Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Non-powered dam”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Dayflow-PR: High-Resolution Streamflow Reanalysis for Puerto Rico, Version 1.0

This dataset presents a high-resolution historical streamflow reanalysis for NHDPlusV2 stream reaches across Puerto Rico (PR) spanning 1950 - 2019. The reanalysis is generated using the calibrated VIC-RAPID hydrologic modeling framework at the Hydrologic Unit Code Sub-basin (HUC08) scale, forced with sub-daily and daily meteorological forcings from Daymet. Runoff is simulated on 1- and 6-km grids, and the resulting total runoff is routed through the NHDPlusV2 river network using the RAPID routing model to produce Naturalized Streamflow Reanalysis. Where complete observational records are available over 1980 - 2019, streamflows are assimilated (substituted) and subsequently routed downstream through the river network to produce Assimilated Streamflow Reanalysis. The dataset includes streamflow outputs from eight distinct hydrologic modeling configurations along with key performanc evaluation metrics at daily and monthly scales, supporting a wide range of water resource applications. This dataset is derived to support the Non-Powered Dam Assessment, as well as 9505 Secure Water Assessment projects for the US Department of Energy (DOE) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO). For further details, refer to Ghimire et al. (2023), Kao et al. (2024), and Ghimire et al. (2025).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Can Food–Energy–Water Nexus Research Keep Pace with Agricultural Innovation?

The interconnection among food–energy–water (FEW) systems in meeting societal demands is broadly acknowledged. Similarly, competitive or synergistic allocations of water and energy resources for agricultural production, manufacturing, and human consumption are understood, and their economic impacts can be predicted. Far less appreciated and understood are the outcomes of the FEW nexus in response to operation changes in agricultural practices and the associated technological innovations for future generations. Also, the inter-scale and feedback effects of emerging technology-driven resource reallocation and decision-making on FEW systems are largely unknown. For example, how do the agroeconomic feedbacks of intelligent technologies influence the FEW nexus of agricultural production under environmental and demographic changes? How does the necessary water allocation for powering non-powered dams and pumped-storage hydropower generation influence agricultural production and municipal water supply maintenance? How do solar and wind energy farms influence land use for agriculture and the rural economy? In turn, how can the generated solar and wind energy help reduce the cost of groundwater extraction or water desalination?

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Estimated capital costs of fish exclusion technologies for hydropower facilities

Hydropower is a reliable source of renewable energy, and its future expansion is likely to be in the form of either smaller new stream development (NSD) projects or powering existing non-powered dams. Thresholds for entrainment risk to fish and the requirements for fish exclusion at hydropower facilities often differ depending on the species involved, the characteristics of the facility, and the goals of stakeholders, but little quantitative information is present within the literature regarding the specific costs of fish exclusion measures. Cost data associated with protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures related to positive barrier screening were identified using keyword searches of an existing environmental mitigation cost data set and manual extraction from regulatory licensing documents available in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) eLibrary. This approach yielded a total of 50 p.m.&E mitigation measures with estimated capital construction costs pertaining to positive barrier screens and represented <10% of the 171 total FERC project dockets available in the data set. These data were highly skewed toward conventional relicensing projects, as <7% were associated with NSD projects. Results indicate highly variable costs are associated with fish screening, with flow-normalized costs one to two orders of magnitude higher for screening with the highest exclusion capability (≤0.09 in. spacing) compared with coarser screening (1–2 in.). These data provide an initial baseline for estimating exclusion costs for hydropower development and may help developers consider options for more fish-friendly generation technologies, though gaps remain relating to a lack of data, particularly for NSD projects.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

NPD Hydro

This tool, the Non-Powered Dam Hydropower Development and Ranking Opportunity Tool (NPD HYDRO), allows users to prioritize or rank NPD sites for future development based on user-defined priorities. Benefits can be evaluated in several categories: the grid, community, industry, and environment (represented by the GCIE impact scores in the tool. In addition, the tool provides the user with a qualitative measure for the feasibility of adding energy storage during NPD conversion, specifically battery, hydrogen electrolysis, and pumped-storage hydropower (PSH). By taking a holistic approach to the potential range of benefits provided by NPD conversions with results tailored to the user’s priorities, NPD HYDRO provides the opportunity for national-level screening and enables users to focus on the sites that are most closely aligned with their interests.

