SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Report prepared for NDEP
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
In this talk, INL will discuss how to develop a cyber supply chain risk management program, to include assessment of vendor risk and applying appropriate mitigations. INL will discuss key risk factors and the challenges of securing supply chain in complex and dynamic vendor environments. Finally, INL will share example language that can be adopted in RFPs and procurement contracts to promote supply chain security.
Final report
Energy systems function as both technological systems and temporal institutions that shape how societies coordinate, justify, and support collective choices over time. This paper introduces the concept of governance horizons to explain why energy transitions can remain morally supported yet become institutionally weak under increasing pressure. We argue that governability depends on institutions' capacity to synchronize across multiple timeframes - aligning short-term decisions with intermediate coordination and long-term commitments. When this synchronization fails, transitions struggle not because their goals are dismissed, but because governance lacks sufficient time to justify, coordinate, and uphold decisions. Comparative analysis of San Antonio, Texas, and Interior Alaska reveals how energy system pressures generate distinct temporal configurations: San Antonio exhibits governance horizon stretching, where institutions must simultaneously meet near-term reliability demands and long-term transformation goals, while Interior Alaska exhibits horizon compression, where extreme environmental constraints force decision-making into short stabilization cycles. In both contexts, public support for sustainability goals coexists with institutional strain because evaluative judgments are unevenly distributed over time. A temporal configuration analysis is introduced as a diagnostic analytic stance for identifying these patterns. By treating temporal alignment as an explanatory variable rather than a background condition, this approach clarifies how feasibility, sequencing, and legitimacy are shaped by constraints on institutional time. The analysis demonstrates that successful energy transitions depend not only on technological innovation or institutional support, but on governance systems’ ability to sustain credible coordination across multiple time horizons.
Scientific discovery is being revolutionized by AI and autonomous systems, yet current autonomous laboratories remain isolated islands unable to collaborate across institutions. We present the Autonomous Interconnected Science Lab Ecosystem (AISLE), a grassroots network transforming fragmented capabilities into a unified system that shorten the path from ideation to innovation to impact and accelerates discovery from decades to months. AISLE addresses five critical dimensions: (1) cross-institutional equipment orchestration, (2) intelligent data management with FAIR compliance, (3) AI-agent driven orchestration grounded in scientific principles, (4) interoperable agent communication interfaces, and (5) AI/ML-integrated scientific education. By connecting autonomous agents across institutional boundaries, autonomous science can unlock research spaces inaccessible to traditional approaches while democratizing cutting-edge technologies. This paradigm shift toward collaborative autonomous science promises breakthroughs in sustainable energy, materials development, and public health.
The Geothermal Entrepreneurship Organization launched in 2019 with the goal of building a geothermal innovation ecosystem at the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin), and in the State of Texas at large. The theses underlying the work of GEO were 1) that with targeted advocacy, recruitment, organization, and coalition building, research institutions with legacy excellence in petroleum and geosystems engineering could become engines of geothermal innovation, research and development; 2) that startups were the appropriate vehicle to speed these innovations from the lab into the field, and building a geothermal startup ecosystem in Texas would not only advance next generation geothermal concepts into the field, but also help spur oil and gas engagement in the space, and 3) that with targeted engagement, education, and recruitment across stakeholders in the oil and gas industry and the State of Texas generally, the oil and gas industry, and other legacy oil and gas entities in the State could become sources of large scale deployment of geothermal energy. The overall goal was to create a ‘snowball’ effect, where targeted impactful actions would catalyze self-sustaining, organic growth of a new geothermal ecosystem in the State of Texas. That goal was achieved through GEO’s work. To test its theses, GEO began work by interviewing and recruiting UT Austin faculty and alumni into geothermal. At the beginning of the GEO project, there was no geothermal activity ongoing within the UT Austin Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Department, the Bureau of Economic Geology, or the Jackson School of Geoscience, and many faculty approached had not before considered how their skillsets might apply