Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Strategic Plan”

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

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

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

BioGeoChemistry at Interfaces (LLNL SFA OBER FY22 Program Management and Performance Report)

The focus of the BioGeoChemistry at Interfaces SFA is to identify and quantify the biogeochemical processes and the underlying mechanisms that control actinide mobility in an effort to reliably predict and control the cycling and migration of actinides in the environment. The research approach includes: (1) Field Studies that capture actinide behavior on the timescale of decades (Research Thrust 1), and (2) Fundamental Laboratory Studies that isolate specific biogeochemical processes observed in the field (Research Thrust 2). These Research Thrusts are underpinned by the unique capabilities and staff expertise at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, allowing the BioGeoChemistry at Interfaces SFA to advance our understanding of actinide migration behavior in the environment, and serve as an resource for environmental radiochemistry research internationally. In the past year, our greater focus on transient redox gradients across stratified waters, sediment-water interfaces, and mineral-water interfaces extended our research beyond actinides to address processes controlling cycling of redox-sensitive metals more broadly. Nevertheless, Research Thrusts 1 and 2 are guided by the following broad central hypotheses that were developed during our last program review held at the end of FY18: Thrust 1 Hypothesis: Biogeochemical processes occurring on the timescale of years to decades lead to greater actinide recalcitrance in sediments and limits their migration in surface and groundwater. Thrust 2 Hypothesis: Long-term biogeochemical processes include mineral and surface alteration, which leads to stabilization of actinide surface associations or incorporation into mineral precipitates. Our strategic goal is to use the knowledge gained from our Science Plan to advance our understanding of the behavior of actinides and other radionuclides (e.g. Cs) and provide DOE with the scientific basis for remediation and long-term stewardship of DOE’s legacy sites. More broadly, we will enhance our understanding of transport phenomena in environmental systems sciences with a particular emphasis on environmentally relevant (long-term) timescales. While we retain our focus on actinide biogeochemistry, our increased focus on overall biogeochemical processes occurring at unique Test Bed locations associated with this SFA provides fundamental information on abiotic and biotic redox processes that control the cycling of redox sensitive metals under dynamic and transient conditions.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

LLNL SFA OBER FY23 Program Management and Performance Report: BioGeoChemistry at Interfaces

The focus of the BioGeoChemistry at Interfaces SFA has been to identify and quantify the biogeochemical processes and the underlying mechanisms that control actinide mobility in an effort to reliably predict and control the cycling and migration of actinides in the environment. The research approach has included: (1) Field Studies that capture actinide behavior on the timescale of decades (Research Thrust 1), and (2) Fundamental Laboratory Studies that isolate specific biogeochemical processes observed in the field (Research Thrust 2). These Research Thrusts are underpinned by the unique capabilities and staff expertise at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, allowing the BioGeoChemistry at Interfaces SFA to advance our understanding of actinide migration behavior in the environment, and serve as a resource for environmental radiochemistry research internationally (Figure 1). In FY23, our SFA research focused on transient redox gradients across stratified waters, sediment-water interfaces, and mineral-water interfaces to address processes controlling cycling of redox-sensitive metals. Nevertheless, Research Thrusts 1 and 2 are guided by the following broad central hypotheses that were developed during our last program review held at the end of FY18: Thrust 1 Hypothesis: Biogeochemical processes occurring on the timescale of years to decades lead to greater actinide recalcitrance in sediments and limits their migration in surface and groundwater. Thrust 2 Hypothesis: Long-term biogeochemical processes include mineral and surface alteration, which leads to stabilization of actinide surface associations or incorporation into mineral precipitates. Our strategic goal is to use the knowledge gained from our Science Plan to advance our understanding of the behavior of actinides and other radionuclides (e.g. Cs) and provide DOE with the scientific basis for remediation and long-term stewardship of DOE’s legacy sites. More broadly, we are improving our understanding of transport phenomena in environmental systems sciences with a particular emphasis on environmentally relevant (long-term) timescales. While we retained some of our historical focus on actinide biogeochemistry this past fiscal year, biogeochemical processes occurring at unique Test Bed locations associated with this SFA provide fundamental information on abiotic and biotic redox processes that control the cycling of redox sensitive metals under dynamic and transient conditions. Furthermore, in collaboration with SFA teams at Argonne National Laboratory, our SFA has begun to transition away from the current research focus and develop a new research program in terrestrial wetland systems. The Terrestrial Wetland Function and Resilience SFA program plan will be delivered to the Environmental System Science (ESS) program within BER at the end of FY23.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2024

