need to analyze such collections of network data quite often by an external expert or by the research community. However, these collections of data contain sensitive, proprietary information. In order for the network data to be shared, it must first be anonymized. The overall objective of this project is to develop an innovative privacy management tool to anonymize network data and achieve sufficient privacy, acceptable data utility, and efficient data analysis at the same time. No existing anonymization methods can achieve all of these at the same time. The core of this technology is a differential private clustering algorithm that provides strong privacy protection, preserves data properties important for subsequent analysis, and allows the party receiving the anonymized data to conduct analysis directly on anonymized data without the need of decryption or any extra processing. The research carried out was to design, implement and verify a solution to this problem by completing the following tasks: 1) developing the core technology; 2) developing a context based method that automatically recommends fields that must be anonymized; 3) conducted experiments showing superior results using our approach compared to existing tools, and 4) developed an intuitive but basic user interface. The research that was conducted generated novel algorithmic techniques that utilize state-of-the-art methods such as condensation, differential privacy preservation, clustering, automated tuning based on contextual awareness, and recommendation techniques to specify columns to users for anonymization leading to optimal privacy that allows research analysis on the dataset. Experiments were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of these novel algorithmic techniques by performing analysis on original non-anonymized datasets, then conducting analysis on the same yet anonymized datasets and comparing the results of the analyses. Overall, the anonymized analysis results were within 1% of the original results, verifying that the generated technology not only guarantees a high level of privacy but also enables research analysis as if it were conducted on the original dataset. Potential applications of this technology include anonymization of any type of structured network datasets that contain sensitive identifiers, such as IP addresses, that can be used in multiple applications. For example, to create an AI or machine learning model for cyber security, e.g., to detect attacks, or for performance analysis, e.g., identify bottlenecks or predict performance. In addition, a market analysis that was conducted for potential applications of this technology identified a broader range of applications of our anonymization technology beyond the network sector that includes healthcare, banking, insurance, securities, finance (FISB), data brokering, cloud services, ad sales, and government.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

Onshore U.S. Carbon Pipeline Deployment: Siting, Safety, and Regulation

Carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) technology has significant potential to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and mitigate the impact of climate change, particularly in hard to decarbonize industrial and commercial sectors. CCUS involves capturing carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) from industrial processes or power generation and utilizing it for other purposes, such as enhanced oil recovery (EOR), or storing the captured CO 2 underground. CCUS technology can reduce the environmental impact of continued fossil fuel use while smoothing the transition to a low-carbon economy. CCUS can create new economic opportunities, such as the development of new industries and job creation, and can enhance energy security by diversifying energy sources. For these reasons, enabling CCUS has become a key objective of the Biden-Harris administration’s clean energy policy and has received bipartisan support. Despite its environmental and economic potential, CCUS faces multiple barriers to widespread deployment. One of the main challenges is the high cost and technical difficulty of implementing and operating large-scale CCUS infrastructure. CCUS remains a relatively expensive way to reduce carbon emissions (e.g., compared to solar photovoltaic technology’s displacement of coal generation). Additionally, financial incentives and supportive policies like those enacted to support solar photovoltaic development, especially at the state level, are inconsistent or nonexistent, which can discourage investment in CCUS projects. There are also technical challenges associated with safe and secure underground CO 2 storage and the development of new carbon utilization technologies. Public opposition to various aspects of CCUS technologies, ranging from concerns that CCUS will extend reliance on fossil fuels to CCUS infrastructure being sited in disadvantaged communities, is a growing challenge. This paper focuses on another significant barrier to broad CCUS deployment: the need for considerable expansion of the dedicated land-based CO 2 pipeline network in the United States to meet CCUS goals and the unique regulatory challenges to its development. To reach carbon emissions targets in the United States by 2050, CCUS technology will need to be supported by tens of thousands of miles of CO 2 pipelines. Estimates