in the space. By the end of the project period, three major research consortia focused on geothermal were launched as a result of GEO’s work, one at the Bureau of Economic Geology, one within the Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Department, and another organized by GEO across six research institutions across the State of Texas, called the Texas Geothermal Institute. Geothermal curricula was launched at UT Austin, and UT Austin began attracting new geothermal enthusiasts into its faculty, including Dr. Silviu Livescu, former Chief Scientist of Baker Hughes. Startups recruited and mentored by GEO launched, raised funding, and deployed (or are currently deploying) their concepts in the field. By the end of the project period, the GEO concept expanded to faculty beyond UT Austin to other institutions, like Texas A&M, the University of Houston, and Rice University, and geothermal engagement began at those institutions as well. Multiple faculty members and alumni across these institutions launched geothermal startup companies, launched geothermal research consortia, and/or began teaching geothermal courses. In 2020, GEO launched what was to become the largest geothermal conference in the world by its second year, ‘PIVOT – From Hydrocarbons to Heat’, and the resulting momentum catalyzed the Society of Petroleum Engineers to launch a geothermal technical section, drove more startups to launch out of the ecosystem, and drove actors in the State of Texas, NGOs, and stakeholders globally to become engaged. Riding this momentum, the Texas Geothermal Energy Alliance was launched, the first ever industry association dedicated to advancing geothermal energy in the State of Texas. The Texas geothermal ecosystem after only two years of building and support is now robust, quickly growing, and self-sustaining. By 2021, the Texas geothermal ecosystem had attracted the attention of philanthropists, funding entities, media, and influencers outside of Texas, and GEO’s executive director was invited to give a TED talk about oil and gas engagement in building the future of geothermal energy, which elevated the success of the ecosystem to a global audience.
Over the past twenty-one years, the Financial Innovations Roundtable (FIR), located at the Carsey School of Public Policy at the University of New Hampshire, has worked to address problems related to access to capital for low- and moderate-income consumers and communities. Since 2014, the event has been co-hosted by the Federal Reserve Board. The FIR works with a range of financial institutions, government agencies, foundations, and trade associations to access their expertise for problem-solving discussions. The 2020 FIR focused on the expanding field of climate finance and was co-hosted by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and The Climate Safe Lending Network. The event was originally slated to be in-person in San Francisco in May 2020 but was postponed due to the pandemic and shifted to an online event hosted November 16‒17, 2020. A significant amount has happened in 2020 on climate finance, racial justice, the economy, and COVID-19. The shocks and stresses of climate change are creating risks in low- and moderate-income communities as well as in the financial sector broadly. The 2020 FIR offered an opportunity to discuss the challenges and opportunities banks and Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) face as they address these risks and how these institutions can help increase individual, institutional, and community-wide resilience. The program explored new and modified products that address climate risk in communities and how those products can be scaled. Conversations focused around: • The progress that has been made in the climate finance field and the challenges that lie ahead for financial institutions’ climate impact and climate-related risk. • Promising opportunities to decarbonize investments and finance low-carbon technology and infrastructure. • How lenders, insurers, housing organizations, and the public sector can work together to reduce housing instability due to climate-related factors and increase the climate-resilience of homes and neighborhoods. • Solutions to help communities address a wide range of related issues, including home weatherization and disaster preparation, home insurance loss, and climate gentrification and displacement. • Discussing lessons learned from other sectors such as renewable energy in order to design both people-based and place-based finance solutions that promote racial and economic inclusion. 1 • The need for all financial institutions to acknowledge that climate risks and racial inequity are systemic risks affecting their bottom line. • The role that bank regulators can play in promoting collaboration across the financial sector and in leading by example with regard to climate finance. • Mapping out concrete action-item initiatives including policy and industry pathways to climate safe lending as well as building a financing platform to provide clean energy to low-income communities. • More broadly, in order to systemically address climate risks, we will need to work together as a range of stakeholders across sectors and collaborate on shared goals and projects.