Pu-238 Production At Idaho National Laboratory

Overview of INL's work on Pu-238 production presented to MFC Strategic Advisory Council (SAC). Discusses program status, upcoming work, and future planned activities.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Modeling Needs to Support the Reconstruction Strategy of Ukraine

Ukraine has been facing difficult times. Russia started a full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022, and has caused huge human and infrastructure losses. As a result of the invasion, more than 8 million people left their homes. The Russian army has targeted Ukrainian energy sources, destroying or damaging over 50% of thermal power generation capacity (coal and gas), 30% of solar generation, and 90% of wind generation. The Russians are also threatening Ukrainian energy security, as they currently control the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant – Europe’s largest. In addition, Russia has destroyed 121,000 buildings, including 5,300 multistory buildings - more buildings than Ukraine built during the past five years. The occupiers destroyed or damaged 343 district heat boiler stations (destroyed 12 / damaged 331) and 8 CHPs (destroyed 4/ damaged 4). There is no doubt that Ukraine will be able to protect its sovereignty and restore its territorial integrity; however, this will be a long process. The Government of Ukraine needs to simultaneously focus on many issues, from waging war to the restoration of electricity, water, and heat supply in the territories close to the front line. In addition to these time-sensitive issues, the government also needs to plan a long term multi-sector strategy for the reconstruction of Ukraine’s economy. Ukraine initiated a broad-based political process for recovery at the International Ukraine Recovery Conference (URC 2022) in Lugano, Switzerland. Prior to URC 2022, Ukraine applied for EU membership on February 28 and was granted the status of candidate country by the European Council on June 23, 2022. More than 40 nations are fully committed to supporting Ukraine throughout its path from early to long-term recovery. In addition, these countries link a successful recovery to Ukraine’s European future (URC, 2022a). The reconstruction process will be long. The government also recognizes that it is not enough to build energy infrastructure back – it should be built back better. The government is committed to building a more sustainable and cleaner energy sector. Energy modeling can provide important insights into paths to decarbonize Ukraine’s economy while rebuilding it after the war. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and the Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine (IEF) work on modeling decarbonization scenarios in the energy sector of Ukraine. The teams focus on the heat sector, which includes district heat, autonomous and individual heating, and energy consumption by final energy consumption sectors, including buildings. Since the teams use world-class integrated assessment models, other sectors will be analyzed as well. The purpose of the document is to describe the needs of key Ukrainian ministries in modeling the reconstruction process. The scope of this document is limited to modeling energy consumption by the power and heat sectors, final energy consumption by buildings, and GHG emissions from these two sectors. The rest of this policy memo is organized as follows. After this introduction, Chapter 2 discusses key provisions of the reconstruction strategy with a focus on energy, buildings, heat supply, environment, and European integration aspirations. Section 3 provides an overview of recent developments and key decisions of the Government of Ukraine in the area of energy efficiency and decarbonization. Finally, Section 4 provides key suggestions on how PNNL and IEF can help the Government of Ukraine in developing strategic documents.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