Woodruff, Nathan↗
DOE OSTI2022

Irrigation Modernization Task 4: Accelerating Energy Solutions (FY2022 Final Report)

This report offers insights on energy solutions for irrigation modernization that serve the needs of farmers as well as residents and industry in the local community. Solutions are found in the irrigation districts where local generation from renewable energy sources – solar, hydro, and wind – can be combined with energy storage and customer loads. These combined resources configured in microgrids can lower costs during peak loads and provide resiliency by maintaining electricity supply during outages. The goal of this project, as stated in the FY2022 AOP, is to promote realization of energy solutions that are tailored to physical location, community, infrastructure, and energy value streams. Further, it is to develop examples of how to increase value of, and overcome barriers to, energy solutions in the context of irrigation modernization. In pursuit of that goal, the project looked at options for: 1) Reducing the cost of energy consumed in irrigation systems, 2) Increasing the revenue from surplus power generation, and 3) Deploying new power generation configured as part of a local microgrid. Potential solutions to reducing energy costs and increasing surplus power revenue revolve around addressing regulatory and legal constraints tied to how power is purchased by and sold to the irrigator or irrigation district. Some headway was made in identifying barriers and ways to push utilities to be more accommodating to distributed energy sources; however, for the most part, real progress hinges on changes at the regulatory and legislative level. Deployment of local, renewable generation systems can be implemented provided the economics of the project and the location are favorable. In concert with Famers Conservation Alliance and Energy Trust of Oregon, a number of approaches were studied in the past year, including off-grid solar powered pumps, grid-tied community solar projects, and in-conduit canal hydropower systems. Ultimately three viable projects were identified: 1) North Unit Irrigation District/City of Redmond, Oregon Critical Facility Microgrid – offers combined in-conduit hydro and solar power generation. 2) Wallowa County/Joseph, Oregon Irrigation System Upgrades – centered on upgrades to a non-powered dam that will add a turbine as well as in-conduit power in canal feeders downstream. 3) Medford, Oregon Wastewater Treatment Plant Biogas Cogeneration System – centered on building out biogas storage and grid upgrades to power the plant, sell excess power, and provide emergency backup power (supplanting a diesel generator). Each of these projects has characteristics that broaden the understanding of the value of microgrids employing renewable energy to achieve resiliency and net-zero carbon goals. The first two projects are centered on new hydropower systems. Although the Medford project is only tangentially tied to an irrigation district, it was selected for study analysis as it was the only one mature enough (with sufficient data) to complete an analysis within this project year. Thus, we chose to move forward developing a case study, in concert with the Community Water-Power Resilience project, to demonstrate a method for evaluating such projects. Essentially, this case study serves as a template for studies to be carried out next year that more directly involve irrigation system hydropower, e.g., the project at the Wallowa County/Joseph, Oregon Irrigation System. Lastly, it is recognized that the locations and case studies in this report are all located in Oregon. We recognize this as a limitation. While the intent is not to ignore other states or regions, this result is driven by the fact that we have cultivated a collaboration with non-profit entities in Oregon that focus on these topics – Farmers Conservation Alliance and Energy Trust of Oregon. These partners were central to identifying projects that may be good fits for this program. A goal in the coming year is to establish collaboration with entities in other states/regions that, similarly, can connect us to potential projects in their geographic area. The potential benefits from the WPTO’s support for demonstration projects as energy solutions in irrigation districts include: (1) Alternative power supplies for communities and farms using renewable, carbon-free energy resources, (2) Cost savings for electricity for communities and farms, (3) Resiliency of power supplies for critical loads when electricity from the grid is not available, (4) Resiliency of power supplies for critical infrastructure in the event of catastrophic events, and (5) Demonstration of irrigation modernization projects that provide resilience and a reduced carbon footprint to irrigation districts and nearby communities. These deployments can serve as vanguards/archetypes spurring similar projects in other districts and states.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Needs and Opportunities for Testing of Hydropower Technology Innovations