Hydrological extremes are intensifying globally, increasing the complexity of decisions required to ensure water security. Advances in hydrological science, modeling, and data systems have expanded the technical frontier of water research, yet uptake of scientific insights in policy and management decisions remains limited. This persistent science–policy gap is not primarily a failure of knowledge generation or robustness, but an institutional challenge shaped by how scientific and governance systems are organized, coordinated, and connected to support the effective use of scientific knowledge. These challenges are particularly pronounced in multi-level and transboundary water governance, where decisions span jurisdictions and require coordination across institutional and political boundaries. We synthesize research at the science–policy interface and evidence from water security initiatives to show how institutional arrangements, scientific tool development, and research practices enable or constrain the sustained use of scientific knowledge in water-security governance processes. Building on these insights, we develop ‘shared decision infrastructure’ as a framing to describe how scientific knowledge is embedded within the institutional, relational, and procedural arrangements that connect science to decision-making processes over time. We translate this framing into a practical intervention roadmap centered on institutional design, tool translation, sustained co-production, and outcome-oriented evaluation to support the integration of science into ongoing governance processes. By positioning science as shared decision infrastructure, the roadmap clarifies how researchers can design scientific efforts that support more coordinated, accountable, and adaptive water security decisions amid deepening uncertainty.
We report the 24th workshop on magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) stability control was held on the Columbia University campus 28–30th October, 2019. The purpose of this annual workshop is to discuss cutting edge results and form future plans for active control of MHD instabilities in magnetic confinement fusion reactor concepts. The program was organized by an international committee of representatives from Auburn University (USA), Columbia University (USA), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (USA), Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (USA), Princeton University (USA), Tottori University (Japan), Kyoto Institute of Technology (Japan), National Institute of Radiological Sciences (Japan), National Institute for Fusion Science (Japan), Institutes of Physical Science—Chinese Academy of Sciences (People's Republic of China), and Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (Italian Republic). Dr Gerald Navratil and Columbia University, in particular, were responsible for organizing and hosting the meeting on their beautiful Morningside Heights campus.
High-reliability systems are characterized by catastrophic implications in the event of failure. These implications can include substantive damage to the environment, social order, and loss of life. Examples of high-reliability systems include nuclear submarines, nuclear reactors, the electric grid, and nuclear weapons. Due to the catastrophic implications of failure, there are heightened awareness and control mechanisms surrounding related data and information. However, defining the difference between data and information is often ambiguous across scholarly disciplines and in United States policy and legislation. For high-reliability systems, the implications of ambiguity between data and information may affect the security of United States interests and even cost lives. For security, data are raw facts or figures without context, while information is the compilation or articulation of data that forms context. Security depends on clarity in the differences between data and information and how to control them. Control is necessary to ensure that data and information are not unintentionally released to foreign governments, the public, or those without need-to-know. A primary concern in the practice of security is the control of data to avoid the unintended conversion to information. Intra-institutionally, this control is highly complex given the amalgam of legacy data systems and the numerous and constantly evolving nature of modern data systems that were not necessarily designed to be integrated. The complexity of this concern is augmented when institutions are part of inter-institutional collaborations or networks of public-private partnerships that share data and information. Additionally, institutions that share data as a function of policy and legislative action—particularly formally integrated data and information system infrastructures—may be at higher security risk. This paper will present an intra-institutional paradigm that utilizes and integrates concepts from numerous disciplines to frame a critical and underspecified practical issue in security—controlling for the unintended conversion of data to information.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide removal (CDR) is required to stabilize global temperature. CDR can be achieved via ecosystem-based approaches that are cost-effective but reversible (e.g., soil and forest management) or by more durable but expensive approaches (e.g., direct air capture coupled with geologic storage). Here, we examine trade-offs between these approaches, focusing on timing, climate impacts, and cost. We simulated reversible carbon accrual for a range of CDR contract structures using a general minimalist model of ecosystem carbon cycling, and parameterized it to simulate US agricultural soil management─specifically cover cropping─as a case study. We then quantified the resulting impact on atmospheric carbon and global temperature using a climate model emulator. We find that maintaining a patchwork of reversible CDR projects by replacing lapsed projects with new projects can reduce warming by 22–195 μ°C in 2100 and that the magnitude of this cooling effect depends on how effectively the patchwork is maintained. Long-term maintenance of reversible CDR projects requires institutional stability that cannot be guaranteed over multiple decades. Consequently, effective CDR ultimately requires replacing reversible projects with durable projects. To address this problem, we modeled the cost of replacing reversible agricultural soil CDR with geologic CDR. We found that using reversible CDR as a bridge to durable CDR is potentially more cost-effective as a global cooling strategy (0.20–0.81 billion USD per μ°C avoided) than perpetual maintenance of reversible CDR (0.32–1.31 billion USD per μ°C avoided) or an immediate transition to durable CDR (1.37–2.19 billion USD per μ°C avoided). However, we emphasize that institutional commitments to maintain reversible CDR projects cannot be guaranteed. Reliance on reversible CDR as a bridge to durable CDR therefore carries an unknown amount of risk and will only function if efforts to maintain reversible CDR are robust.
The Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse) accident tolerant fuel (ATF) program funded by Westinghouse and the US Department of Energy (DOE) utilized chromium (Cr) coated zirconium alloy cladding with doped UO 2 (ADOPT(TM)) and uranium silicide (U 3 Si 2 ) high density/high thermal conductivity fuel for its lead test rod (LTR) program with irradiation beginning in 2019. ADOPT is a Cr 2 O 3 +Al 2 O 3 doped UO 2 pellet with increased oxidation resistance and density, and increased resistance to fission gas release. Due to the issues with U 3 Si 2 fuel reaction in pressurized water reactor (PWR) environments, uranium nitride (U 15 N) has been substituted for U 3 Si 2 as a long-term fuel option. Cr coated cladding with ADOPT fuel is the near-term Westinghouse EnCore fuel product. The long-term EnCore ® fuel product is SiGA ® SiC/SiC composite cladding with high density/high thermal conductivity UN fuel. In 2020, the higher burnup and higher enriched and (HBHE) program was integrated into the ATF program. The objective of this expanded program is to extend ATF burnups to at least 75 MWd/kgU to economically facilitate 24-month cycles in PWRs. The ATF program now includes ADOPT fuel with enrichments >5% 235 U. Over the past several years, Westinghouse has tested the Cr coated zirconium (Zr) and silicon carbide (SiC) claddings in Westinghouse Churchill autoclaves and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) reactor. Additionally, the Cr coated cladding has been tested in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and in LTR programs at the Doel 4 and Bryon 2 commercial reactors. High temperature tests at the state-of-the-art Westinghouse facilities in Churchill, PA and at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) have been carried out to determine the time and temperature limits for the Cr coated zirconium claddings. These tests indicate that Cr coated Zr cladding can take temperatures up to about 1500°C for short periods of time without becoming totally oxidized. The main issue is the formation of the Cr-Zr eutectic at 1333°C resulting in the migration of this eutectic inward with the formation of ZrCr 2 which rapidly oxidizes to ZrO 2 on the outside of the tube. The Cr coated Zr cladding also delays the bursting of the tube, reduces the burst area, and reduces hydriding and embrittlement of the Zr which is a major benefit for reducing fuel fragmentation, redistribution, and dispersal (FFRD), the major licensing issue faced by HBHE. The manufacturing parameters for the SiC have been found to have a significant effect on the corrosion rate of the SiC in light water reactor (LWR) conditions and significant improvements have been made in the yield, quality, and oxidation resistance of the SiC cladding by identifying and tightening manufacturing process parameters. Current autoclave results for SiC composite claddings indicate that a corrosion rate of fewer than 2 micrometers per year can be achieved which meets corrosion requirements under normal operating conditions. High temperature steam oxidation tests at the state-of-the-art Westinghouse facilities in Churchill, PA and at Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT) have been carried and determined that SiC cladding can withstand temperatures up to about 1800°C to 1900°C before excessive corrosion reactions begin, and that the SiC will not balloon and burst. ADOPT fuel pellets were incorporated into the Westinghouse ATF program because of their increased density and oxidation resistance. A topical report supporting the use of ADOPT pellets has been submitted to the NRC and will be approved shortly. ADOPT pellets have been a product in Europe for over 15 years. The additives work to make larger grain sizes which appear to reduce fission gas release during transients as well as increase the density of the pellet. Fuel rod and assembly design in preparation for the lead test rod (LTR) and lead test assembly (LTA) programs is underway as well as licensing efforts