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.
A corrected equation is provided in this free article.
The application of high-power, few-cycle, long-wave infrared (LWIR, 8–20 µm) pulses in strong-field physics is largely unexplored due to the lack of suitable sources. However, the generation of intense pulses with >6 µm wavelength range is becoming increasingly feasible with the recent advances in high-power ultrashort lasers in the middle-infrared range that can serve as a pump for optical parametric amplifiers (OPA). Here we experimentally demonstrate the feasibility of this approach by building an OPA pumped at 2.4 µm that generates 93 µJ pulses at 9.5 µm, 1 kHz repetition rate with sub-two-cycle pulse duration, 1.6 GW peak power, and excellent beam quality. The results open a wide range of applications in attosecond physics (especially for studies of condensed phase samples), remote sensing, and biophotonics.
Abstract not provided.
Rapid advances in energy applications require new theory and computational models to provide guidance for interpretation of experimental results and mechanistic understanding. New theory development is necessary to treat systems of increasing complexity, size, and relevance to real applications. Functional transition metal compounds, including molecules, clusters, nanoparticles, surfaces, and solids, provide particular promise for magnetic, optical, and catalytic applications. However, such systems can be exceptionally challenging to model. To make progress in understanding and designing transition metal compounds for energy applications, theory must be able to simulate such systems in complex environments, as well as simulate the spectra of such complex systems to provide direct connections with experiment. Leveraging the independent expertise of the team’s members, this project aimed to make inroads to the theoretical and computational challenges associated with studying transition metal compounds, their reaction chemistry, photophysics and photochemistry, and response to spectroscopic interrogation.
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.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The National Association of State Energy Officials (NASEO) worked with the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs Office (WIP) over a ten year period to provide technical assistance, research and analyses, and enhanced coordination between DOE and the State and Territory Energy Offices. Over the life of the agreement, NASEO worked with WIP and the states to provide statewide strategic energy plan analyses and recommendations, including customized technical assistance to the states; peer to peer financing assistance via NASEO’s Financing Committee and supporting activities; training on core energy policies and programs, including dialogues and resources to support energy-air coordination, a training for new State Energy Office Directors, peer to peer exchange via a rural energy taskforce, and support to states to enhance buildings efficiency, home energy labeling, and technology deployment opportunities; support for State Energy Program metrics; and regional coordination via regional coordinators and peer exchange opportunities both in-person and online. Over the life of the project, the position and role of State Energy Offices within state government has changed, with now 80 percent of State Energy Office Directors serving as their Governor’s energy advisor, or reporting directly to their Governor’s energy advisor. This shift in stature has made it ever more crucial for State Energy Offices to receive timely and relevant technical assistance across a range of energy issue areas. NASEO, in collaboration with WIP, was able to deliver this technical assistance, and energy efficiency and renewable energy deployment has accelerated across the country. The State Energy Office Directors and their staff continue to engage in NASEO’s Committees – many of which were supported through this agreement – and have provided formal and informal feedback on the value of the programs supported through this award (e.g., reporting via survey increased understanding of their roles and technical assistance offerings provided by WIP and NASEO following the New Director Trainings). Moreover, resources developed through this award (e.g., Comprehensive State Energy Planning Guidelines, State Energy Loan Fund Database, Rural Data Resources for State Energy Planning and Programs, The Value of Adding home Energy Score to Low-Income Energy Efficiency Programs, etc.) have been cited by states as instrumental to their understanding of specific energy issue areas and in many cases led directly to enhanced program design within a state (e.g. Iowa citing their review of NASEO’s Comprehensive State Energy Planning Guidelines as a necessary first step in their planning process, later following may of the steps outlined in the guidelines). The priorities of the states and federal government have evolved over the last decade, with an increasing focus on climate mitigation and adaptation, equity impacts and considerations, energy security and resilience, and enhanced energy efficiency and renewable energy technology deployment, but the roots of these new priorities are based in the state and federal policies and programs, and research and analyses, that were supported in part through this award and other complementary initiatives. NASEO looks forward to continuing to support the states, and collaborate and coordinate with DOE, as we build on this important foundation in the years ahead.