Despite hydropower’s status as a well-established technology, changes in the global energy sector have prompted a variety of necessary hydropower technological innovations. Examples include efficient lowhead turbines, more flexible and dispatchable hydropower and pumped storage systems to complement variable and intermittent renewable resources, and technologies providing higher environmental performance. However, while innovative technologies are currently being proposed to meet these development challenges, small hydropower facility owners do not have sufficient risk-bearing capacity to adopt new, unvalidated technologies. This discourages manufacturers from bringing nascent technologies to market and stalls the technological growth of the sector. To reduce the risks associated with new technologies and promote further innovation, systemic (and sometimes unconventional) validation activities and new testing capabilities for hydropower are highly desired. These testing capabilities must demonstrate the safety, environmental acceptability, reliability, and performance of innovative technologies to quantify their value compared with existing technologies. Establishing these capabilities through dedicated testing facilities will be key to promoting hydropower growth in the United States. Following direction from the House Energy and Water Development Committee, the US Department of Energy’s Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) has been tasked with understanding the state of hydropower testing in the United States. This scoping report discusses the needs and opportunities of hydropower testing in the United States, with a specific focus on small hydropower. Future developments will likely mostly target low-head sites with less than 30 ft (9.1 m) from new stream-reach developments, non-powered dam retrofits, and rehabilitation/upgrade of existing plants.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Magnetic Gears: The Key to Robust, Cost-Effective Hydropower Drivetrains

Based on previous demonstrated success at fabricating 5 and 10 kW scale magnetic gearbox (MGB) prototypes, Emrgy and its partners (the project team) proposed to design and construct a 100 kW scale MGB with a 30:1 gear ratio for the low-head hydro applications. The Statement of Project Objectives included tasks covering: 1) Market Applicability; 2) Technical Metrics; 3) Design (initial); 4) Electromagnetic (EM) Load and Structural Analysis; 5) Modal Analysis; 6) Sealing Design and 7) Final Design during Budget Period 1. Budget Period 2 included tasks covering: 1) Materials Procurement and Test Plan Development; 2) Assembly; and 3) Testing. The Market Applicability study (Task 1) led to a clear conclusion and recommendation toward “Low Head” technologies for maximum market share of both New Stream Reach development as well as powering Non-Powered Dams. The findings of this study also identified the opportunity for a larger scale magnetic gearbox-based drive train as a function of increased torque, as opposed to increased speed. The Technical Metrics Study (Task 2) concluded a horizontal orientation was preferred, examined potential loss mechanisms, concluded that a Halbach Array magnetic design was preferred, established a 30:1 gear ratio as optimal, and established a power rating of 100 kW as optimal. The subsequent initial and final detailed design process included electro-magnetic (EM) load and structural analysis (Task 4), a Modal analysis (for vibration) (Task 5), and a sealing design (Task 6) to assure water impermeability. The final design package (Task 7) included 729 individual parts, 117 unique part numbers, and 15 assemblies. In order to facilitate procurement, the full bill of materials was broken down into several sub-components: 1) custom magnetic parts; 2) custom machined parts; 3) custom casted parts; and 4) commercial off the shelf (COTS) parts. The casted parts were fabricated by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) via a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with Emrgy and funded by the Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO). The procurement effort (Task 8) ultimately covered three time periods based on challenges encountered in meeting the budgeted cost for the prototype. Following the first effort in the early stages of Budget Period 2 in 2017, a no-cost time extension was granted to seek alternative fabrication and procurement options. The project was re-booted in 2020 based on the new ORNL CRADA that would focus on five (5) of the more difficult and expensive parts using their advanced manufacturing expertise. Procurement efforts for the other custom machined parts resulted in quotations that still exceeded the budget by more than $\$$100k. This was, in part, also due to the concurrent COVID-19 pandemic that caused both supply chain disruptions and labor shortages. As the project continued, pricing and availability degraded further. In Q2 FY’22, it was decided to not proceed with the fabrication of the prototype (Task 9) based on budgetary limitations. Outcomes included a full and detailed design of a 100 kW magnetic gearbox and associated indented bill of materials (BOM) and CAD drawings, a full assembly instruction manual with an associated BOM for materials necessary to support assembly, the fabrication of the double Halbach magnetic array for the rotor/stator system, fabrication of five (5) sand-casted/machined parts (via CRADA with ORNL) and an initial draft of a comprehensive testing plan. The most significant non-outcome was the actual fabrication and testing of the prototype gearbox based on budget limitations. Lessons learned included the need for an Application / Design / Cost trade analysis to better elucidate the cost potential of the MGB in the projected volumes anticipated for future demand. This would better establish the efficacy of the original cost target ($\$$0.80/Watt) and/or the need for reconsideration of designs and applications. Likewise, additional consideration of the prototype nature of the gearbox – single use, short lifetime, etc. - either as a separate exercise or in place of the design process completed, to reduce the cost of the demonstration prototype device. Additionally, project continuity was cited as a significant risk based on the loss of the primary design engineering firm after Budget Period 1. A design analysis exercise was conducted at the conclusion of the project to identify potential areas for cost reduction. One concept considered was the removal of the inner ring of magnets (with associated changes in the outer ring magnets) to enable a horizontal collapse of the design. It was estimated this could reduce cost by 10-25% without impacting performance.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Cost of Fish Exclusion and Passage Technologies for Hydropower