BETO 2021 Peer Review - Strategic Analysis Support WBS 4.1.1.30

Strategic Analysis Support. The objective of the NREL strategic support project is to provide sound, unbiased, and consistent analyses to inform the strategic direction of the DOE BETO office. This project addresses key technological questions, provides critical data needed to inform strategy, and highlights barriers, gaps and data needs in support of the DOE BETO's mission to improve the affordability of bio-based fuels and products. This task employs various quantitative (techno-economic analysis, TEA) and qualitative (gap analysis) approaches to allow for direct comparisons of biomass conversion technologies across a wide slate of processing platforms and products. Furthermore, this project develops and utilizes novel analyses beyond traditional biorefinery focused TEA/LCAs to identify both technical (e.g., in sustainable design) and non-technical (e.g., in value proposition) barriers, as well as to outline mitigation strategies and R&D needs for emerging technologies. Additionally, the project is tasked with evaluating drivers that support the growing bio-economy, which is achieved by the development and public release of tools to advance the understanding and facilitate comparisons of socio-economic impacts along the supply chain. Critical to the success of this project is the development of defensible methodologies, analyses, and tools that are publicly available to support stakeholders and bioeconomy growth. To develop such high-quality analyses, the biggest challenge to this project, as with most analysis focused projects, is the availability and reliability of the underlying data. Therefore, the project team works extensively with key stakeholders (e.g., policy makers, bioenergy technology developers, and investors) in developing and reviewing the results of these analyses to overcome this challenge. Any remaining uncertainties associated with the analysis efforts are clearly defined and quantified.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Pit Production Strategic Analysis Tool

The LANL Pit Production Strategic Analysis tool is an executive-level decision support tool for planning related to the demand and production of pits. The spreadsheet-based tool includes decision factors for stockpile program demand combined with production and infrastructure planning at PF-4, Savanna River, and future production options. The tool graphically compares supply and demand under different scenarios. The tool is based on NNSA planning documents and process analyses.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Human Dimensions of Energy Systems Workshop - September 6-7, 2022: Findings and Next Steps

Advanced energy technologies and informed policies are necessary but not sufficient to accelerate the energy transition at the speed required to meet our shared climate and energy resilience goals. To fully understand and implement integrated energy systems, we need to be able to model and analyze the complete system-of-systems, including the behavior of people interacting with and being impacted by energy systems. The purpose of this workshop is: Understand how human behavior and decisions affect the performance of energy systems with a focus on resilience and human well-being; Identify opportunities to improve energy system design to explicitly consider human behavior and well-being; Enhance our capability to model and predict human actions. Develop the ability to stress test these integrated systems; Identify or develop requirements and tools for more robust system designs that can be used for human-in-the-loop exercises and training; Identify opportunities for joint research, joint appointments, and collaboration; and Guide internal investments and strategic hires.

analyze↗
DOE OSTI2021

INECP Country Engagement Plans and Transformational Events [Slides]

The International Nonproliferation Export Control Program (INECP) harnesses the expertise of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories to assist partners internationally in implementing and adopting strategic trade control measures that can effectively counter WMD procurement efforts. This presentation includes discussion of work with LANL INECP technical leads to update the engagement plan for Turkey, which involved researching Turkey’s WMD related legal framework, relevant export control agencies, and WMD-relevant industries (e.g. advanced manufacturing and aerospace).

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Systematic Evidence Based Performance Approach to Regulation of Nuclear Sites in England and Wales - 20058