With mounting concerns over climate change and the environmental impact of fossil fuels, the United States has witnessed a growing interest in alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs). In 2021, approximately 1.5 million battery EVs (BEVs), 0.8 million plug-in hybrid EVs (PHEVs), and 5.5 million hybrid EVs (HEVs) were registered in the United States. In the state of New York, a total of 51,900 BEVs, 44,600 PHEVs, and 221,600 HEVs were registered in 2021. The current report presents the results of an analysis of AFV adoption patterns in New York State and the rest of the United States based on data from the 2017 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS). Overall, the report reveals the demographics and mobility factors (e.g., household income, homeownership, and trip length) that contribute to the adoption of AFVs. This study provides insights that can inform policy decisions aimed at promoting sustainable transportation solutions.The 2017 NHTS data showed that the percentage of households owning at least one AFV is lower in New York City compared with that in other regions of New York State. From the NHTS samples, of the 25 households that owned at least one BEV in New York State, 15 households (60%) lived within a 5-mile radius, based on the great circle distance, of the nearest charging station, and 23 households (92%) lived within a 10-mile radius of the nearest charging station. Furthermore, among the 40 households in New York State that own at least one PHEV, 48% (19 households) lived within a 5-mile radius of the closest EV charging station, and 83% (33 households) lived within a 10-mile radius of the nearest charging station. The rest of the United States had a higher percentage of households that own at least one AFV compared with that of New York State. A comparison was made between EV adoption levels using NHTS and EValuateNY, which is a tool that gathers statistics on the electric car market in New York State. The estimates obtained from New York State household samples in NHTS were slightly lower than the data provided by EValuateNY. In New York State and the rest of the United States, households with higher incomes tended to have a higher proportion of AFV ownership compared with those with lower incomes. For example, households in New York State earning $\$ $150,000 or more had an approximately 6% share of owning at least one AFV, which was markedly higher than those earning less than $\$ $100,000 (less than 3%). Additionally, homeowners in New York State and the rest of the United States also exhibited a significantly higher share of AFV ownership compared with that of renters. In New York State, households that own at least one AFV tended to travel farther and had longer travel times compared with their counterparts without an AFV. In terms of households with at least one AFV, households with HEVs tended to have more person trips, longer person miles of travel, and more vehicle miles traveled, resulting in longer travel times than that of households with BEVs or PHEVs. Notably, households with AFVs had a slightly lower share of family and personal business trips but a higher share of social and recreational trips compared with households without AFVs. Additionally, households with at least one AFV tended to have a slightly higher share of walking trips than their counterparts without an AFV. However, the comparisons were not statistically significant. These travel patterns observed in New York State were consistent with those observed in other regions of the United States.
Estimating the state preparation fidelity of highly entangled states on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices is important for benchmarking and application considerations. Unfortunately, exact fidelity measurements quickly become prohibitively expensive, as they scale exponentially as O(3 N for N-qubit states, using full state tomography with measurements in all Pauli bases combinations. However, Somma et al.established that the complexity could be drastically reduced when looking at fidelity lower bounds for states that exhibit symmetries, such as Dicke states and GHZ states. These bounds must still be tight enough for larger states to provide reasonable estimations on NISQ devices. For the first time and more than 15 years after the theoretical introduction, we report meaningful lower bounds for the state preparation fidelity of all Dicke states up to N=10 and all GHZ states up to N=20 on Quantinuum H1 ion-trap systems using efficient implementations of recently proposed scalable circuits for these states. Our achieved lower bounds match or exceed previously reported exact fidelities on superconducting systems for much smaller states. Furthermore, we provide evidence that for large Dicke states |$D^{N}_{N/2}\rangle$, we may resort to a GHZ-based approximate state preparation to achieve better fidelity. This work provides a path forward to benchmarking entanglement as NISQ devices improve in size and quality.