Hydropower represents a reliable source of renewable energy and accounts for approximately 7% of the total electrical generation in the United States. Future expansion of hydropower is likely to be in the form of either smaller new stream development projects or powering existing non-powered dams. For these new projects to be successful, careful analysis of risks, costs, and uncertainty to offset reduced power production as well as ensuring the protection and safe passage of migratory fish to gain public support, will be required. Exclusion and passage are two common approaches to protect fish from entrainment and impingement at hydropower facilities. The thresholds for entrainment risk and requirements for exclusion and passage often differ depending on the species involved, the characteristics of the facility, and the goals of stakeholders. While the costs associated with environmental mitigations represent a large proportion of the total costs required for the licensing of hydropower facilities, little quantitative information is present within the literature regarding the specific costs of fish exclusion and passage. Working with FOA awardee Natel Energy, scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory were tasked with assessing the capital construction costs for downstream fish exclusion and passage infrastructure. This report used keyword searches of an existing environmental mitigation cost data set and manual extraction of additional cost data associated with protection, mitigation, and enhancement (PM&E) measures related to positive barrier screening and passage from regulatory licensing documents available in the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) eLibrary. This approach yielded a total of 50 PM&E mitigation measures with estimated capital construction costs pertaining to positive barrier screens, 142 pertaining to passage studies, and 26 pertaining to passage-related studies. PM&E measures associated with positive barrier screens represented <10% of the 171 total FERC project dockets available in the data set. These data were highly skewed toward conventional relicensing projects, as <7% were associated with new stream development (NSD) projects. Results from these data indicate highly variable costs associated with fish screening, with flow-normalized costs one to two orders of magnitude higher for screening with the highest exclusion capability (≤0.09 in. spacing) compared with coarser screening (1 to 2 in.). Furthermore, estimated capital costs of passage infrastructure were positively related to the scale of the project based on installed capacity for some, but not all, types of passage. These data provide an initial baseline for estimating exclusion and passage costs for hydropower development and may help developers consider options for more fish-friendly generation technologies, though gaps remain relating to a lack of data, particularly for NSD projects. More data may still be available within the FERC eLibrary, but significant effort will be required to manually identify and extract the data for future analyses.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydropower Investment and Public-Private Ecosystem Assessment