The Environment Agency for England has developed a systematic evidence-based approach to pursue our strategic environmental objectives for the regulation of nuclear sites. We use an annual evidence review process to ensure effective and efficient targeting of limited resources to achieve those objectives. Over the last 8 years, we have been developing and refining this approach to ensure risk-based and value driven regulation. The approach comprises nuclear site and nuclear sector review processes known as Site Environment Review (SER) and Nuclear Environment Review (NER). This approach complements our regulation of nuclear site permit holders under the Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR). We deliver our regulation of nuclear sites in England and Wales alongside the Office for Nuclear Regulation. The SER process involves the lead regulator for each nuclear site assessing the permit holder's environmental performance across 14 themes, set within the context of the site's main activities and associated waste disposals. Our themes include environmental leadership, resources and climate change, radioactive waste management, facility management and decommissioning, groundwater, and environmental radiological protection. We use evidence from site inspections and working within our subject matter groups to grade current and predicted future environmental performance. We are particularly interested in sustainability and the application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) to prevent the creation, and minimise the disposal, of radioactive wastes. We use risk analysis (strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities) to examine performance against our strategic environmental objectives, which are set out, in our 5-year Nuclear Delivery Plan (NDP). The output supports the targeting of our resources at each nuclear site. We consult the relevant permit holders on the SER priorities and use their feedback to refine our plans. We expect all permit holders to take account of our priorities when considering their own programmes of work, objectives and plans. The NER process brings together what we learn and achieve through regulation across the sector. It provides input to planning priorities, supported by qualitative and semi-quantitative evidence. It covers the 28 nuclear sites in England and Wales and spans the same 14 environmental themes. During the process we collate, compile and summarise evidence from the SERs and other sources such as inspection reports and evidence from our other nuclear work programmes. The output is the NER annual report. This provides a snapshot of the status of the nuclear sector and gives insights to enable us to regulate more efficiently and effectively. It also takes account of cross-cutting issues and risks such as changes in international standards, domestic policy, regulatory framework, domestic standards and guidance, learning from experience such as incidents, events and good practice, and innovation, research and development. It provides graphics that illustrate the grading of environmental performance for the nuclear sector across the fourteen environmental themes. This analysis allows benchmarking of nuclear site's environmental performance and the visualisation provides a convenient comparison of performance across themes, sites, and over time. We use this intelligence to inform our investment in training and development of our staff, and our cross-cutting engagement on strategic issues with government, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and other corporate organisations. Adopting this approach can provide benefits with organisational reputation, stakeholder participation and ensuring value from the public investment. This paper describes the history of the SER/NER process, a selection of outputs from the process and ideas for improvement. The paper will be of interest to other regulators and organisations across the world that are interested in supporting continuous improvement. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Energy Resilience Planning For Remote, Island, And Islanded Communities

This webinar is intended to educate prospective applicants on the Energy Transitions Initiative Partnership Project (ETIPP). It includes a general description of what ETIPP does, who the ETIPP partners are, the types of technical assistance ETIPP might provide communities, and what the technical assistance application process involves.

44 EE - Strategic Programs, Energy Transition Init↗
DOE OSTI2024

STREAM: Strategic Technology Roadmapping and Energy, Environmental, and Economic Analysis Model

This is the implementation of the framework for the planning of the technological makeup of the industrial sector. Motivated by the efforts to achieve carbon neutrality, the model of this framework modifies the portfolio of technologies over time for the sector of interest such that, - Net Present Value (NPV) is minimized - Constraint on Greenhouse Emissions (GHG), e.g. carbon dioxide, is satisfied - Demand of the underlying commodity is satisfied - The current implementation reflects a case study for the electric power sector. The for a given initial set of capacities of different vintages, the space of decisions include, - Retirement of the existing capacities. - Retrofitting the existing capacities to alternative characteristics. - Creation of new capacities from a technology portfolio. All the associated quantities with the deployments, e.g. CO2, heat requirement, etc.

Thiery, David↗
DOE OSTI2021

SFWST Disposal Research R&D 5-Year Plan - FY2021 Update.

In the planning for FY2020 in the U.S. DOE NE-81 Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) Campaign, the DOE requested development of a plan for activities in the Disposal Research (DR) Research and Development (R&D) over a five (5)-year period, and DOE requested periodic updates to this plan. The DR R&D 5-year plan was provided to the DOE based on the FY2020 priorities and program structure (Sassani et al., 2020) and represents a strategic guide to the work within the DR R&D technical areas (i.e., the Control Accounts), focusing on the highest priority technical thrusts. This FY2021 report is the first update to the DR R&D 5-year plan for the SFWST Campaign DR R&D activities. This 5-year plan will be a living document and is planned to be updated periodically to provide review of accomplishments and for prioritization changes based on aspects including mission progress, external technical work, and changes in SFWST Campaign objectives and/or funding levels (i.e., Program Direction). The updates to this 5-year plan will address the DR R&D that has been completed (accomplishments) and the additional knowledge gaps to be investigated, with any updates to the DR R&D priorities for the next stages of activities.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