with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Finally, accident analyses coupled with economic evaluations for both operating savings as well as fuel savings have been initiated. Modular Accident Analysis Program 5 (MAAP5) calculations indicate that both Cr coated cladding and SiC composite cladding can increase the time to fuel rod loss of geometry for up to two hours longer than current Zr based cladding in a station blackout scenario. This additional time is due to the much higher oxidation resistance of the SiC and Cr coated cladding. These two hours can be used to implement additional response options instituted through the Diverse and Flexible Mitigation Capability (FLEX) program by reactor operators. Both ATF cladding options also reduce hydrogen production which dramatically reduces primary system and containment pressure and the risk of fission product release beyond containment in the unlikely event of an accident. The lower pressure in the system allows more time to feed cooling water to the core, resulting in the avoidance of fuel melting. The coping time is extended indefinitely if the modest water flow provided by FLEX continues. Experimental work on methods to rapidly fabricate SiC composite structures with high density and reduce the fabrication price of SiC fibers while maintaining a high level of performance is needed. Methods for mitigating or stopping the Cr-Zr eutectic are also needed to further improve the oxidation resistance of Cr coated Zr. Minimal (<1%) swelling of U 3 Si 2 and subsequent fission gas release has been demonstrated up to 20 MWd/kgU. Irradiation experiments with U 3 Si 2 fuel in ATR to determine these properties at 40 MWd/kgU were completed but post irradiation examinations were not done since U 3 Si 2 has been replaced by UN. UN has three issues that are being addressed. The first is increasing the oxidation resistance so that there is not excessive reaction up to ~1500°C. While UN increases the pellet density and additives to the UN postponed the temperature at which rapid oxidation occurred by ~100°C to 200°C, this is not enough, and pellet coating options are now being pursued. The second is developing a method to manufacture that does not require the multi-step process of UF 6 to UO 2 to UC to UN. Efforts are underway looking at UF 6 to UN 2 to UN and UF 6 to UF 4 to UN 2 to UN reactions. Finally, an economically acceptable process for potentially enriching the 15 N content of the nitrogen used to make UN to >95% 15N was identified though not experimentally validated. In addition to the work supported by the DOE, research and testing activities are being carried on in a world-wide effort funded by many countries such as Sweden, United Kingdom, Belgium, Netherlands, Spain, Germany, Japan, and France. This work is being facilitated through the Westinghouse led Collaboration for Advanced Research on Accident Tolerant Fuel (CARAT) program. Annual meetings were organized in 2018 and 2019 by Westinghouse as a venue for presentation of this work and to provide for the cross-fertilization of ideas among the many outstanding researchers in the ATF area. No meetings were held in 2020 and 2021 due to the COVID-19 related restrictions on traveling and gatherings. Since SiC, coated cladding, and high-density fuel options are not currently used in the nuclear industry; support from the government and industry members is needed to further the significant effort of setting new standards. The same is true for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) which must review and approve the commercial use of these new fuels since all current regulations are oriented toward Zr/UO 2 fuel. Several meetings have been held with the NRC to generate a fast-track approach to licensing ATF using a combination of atomic modeling, in-rod sensors, and in-reactor testing. This approach was memorialized in an “Accelerated Fuel Qualification White Paper” prepared by the Accelerated Fuel Qualification Working Group lead by General Atomics.