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) commissioned this Report to evaluate the primary challenges in raising investment in medium-sized hydropower and PSH, defined as projects with five (5) to 30 megawatts (MW) of installed capacity, and to understand potential opportunities to increase mobilization of private sector investment in hydropower and PSH projects in the future. Based on stakeholder interviews, a market survey, and industry reports, this Report considers the investment and development trends and future opportunities for five hydropower project types: capacity additions, conduits, PSH (both open and closed loop), non-powered dams (NPDs), and new stream-reach development (NSD).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Baseline Cost Model for Hydropower: Documentation (2025)

Hydropower currently contributes about 80 GW of conventional and 23 GW of pumped storage capacity to the United States (US) power grid. Previous studies have estimated a considerable amount of remaining US hydropower resources, including non-powered dams (NPD) (Hadjerioua et al., 2012), new stream-reach developments (NSD) (Kao et al., 2014), pumped storage hydropower (PSH) and canal/conduit (Kao et al., 2022). The combined theoretical capacity potential of these various hydropower resources is comparable to the existing US hydropower capacity. There is a continuing interest in developing this hydropower potential, particularly to help meet the increasing demand for electricity. However, available data (Sasthav and Oladosu, 2022) show that the rate of new hydropower development has slowed considerably over time despite the interest of industry stakeholders. This is partly due to the competition from other energy resources and from the highly dispersed nature of remaining hydropower resources, which lead to high information requirements for evaluating the feasibility of potential projects. Cost information provides the most succinct summary of the feasibility of a potential hydropower project required by stakeholders, including developers, investors, policymakers, consumer groups, etc., considering investment options. The best estimates of hydropower costs can be obtained through detailed engineering design and cost assessments of individual projects. However, this approach has high data and resource (time, funds, cross-disciplinary expertise) requirements that render it inapplicable for rapid cost estimation with limited data. Although innovative approaches can overcome some of these impediments (see Oladosu and Ma, 2024 for such an application to potential NPD projects), the development of such approaches still requires significant amounts of resources and are not generally applicable to all hydropower project types. Therefore, statistical and parametric methods using simpler cost specifications remain of significant utility to hydropower stakeholders and are, at the least, complementary to more detailed approaches, particularly when evaluating many potential projects.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Updated Baseline Cost Model for Hydropower (2023)

The "Updated Baseline Cost Model (BCM) for Hydropower" is an empirical model for estimating the costs of US hydropower projects in six categories (Non-Powered Dam (NPD), New Stream Development (NSD), Canal/Conduit, Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH), Capacity Expansion, Generator Rewind). The model equations have been estimated with data on existing or planned projects obtained from various sources. NOTE: This is a macro-enabled workbook, so Excel may block it on the first opening. In that case: 1. Save the workbook to a local directory 2. Right-click on the workbook in the local directory and select “Properties” 3. Then check “Unblock” at the bottom of the “General” tab.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

U.S. Hydropower Development Pipeline Data, 2026

The U.S. Hydropower Development Pipeline dataset provides a comprehensive, regularly updated view of proposed and potential hydropower projects across the United States. This resource compiles information from federal agencies and other public sources to track non-powered dams considered for electrification, proposed hydropower facilities at stream reaches with no existing dams, conduit exemptions, and emerging pumped storage hydropower proposals. The dataset includes project characteristics such as location, development status, technology type, ownership category, and other attributes that support analysis of future hydropower trends. It is designed to help researchers, planners, policymakers, and stakeholders assess national‑scale development patterns, understand the evolving hydropower landscape, and explore opportunities and challenges associated with new hydropower deployment. The dataset is updated annually to reflect changes in project status, new proposals entering the pipeline, and projects that are cancelled, completed, or otherwise removed from active consideration. Note: Capacity additions to existing hydropower plants are not included in this database due to reliance on a proprietary data source.