2023 Project Peer Review Report

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

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Defending the Homeland: Growing Foreign Challenges to the U.S. Missile Defense Posture

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) for Policy requested that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory conduct a Congressionally directed study on homeland missile defense, pursuant to Section 1692 of the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act. In accordance with the statutory language, this study considers whether the security benefits obtained by deployment of homeland missile defenses of the United States are undermined or counterbalanced by adverse reactions of potential adversaries, and considers the effectiveness of homeland missile defense efforts of the United States to deter the development of ballistic missiles. Almost a half-century has elapsed since the United States and the Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, and almost two decades since the former withdrew. Since withdrawing, the United States has sought to develop and deploy a layered missile defense system to defend against regional threats to U.S. and allied interests abroad and to counter limited threats to the U.S. homeland. As such, missile defense supports key national defense policy objectives. Protecting the U.S. homeland, forces abroad, allies, and partners. Deterring attacks against the United States, its allies, and partners. Assuring allies an strengthening U.S. diplomatic activities in peacetime and crisis. We offer five key findings: 1. The primary benefit of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system is the protection it provides the U.S. homeland against a limited but evolving rogue-state missile threat. While this system has never been tested in combat, it appears thus far to have effectively paced North Korea’s development and deployment of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In the absence of such a defensive capability, the United States would likely have been more heavily exposed to North Korean actions, would have operated at a much higher-risk posture, and would have had less negotiating room with which to navigate coercive tactics and crises. Its allies would have been more concerned about U.S. willingness in time of crisis and war to run the risks of protecting them. The GMD system also serves as a hedge against Iranian breakout. 2. Potential adversaries continue to develop long-range ballistic missiles despite deployment of a U.S. homeland missile defense system. This includes both rogue states and major power rivals whose long-range missile programs predated the deployment of U.S. missile defenses. While North Korea has continued its long-range missile developments and achieved an intercontinental capability, Iran has not yet reached this threshold. The broader proliferation of long-range missiles anticipated in the late 1990s has not materialized. 3. While Russia has used the existence of a U.S. homeland missile defense system as a justification for its substantial and continuing weapon modernization program, neither Russian force modernization nor the limited U.S. homeland missile defense system has altered the strategic balance. Russia has long considered U.S. missile defenses—both theater and homeland—as directed against its strategic forces and as a capability that could rapidly advance, thereby eroding Russian confidence in its nuclear deterrent. Russia’s political and military actions appear excessive and negatively impact areas such as arms control, but they do not undermine the primary benefit of the U.S. system cited in Key Finding 1. 4. China’s expansion and diversification of nuclear and missile forces has been influenced by its concerns about U.S. homeland missile defense, but those concerns are only one of many factors in China’s force planning. Although China’s actions to preserve and expand its assured retaliation prospects have not fundamentally altered the strategic balance, its buildup and lack of transparency about its force modernization goals are troubling. Taken together, the aggregate pattern of China’s modernization activities over the past two decades strongly suggests a concerted effort to develop a modern military force commensurate with its intended geopolitical status. Whatever China’s legacy concerns over the survivability of its strategic nuclear forces, its ability to overwhelm the GMD system appears intact today and will be further strengthened in the years ahead as it continues its long-term modernization program. China’s political and military actions negatively affect U.S. security interests but do not undermine the primary benefit of the U.S. system cited in Key Finding 1. 5. The basic finding that benefits have not so far been undermined by adverse reactions is a function of circumstances that are increasingly in flux. The existing GMD-centered system is under increasing pressure from the pace and scope of North Korean missile deployments. The proposed “layered” system seeks to mitigate this impending capability gap in the near term and to complement future capabilities, such as the Next Generation Interceptor, when they come online. Given the pace of U.S. missile defense developments since 2000, it is possible that adversary advances in capability will outpace the U.S. system’s ability to adapt. Additionally, because this layered system is in principle more readily scaled, it will almost certainly be viewed skeptically by China and Russia. In a context of growing great-power security competition, the Department of Defense (DoD) should consider undertaking a broader net assessment of the U.S., Russian, and Chinese force balance.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2022