range from a minimum of roughly 29,000 pipeline miles (according to a 2020 Great Plains Institute study) to 66,000 pipeline miles (as per a 2021 Princeton University–led study). As of October 2022, however, the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) reports fewer than 5,400 miles of U.S. pipelines carrying CO 2 . This deficit—and what it means for the prospect of moving substantially larger quantities of CO 2 from source to use or storage—threatens to stifle the development of CCUS projects and technologies identified as an important tool to meet emissions targets. The current regulatory landscape facing CO 2 pipeline development can best be described as uncertain. At the federal level, the U.S. DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) oversees safety regulation of pipelines transporting hazardous materials, including CO 2 upon commencement of operation. However, PHMSA’s definition of CO 2 as “a fluid consisting of more than 90 percent CO 2 molecules compressed to a supercritical state” has not been updated since its 1991 addition to the Federal Register. Because CO 2 can be transported in a gaseous, liquid, or supercritical state (indeed, the physical state of CO 2 can fluctuate within a single pipeline due to environmental changes), doubts persist about the extent of PHMSA’s purview—and raise questions about what, if anything, states should do to address this apparent gap. PHMSA has begun a major revision of its existing rules, but the agency does not expect a first draft before 2024. Economic oversight of CO 2 pipelines is even less clear. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and Surface Transportation Board (STB)—which regulate the rates of interstate oil/natural gas and non-energy pipelines, respectively—have both declined jurisdiction over interstate CO 2 pipelines. This presumably leaves economic regulation to state and/or local governments, but few if any states have the laws or resources in place to oversee just and reasonable rates. Further, the interstate nature of CO 2 pipeline development creates questions around how different states should align their rate-making decisions. Onshore U.S. Carbon Pipeline Deployment: Siting, Safety, and Regulation Currently, regulatory responsibilities regarding CO 2 pipeline siting and permitting fall to state and local governments. The variety of laws and regulations across the country, however, creates a maze of requirements for pipeline developers to navigate. To secure necessary permits, most states require pipeline companies to be “common carriers” that provide transport service to the public at uniform rates. However, the specific definition of that term varies. Some states require clear evidence that a pipeline services the public, while others automatically deem any pipeline company transporting energy products or hazardous materials to be a “common carrier”—with little consideration for accessibility to third parties. Other states have eschewed common-carrier terminology entirely, placing private and publicly accessible pipelines on equal footing. Much like the variation in common-carrier requirements, laws governing eminent domain authority to secure rights-of-way (ROW) to commence construction on a planned pipeline route differ by state. Several states have no laws or rules governing CO 2 pipelines. In addition to creating questions about whether long-standing rules for other pipelines (e.g., natural gas or petroleum products) apply to CO 2 , this policy vacuum leaves local governments as the sole authority over sections of pipe within their boundaries. With dozens of counties along a given route, the probability of inconsistent regulation of the same pipeline is significant. Even in states with CO 2 pipeline laws in place, local regulatory attempts to address rising concerns over pipeline routing and safety have triggered lawsuits by pipeline companies seeking to delimit areas of federal, state, and local government responsibility. Meanwhile, legislators across the country have introduced bills to restrict the application of eminent domain to CO 2 pipeline projects, which could threaten a key means of securing ROW that companies cannot secure through negotiation with landowners. Taken separately, any of these regulatory issues—the narrow federal definition of CO 2 , FERC’s and STB’s decisions that CO 2 pipelines are not within their jurisdiction, and the considerable variation in state and local governments’ laws regulating CO 2 pipeline technologies—are extremely difficult to resolve. Adding the required scale of CO 2 pipeline expansion and the currently identified narrow window of time in which to reach climate target goals, the task becomes even more difficult—and raises a host of urgent questions for regulators. How should CO 2 be defined in federal regulations to ensure consistent safety standards across the country? What is the potential impact radius of a CO 2 pipeline rupture, and how should that inform local emergency response? In the absence of centralized federal oversight, what should state legislatures do to increase alignment for interstate CO 2 pipeline projects? This paper intends to serve as a primer for regulators and stakeholders who seek to better understand the regulatory challenges and opportunities facing this critical infrastructure.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