Johnson, Megan [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000290141741)↗
DOE OSTI2022

Environmental design of low-head run-of-river hydropower in the United States: A review of facility design models

We state that the goal of run-of-river hydropower is to produce cost-competitive renewable electricity with minimal disruption of the natural riverine ecosystem. Modeling and feasibility analysis of alternative design options are crucial for developing new run-of-river hydropower projects. Our review shows that existing run-of-river hydropower design models focus on maximizing economic potential at high-head diversion schemes with limited consideration of environmental outcomes. Since nearly three-quarters of new hydropower potential in the United States is found at low-head sites and environmental performance standards are imperative to project success, new models are needed to address the multi-dimensional design challenges at these sites. To aid in formulating holistic models, we synthesize the performance objectives and design variables related to early-stage run-of-river facility design. The objectives span six potential impact areas, including hydrologic alteration, sediment continuity, water quality, aquatic species passage, social, and economic. Based on these reviews, we identify three key areas to enhance the capabilities of run-of-river hydropower design models. These are 1) expanded model formulations, 2) assessment of barrier effects, and 3) explicit environmental objectives. The resulting modeling improvements would accelerate the identification of run-of-river hydropower designs that minimize environmental impacts, promote economic competitiveness, and incorporate the value of non-power benefits.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Restoration Hydro: A Watershed Approach to Standard Modular New Hydropower

The objectives of FOA DE- FOA-0001836- “Standard Modular Hydropower” included designing a standardized, modular, and environmentally compatible hydropower schematic for implementation in greenfield sites that generate up to 10 MW of capacity. Utilizing funds competitively awarded under DOE’s Water Power Technologies Office, the Natel Energy team developed a concept for modular new stream reach (NSR) hydropower that incorporates multi species upstream and downstream fish passage, improved river channel connectivity, and recreational modules. The in-stream design of the collective modules minimized site specific design and maximized the opportunities for modularity. Financial data was also presented using actual costs from regional suppliers, with figures provided in 2022 dollars. While the project team did not address potential permitting process improvements, the site selection criteria did consider established barriers to hydropower development such as tribal and preserved lands, interconnection proximity, and endangered species to exclude or deprioritize. The project’s design schematic met the objectives of the FOA, and presented a unique solution that targets alluvial pockets as natural features for sustainable development. Natel’s concept also incorporated the company's fish-safe Restoration Hydro Turbine for safe downstream passage, while featuring a rock arch that integrates fish passage, water, recreation, and grade control modules (including sediment). Alignment with the Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) “Innovative Design Concepts for Standard Modular Hydropower and Pumped-Storage Hydropower” Program: According to the Hydropower Vision (DOE, 2016), approximately 16 GW of hydropower growth is possible with the development of technology solutions that balance efficiency, economics, and environmental sustainability. The desired outcome of the SMH program is transformational innovation specifically in the site identification, conceptual, and detailed design phases of technology development lifecycles (DOE, 2018). In developing the SMH design schematic, the team aimed to address the opportunities outlined in the Vision through an inverted design philosophy; rather than singularly prioritizing efficiency and power production, the team focused on integrating hydropower with restoration of degraded streams to optimal ecosystem function and provision of exceptional recreation value as design criteria. To achieve this, Restoration Hydro incorporates the principles of nature-based engineering (WWAP, 2018) and biomimicry (Biomimicry NL.) to strategically deploy complementary combinations of permanent, semi-permanent, and ephemeral low-head structures - such as natural and engineered log jams - that harness geomorphological and hydrological processes at the landscape-scale. Primary applications of Restoration Hydro include: 1) restoration of degraded watersheds’ natural ecological function and enhancement of hydrological connectivity; and 2) creation of associated co-benefits to hydro production, including increased groundwater recharge, improved sediment transport and management, improved water security and water quality. Restoration Hydro projects build upon proven watershed restoration engineering techniques by integrating hydropower turbines into low-head structures using innovative and evolving civil works concepts that facilitate fish and sediment passage, and in some cases create additional revenue-generating recreational opportunities. Powering low-head structures creates a directly monetizable layer of economic value in the form of flexible, reliable, renewable energy on top of the already high-value water, environmental and recreational benefits of watershed and river restoration. The approach aims to create a virtuous, self-reinforcing cycle whereby Restoration Hydro projects support the scaling of ecosystem restoration activities, creating a water-energy-carbon multiplier effect that, through the principles of adaptive change management: 1) improves the resilience of landscapes and downstream population centers for changing hydrological cycles; 2) creates a reliable energy resource that facilitates the integration of intermittent renewable power sources into grids; and 3) supports climate change mitigation through grid decarbonization and enhanced ecosystem carbon capture and retention.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