Evolution of Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning at MESA

Early on in 2018 Sandia recognized the Microsystems Engineering, Science and Applications (MESA) Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning capability to be unpredictable, inconsistent, reactive, and unable to provide strong linkage to the sponsor's needs. The impetus for this report is to share learnings from MESA's journey towards maturing this capability. This report describes re-building the foundational elements of MESA's Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning capability using a risk-based, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) approach. To begin, MESA's decades-old Piano Chart + Ad Hoc Hybrid Methodology is described with a narrative of its strengths and weaknesses. Then its replacement, the MCDA /Analytical Hierarchy Process, is introduced with a discussion of its strengths and weaknesses. To generate a realistic Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning budget outlook, MESA used its rolling 20-year Extended Life Program Plan (MELPP) as a baseline. The new MCDA risk-based prioritization methodology implements DOE/NNSA guidelines for prioritization of DOE activities and provides a reliable, structured framework for combining expert judgement and stakeholder preferences according to an established scientific technique. An in-house Hybrid Decision Support System (HDSS) software application was developed to facilitate production of several key deliverables. The application enables analysis of the prioritization decisions with charts to display and provide linkage of MESA's funding requests to the stakeholders' priorities, strategic objectives, nuclear deterrence programs, MESA priorities, and much more.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

The Highly Integrated Vehicle Ecosystem (HIVE): A Platform for Managing the Operations of On-Demand Vehicle Fleets

This paper introduces the Highly Integrated Vehicle Ecosystem (HIVE), a transportation modeling tool developed by within the Center for Integrated Mobility Sciences (CIMS) group at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). HIVE is an agent-based supply/demand model for Mobility on Demand (MoD) which mixes agent-based modeling and centralized dispatch for automated and human-driven fleets and ride hail passengers. Research questions using HIVE span multiple categories, including intelligent fleet planning (assessing fleet, battery, and infrastructure investment decisions), intelligent fleet control (charge management, vehicle dispatching) and strategic business model decision-making (depot-based full-time drivers versus gig-based drivers, human-driven versus automated). The components of the HIVE model are explained and then HIVE is demonstrated in a case study using demand data from the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission data set.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Biofuels Production and Development in the United States

Addressing transportation emissions will require a combination of policy interventions, technological innovations, and behavioral changes. To decrease transportation-related carbon emissions, we recommend transitioning to cleaner and more efficient transport, expanding public transportation, and promoting sustainable urban planning. Transitioning to biofuels in the U.S. transportation sector presents a host of environmental, economic, and strategic advantages. Environmentally, biofuels offer a promising avenue for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions compared to conventional fossil fuels. Biofuels produce fewer harmful emissions, such as particulate matter and nitrogen oxides, compared to conventional fuels, thereby improving local air quality, and reducing health risks associated with air pollution. The U.S. government issued a "Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) Grand Challenge" to promote the development of SAF and address the decarbonization of commercial aviation. The targets are to expand current domestic SAF production to 3 billion gallons per year by 2030, and then to 35 billion gallons by 2050, while achieving life cycle GHG reduction of at least 50% relative to fossil Jet A. The United States' biofuel production capacity rose to 23.8 billion gallons per year in 2023, a growth of more than 1.7 billion gallons since 2022. Ethanol nameplate capacity has reached 17.8 billion gallons per year since 2023, the ethanol production is 15.6 billion gallons in 2023 as capped by EPA regulation. Biodiesel production capacity stands at 2.1 billion gallons, and renewable diesel capacity is now 3.9 billion gallons. This newsletter keeps you informed on the state of biofuels in the United States, policy and regulations, technology advancements, and environmental and social impacts.

biodiesel↗