This report provides an overview and status update on U.S. state renewables portfolio standards (RPS) and has been expanded from previous editions to also cover 100% clean electricity standards (CES) adopted by a growing number of states. The report, published in slide-deck form along with accompanying data files, describes recent legislative revisions, key policy design features, compliance with interim targets, past and projected impacts on clean electricity development, and compliance costs. The 2023 edition presents historical data through year-end 2023 and projections out to 2050. Key trends from this edition of the report include the following: -Evolution of state RPS and CES programs: States continue to refine and revise their RPS policies, often by adopting higher targets and/or broader CES policies. Among the 29 states plus DC with an RPS, 16 have RPS targets of at least 50% of retail sales, and 4 states have a 100% RPS. An additional 16 states have adopted a broader 100% CES. -Historical impacts on renewables development: Almost half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity (RE) generation and capacity since 2000 is nominally associated with state RPS requirements. That percentage has declined over time to 35% of all U.S. RE capacity additions in 2023, though in certain regions RPS policies continue to play a dominant role in driving RE growth. -Future RPS and CES demand and incremental needs: The combined demand for clean electricity from RPS and CES policies will grow from roughly 500 TWh today to 1700 TWh by 2050. Accounting for current supplies—including existing nuclear and hydroelectric generation eligible for CES targets—RPS and CES policies will require 900 TWh of new clean electricity by 2050, equivalent to roughly 3x the historical rate of RPS-buildout. -RPS target achievement to-date: States have generally met their interim RPS targets in recent years, with only a few exceptions reflecting unique, state-specific issues. Most CES targets are not yet in force, and so little compliance experience to-date. -REC pricing trends: Prices for NEPOOL Class I RECs remained at roughly $\$40$/MWh over the past year, just below ACP rates in the larger state markets, while PJM Tier I REC prices continued to rise, reaching $\$35$/MWh by year-end 2023 and surpassing ACP levels in some states. Prices for solar RECs remained relatively stable, and continue to exhibit wide variation across states, with the highest prices ($200-450/MWh) in NJ, MA, and DC. -RPS compliance costs: RPS compliance costs average roughly 4% of retail electricity bills across RPS states, though vary widely from state to state, with the highest costs (11-12% of retail bills) in states with solar carve-outs and high SREC prices.
Highlights: • The rich structures of Werner states are reviewed. • Werner states are characterized in terms of quantum uncertainty. • Information-theoretic aspects of Werner states are revealed. In a seminal study of quantum states with Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen correlations (entanglement) admitting a hidden-variable model (Werner, 1989), Werner introduced the dichotomy of entanglement/separability and devised a family of highly symmetric states, now termed the Werner states, some of which exhibit entanglement but no Bell nonlocality. It turns out that the Werner states have a rich structure of correlations and constitute a paradigm which has played an innovative role in both theoretical and experimental explorations of quantum information. Given the theoretical significance and wide applications of the Werner states, here we first give a concise review of information contents of the Werner states, and then present an information-theoretic characterization of them in terms of the Wigner–Yanase skew information: The Werner states are identified as the states with the minimum quantum uncertainty with respect to a natural family of observables (i.e., the generators of the diagonal unitary group). For this purpose, we introduce a measure of quantum uncertainty which is of independent interest in studying asymmetry, coherence, and uncertainty, and reveal its fundamental properties. We further identify the Bell triplet states as the opposite states of the Werner states in the sense that they have the maximal amount of quantum uncertainty. Analogously, we provide a similar characterization of the isotropic states as the minimum quantum uncertainty states with respect to a closely related family of operators.
In this work, proton-coupled electron transfer (PCET) was studied for the ground and excited electronic states of a [Ru(terpy)(bpm)(OH 2 )(PF 6 ) 2 ] complex, Ru-bpm. Cyclic voltammetry measurements show that the Ru(II)-aqua moiety undergoes PCET to form a Ru(IV)-oxo moiety in the anodic region, while the bpm ligand undergoes PCET to form bpmH 2 in the cathodic region. The photophysical behavior of Ru-bpm was studied using steady-state and femtosecond transient UV–vis absorption spectroscopy, coupled with density functional theory (DFT) calculations. The lowest-lying excited state of Ru-bpm is described as a (Ru → bpm) metal-to-ligand charge-transfer (MLCT) state, while the metal-centered (MC) excited state was found computationally to be close in energy to the lowest-energy bright MLCT state (MC state was 0.16 eV above the MLCT state). The excited-state kinetics of Ru-bpm were found via transient absorption spectroscopy to be short-lived and were fit well to a biexponential function with lifetimes $τ_1$ = 4 ps and $τ_2$ = 65 ps in aqueous solution. Kinetic isotope effects of 1.75 ($τ_1$) and 1.61 ($τ_2$) were observed for both decay components, indicating that the solvent plays an important role in the excited-state dynamics of Ru-bpm. Based on the pH-dependent studies and the results from prior studies of similar Ru-complexes, we hypothesize that the 3 MLCT state forms an excited-state hydrogen-bond adduct with the solvent molecules and that this process occurs with a 4 ps lifetime. The formation of such a hydrogen-bond complex is consistent with the electronic density accumulation at the peripheral N atoms of the bpm moiety in the 3 MLCT state. The hydrogen-bonded state 3 MLCT decays to the ground state with a 65 ps lifetime. Such a short lifetime is likely associated with the efficient vibrational energy transfer from the 3 MLCT state to the solvent.