AquaPV: Regulatory and Environmental Considerations for Floating Photovoltaic Projects Located on Federally Controlled Reservoirs in the United States

To meet the nation's decarbonization goals, the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Futures study forecasts that installed solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity must increase nearly tenfold, from 80 gigawatts (GW) in 2020 to approximately 760 GW cumulative installed capacity by 2035. Ground-mounted PV is expected to dominate future solar deployment and will require more than 3.5 million acres of land to meet annual demand projections (of nearly 45 GW) by 2030. However, various competing demands for land (e.g., agricultural production, conservation) and high land acquisition costs in specific locations could be challenges to meeting future PV demand solely with ground-mounted PV deployment. Floating photovoltaics (FPV) may be an alternative in locations where ground-mounted PV is not feasible and aid in reaching the nation's PV deployment and decarbonization goals. FPV is a newer siting approach in which a PV array is affixed to a floating apparatus and sited on a water body like a reservoir behind a dam. FPV systems may be stand-alone or co-located at new or existing hydroelectric facilities or pumped storage hydropower (PSH) facility reservoirs. Co-located FPV systems may or may not be operationally paired and work in tandem with the hydroelectric or PSH facility. This report provides novel analysis to understand the opportunities and challenges associated with developing stand-alone and co-located FPV projects on reservoirs in the United States. Specifically, the report explores potential environmental and energy benefits and environmental impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of FPV projects. The report also identifies and analyzes U.S. federal- and state-issued permits and authorizations required by federal laws to understand the licensing pathways and regulatory requirements for FPV projects sited on reservoirs licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and on powered and non-powered reservoirs owned by the Bureau of Reclamation or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

AquaPV: Regulatory and Environmental Considerations for Floating Photovoltaic Projects Located on Federally Controlled Reservoirs in the United States

To meet the nation's decarbonization goals, the U.S. Department of Energy's Solar Futures study forecasts that installed solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity must increase nearly tenfold, from 80 gigawatts (GW) in 2020 to approximately 760 GW cumulative installed capacity by 2035. Ground-mounted PV is expected to dominate future solar deployment and will require more than 3.5 million acres of land to meet annual demand projections (of nearly 45 GW) by 2030. However, various competing demands for land (e.g., agricultural production, conservation) and high land acquisition costs in specific locations could be challenges to meeting future PV demand solely with ground-mounted PV deployment. Floating photovoltaics (FPV) may be an alternative in locations where ground-mounted PV is not feasible and aid in reaching the nation's PV deployment and decarbonization goals. FPV is a newer siting approach in which a PV array is affixed to a floating apparatus and sited on a water body like a reservoir behind a dam. FPV systems may be stand-alone or co-located at new or existing hydroelectric facilities or pumped storage hydropower (PSH) facility reservoirs. Co-located FPV systems may or may not be operationally paired and work in tandem with the hydroelectric or PSH facility. This report provides novel analysis to understand the opportunities and challenges associated with developing stand-alone and co-located FPV projects on reservoirs in the United States. Specifically, the report explores potential environmental and energy benefits and environmental impacts associated with the siting, construction, and operation of FPV projects. The report also identifies and analyzes U.S. federal- and state-issued permits and authorizations required by federal laws to understand the licensing pathways and regulatory requirements for FPV projects sited on reservoirs licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and on powered and non-powered reservoirs owned by the Bureau of Reclamation or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY,SOLAR ENERGY↗