SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “campus”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2026

Mixing Zone Dilution Study for the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Sequim Campus

In summary, we conducted a plume modeling study to determine the dilutions at regulatory mixing zones for outfall 008 located at MRCL, Sequim. This included an analysis of diffuser and effluent characteristics together with ambient conditions around the outfall. Table 5, summarized the main results for dilution numbers estimated in our study, showing the minimum dilution for acute criteria is 29.8 that occurred for July conditions and the minimum dilution for chronic criteria is 1713.58 under December conditions.

Premathilake, Lakshitha↗

DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗

DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗

DOE OSTI2024

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2023

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), one of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science’s 10 national laboratories, provides innovative science and technology development in the areas of energy and the environment, fundamental and computational science, and national security. There are three DOE offices within the Richland area. Two are responsible for the Hanford Site, whereas the Pacific Northwest Site Office oversees PNNL. PNNL prepares an Annual Site Environmental Report to meet the requirements of DOE Order 231.1B, Environment, Safety and Health Reporting, and DOE Order 458.1, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, thus assuring that the public is informed of any PNNL-Richland campus or PNNL-Sequim campus event that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public, site staff, or the environment. The report provides a synopsis of ongoing environmental management performance and compliance activities for operations that occur at the PNNL-Richland campus in Richland, Washington, and at the PNNL-Sequim campus near Sequim, Washington. It describes the location of and background for each facility; addresses compliance with applicable DOE, federal, state, and local regulations, and site-specific permits; documents environmental monitoring efforts and their status; presents potential radiation doses to staff and the public in the surrounding areas; and describes DOE-required data quality assurance methods used for data verification. The ASER report describes Compliance with Federal, State, and Local Laws and Regulations in 2023, Environmental Sustainability, Environmental monitoring and dose assessment, Natural and Cultural Resource Management, and Quality Assurance activities that took place during Calendar Year 2023.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

DOE OSTI2025

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Facility Radionuclide Emission Points and Sampling Systems

Battelle–Pacific Northwest Division operates numerous research and development laboratories in Washington State. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) contracts to Battelle at Richland facilities on both the DOE Hanford Site and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) Richland campus. These facilities have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. The PNNL contract with DOE also includes operations at the PNNL-Sequim campus in Sequim, where there is also the potential for radionuclide air emissions. This document is a periodic update that describes current PNNL facility emission units and sampling systems. The National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP [40 Code of Federal Regulations 61, Subpart H]) requires an assessment of all emission units that have the potential for radionuclide air emissions. Emission units are registered with the State of Washington. Potential emissions from emission units are assessed annually by PNNL staff. Sampling, monitoring, and other regulatory compliance requirements are designated based on the potential to-emit dose criteria, a graded approach to facility-identified potential impact categories, and regulatory requirements. The purpose of this document is to describe the facility radionuclide air emission sampling program and provide current and historical facility emission unit system performance, operation, and design information. For sampled emission units, the building, exhaust unit, control technologies, and sample extraction details are provided. Additionally, applicable configuration drawings, figures, and photographs are included. For non-sampled emission units, emission estimation and radionuclide source details are provided. Site-wide permits for the lowest potential impact category are described. Deregistered/transitioned emission unit details are also provided as necessary for at least 5 years post-closure/transition. Currently, five emission units are sampled continuously for particulate radionuclides at PNNL managed facilities on the PNNL-Richland campus (3 of the 5) and on the Hanford Site (2 of the 5). Four of these units have sampling systems that comply with the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1–2011 standard for sampling from stacks and ducts of nuclear facilities, and the fifth is grandfathered and compliant with the older ANSI N13.1–1969 standard. In addition, the PNNL-managed Hanford Site 325 Building EP 325-01-S stack is sampled continuously for emissions of tritium. No emissions sampling is required for the single licensed emission unit on the PNNL-Sequim campus.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Deep-Learning-Based Multi-Timescale Load Forecasting in Buildings: Opportunities and Challenges from Research to Deployment