This report provides an overview and status update on U.S. state renewables portfolio standards (RPS) and has been expanded from previous editions to also cover 100% clean electricity standards (CES) adopted by a growing number of states. The report, published in slide-deck form along with accompanying data files, describes recent legislative revisions, key policy design features, compliance with interim targets, past and projected impacts on clean electricity development, and compliance costs. The 2023 edition presents historical data through year-end 2022 and projections out to 2050. Key trends from this edition of the report include the following: -Evolution of state RPS and CES programs: States continue to refine and revise their RPS policies, often by adopting higher targets and/or broader CES policies. Among the 29 states plus DC with an RPS, 16 states have RPS targets of at least 50% of retail sales, and 17 states have a 100% CES or RPS target. -Historical impacts on renewables development: Roughly half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity (RE) generation and capacity since 2000 is associated with state RPS requirements, though that percentage has declined in recent years, representing 30% of all U.S. RE capacity additions in 2022. Within some regions, particularly the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, RPS policies play a more central role in motivating RE growth. -Future RPS and CES demand and incremental needs: RPS and CES policies will require roughly 300 terawatt-hours (TWh) of additional clean electricity supply by 2030 and 800 TWh by 2050, requiring total U.S. non-hydro RE generation to reach 28% of electricity sales by 2050 (compared to 17% today). This amounts to roughly one-quarter of EIA’s projected RE growth through 2050. -RPS target achievement to-date: States have generally met their interim RPS targets in recent years, with only a few exceptions reflecting unique, state-specific issues. Most CES targets are not yet in force. -Renewable energy certificate (REC) pricing trends: Prices for NEPOOL Class I RECs remained at roughly $\$40$ /MWh over the past year, just below alternative compliance payment (ACP) rates in the larger state markets, while PJM Tier I REC prices continued to rise, reaching $\$30$ /MWh by year-end. Prices for solar RECs (or SRECs) remained relatively stable, and continue to exhibit wide variation across states, with the highest prices ($\$200-450$ /MWh) in NJ, MA, and DC. -RPS compliance costs: RPS compliance costs average roughly 3.5% of retail electricity bills across RPS states, though vary widely from state to state, with the highest costs (8-12% of retail bills) in states with solar carve-outs and high SREC prices.
To meet clean energy goals, states will need significant capital. Federal funding from the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will help, including by capitalizing clean energy state revolving loan funds (RLFs). States can leverage state clean water revolving funds to finance even more clean energy improvements. New York and Pennsylvania have used this innovative mechanism to extend the impact of their clean energy loan programs. For states looking to extend the reach of their clean energy financing programs, the brief: -Explains how each state leveraged their state revolving funds, -Identifies critical success factors for doing so, and -Offers key elements for replicating this model In New York, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority structured a sale of bonds secured by the repayments from a portfolio of residential energy efficiency loans from its Green Jobs – Green New York Program, with the additional support of a guarantee from the state’s clean water revolving fund. The Pennsylvania Treasury Department received a direct investment of funds from Pennsylvania’s clean water revolving fund to support the relaunch of the Keystone Home Energy Loan Program (HELP), which had previously been shuttered due to lack of support funding. From our review of these two case studies, when facilitating state clean water revolving fund transactions to support clean energy lending, the following critical success factors emerged: -Reference to preventing atmospheric deposition resulting from the combustion of fossil fuels in the state’s Clean Water Act Section 319 Nonpoint Source Pollution Management Plan, which sets out that state’s strategy for reducing pollution into state waterways. -Strong relationships and trust between the clean water revolving fund administrator and the state agency administering the clean energy loan program. -Limited funding exposure for the clean water revolving funds—which are generally large and well capitalized—to ensure that any losses experienced by clean water revolving funds would have a negligible impact on the fund’s ability to support core water and wastewater projects. -Willingness, on the part of the clean water revolving fund administrator, to innovate and engage in careful analysis to support transaction structuring, and support from state energy partner organizations. The brief provides case studies of these states’ experiences, critical success factors, and key elements for replicating the model.