Electricity load forecasting for buildings and campuses is becoming increasingly important as the penetration of distributed energy resources (DERs) grows. Efficient operation and dispatch of DERs require reasonably accurate predictions of future energy consumption in order to conduct near-real-time optimized dispatch of on-site generation and storage assets. Electric utilities have traditionally performed load forecasting for load pockets spanning large geographic areas, and therefore, forecasting has not been a common practice by buildings and campus operators. Given the growing trends of research and prototyping in the grid-interactive efficient buildings domain, characteristics beyond simple algorithm forecast accuracy are important in determining the algorithm's true utility for smart buildings. Other characteristics include the overall design of the deployed architecture and the operational efficiency of the forecasting system. In this work, we present a deep-learning-based load forecasting system that predicts the building load at 1-hour intervals for 18 hours in the future. We also discuss challenges associated with the real-time deployment of such systems as well as the research opportunities presented by a fully functional forecasting system that has been developed within the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Intelligent Campus program.

building load forecasting↗

DOE OSTI2025

NREL at a Glance

NREL leads research, innovation, and strategic partnerships that advance and strengthen energy abundance, affordability, security, and reliability as well as power economic growth and global competitiveness. Golden, Colorado, hosts the main NREL facility - the South Table Mountain Campus - and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) responsible site office - the Golden Field Office; the Flatirons Campus is located 25 miles north. Additional NREL facilities include NREL's Alaska Campus in Fairbanks and the Washington, D.C., office.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2025

REopt/Microgrid Analysis (CRADA Final Report)

NREL is the only DOE national laboratory solely dedicated to advancing energy efficiency (EE) and renewable energy (RE) technologies and applications. Since its inception, NREL has supported both the public and the private sectors in implementing EE and RE systems and strategies to lower energy use and to meet remaining energy needs with resources having minimal environmental impact. NREL is now a sought-after resource for EE, RE, and energy systems integration expertise. CU Boulder is a public university located in Boulder, Colorado, with over 30,000 students. CU is committed to environmental sustainability and is interested in partnering with NREL to explore opportunities for RE on campus and evaluate an RE microgrid. The goal of this project is to assess the technical and economic potential for RE generation at CU and evaluate how RE may be incorporated as part of a microgrid to increase energy resiliency on campus.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2026

Optimizing district energy systems by integrating Borehole Thermal Energy Storage Using a Mixed-Integer Linear Programming g-function framework with a Multi-Timescale Rolling Horizon method

Shallow geothermal has gained increasing attention in recent years; however, a reliable framework for its accurate incorporation into large-scale energy system optimization remains lacking. This study proposes a Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) framework combined with the g-function approach to integrate Borehole Thermal Energy Storage (BTES) technology into energy system optimization. Validation against a Modelica-based reservoir network simulation demonstrates that the proposed framework effectively captures the ground thermal response under varying energy loads and accurately estimates the borefield energy supply. To enhance scalability, a Rolling Horizon with Multi-Timescale (RH-MTS) method is further introduced, reducing computational time by 73 % for the 1-year optimization model with only minor loss of optimality. The framework is demonstrated through the case study of the UC Berkeley campus. Results indicate that BTES is a cost-effective and low-carbon solution: two borefields comprising 382 boreholes can meet 8.0 % and 6.6 % of the total campus heating and cooling demand, respectively, at an average energy rate of 0.70–0.77 USD/kWh and carbon intensity of 0.54 kg-CO2/kWh. Short-term analysis reveals a 35%–65% decline in BTES energy flow after 3–6 months of continuous heating/cooling operation, while long-term simulation shows that annual energy production of BTES can vary by up to 12.0 % after four years before stabilizing. Overall, this study develops a novel optimization framework that couples physics-based g-function method with MILP optimization framework, thereby advancing methodological development for shallow-geothermal integration and providing actionable guidance for BTES deployment in district-energy systems.

Yang, Jiahui↗

DOE OSTI2024

Advancing Sustainability in Data Centers: Evaluation of Hybrid Air/Liquid Cooling Schemes for IT Payload Using Sea Water

Abstract-The growth in cloud computing, Big Data, AI and high-performance computing (HPC) necessitate the deployment of additional data centers (DC's) with high energy demands. The unprecedented increase in the Thermal Design Power (TDP) of the computing chips will require innovative cooling techniques. Furthermore, DC's are increasingly limited in their ability to add powerful GPU servers by power capacity constraints. As cooling energy use accounts for up to 40% of DC energy consumption, creative cooling solutions are urgently needed to allow deployment of additional servers, enhance sustainability and increase energy efﬁciency of DC's. The information in this study is provided from Start Campus' Sines facility supported by Alfa Laval for the heat exchanger and CO 2 emission calculations. The study evaluates the performance and sustainability impact of various data center cooling strategies including an air-only deployment and a subsequent hybrid air/water cooling solution all utilizing sea water as the cooling source. Here we evaluate scenarios from 3 MW to 15+1 MW of IT load in 3 MW increments which correspond to the size of heat exchangers used in the Start Campus' modular system design. This study also evaluates the CO 2 emissions compared to a conventional chiller system for all the presented scenarios. Results indicate that the effective use of the sea water cooled system combined with liquid cooled systems improve the efﬁciency of the DC, plays a role in decreasing the CO 2 emissions and supports in achieving sustainability goals.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2026

Data Center Waste Heat as an Emerging Urban Thermal Hazard: First Field Measurements of Neighborhood-Scale Air Temperature Impacts

Data centers are among the fastest-growing sources of concentrated anthropogenic heat in urban environments. Despite heat flux densities that exceed peak solar irradiance by a factor of 2–6, their thermal impacts on adjacent communities have never been directly measured or reported in the peer-reviewed literature. This short communication addresses that gap by presenting the first vehicle-based traverse measurements of air temperature in residential neighborhoods downwind of operational data centers. Five traverses at four facilities in the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area, ranging from a 36 MW single-building data center in Mesa to a 169 MW colocation campus in Chandler, reveal downwind air temperature warming as high as 2.2 °C, with average downwind air temperatures 0.7–0.9 °C warmer than corresponding upwind areas. Thermal signatures were detectable at distances up to 500 m from facility perimeters. The 36 MW Mesa facility rejects waste heat equivalent to the electricity consumption of approximately 40,000 households, while the 169 MW Chandler campus is equivalent to over 180,000 households, both concentrated into footprints smaller than a single residential subdivision. With U.S. data center capacity projected to more than double by 2030, these findings establish data center anthropogenic waste heat as a previously undocumented urban thermal hazard demanding attention from the data center and urban planning communities.

Phoenix↗

DOE OSTI2026

Raw_data_Batch_I: State Street

Date of collection: May 18, 2023 Location: State Street, Chicago, IL This data set contains lidar and vision data collected along State Street. The vehicle started from outside of the McCormick Tribune Campus Center at the Illinois Institute of Technology’s Mies Campus and headed north along State Street, until the north end of State Street in the Gold Coast. The data contains the following Robot Operating System (ROS) topics: - /Central_Camera_blurred – Image flow from coaxial camera heading, vehicle front. - /Left_Camera_blurred – Image flow from left camera, 60° from central camera on the left side. - /Right_Camera_blurred – Image flow from right camera, 60° from central camera on the right side. - /camera0/camera_info – Intrinsic and distortion information of left camera. - /camera0/projection_matrix – Extrinsic matrix of left camera from lidar. - /camera2/camera_info – Intrinsic and distortion information of central camera. - /camera2/projection_matrix – Extrinsic matrix of central camera from lidar. - /camera5/camera_info – Intrinsic and distortion information of right camera. - /camera5/projection_matrix – Extrinsic matrix of right camera from lidar. - /novatel/oem7/bestpos – Latitude, longitude, and elevation information from NovAtel GNSS-INS system. - /points_raw – VLP-32 lidar point cloud. - /tf – Vehicle base frame. The data are organized into a data description file and one or more ROS .bag files, dependent on original file size. The data description file provides information about the data collection date, location, and detailed mapping, while the .bag file(s) contain the actual data. Please note that for the purpose of securing personally identifiable information, all license plates and faces included in this publication have been intentionally blurred during real-time processing. ![state street image](state-street.png)

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2024

Characterization of the Triassic Newark Basin of New York and New Jersey for Geologic Storage of Carbon Dioxide

The project Characterization of the Triassic Newark Basin of New York and New Jersey for Geologic Storage of Carbon Dioxide is one of 9 site characterization projects that were implemented as part of ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act). Data from this project was used to improve resolution of data in NATCARB in the area of study. Data related to this study has already been incorporated in NATCARB Atlas. Sandia Technologies, LLC, and co-investigator Conrad Geoscience Corporation, examined the potential for large-scale, permanent CO2 storage in sedimentary strata within the Newark Rift Basin. The Newark Rift Basin underlies an industrialized, developed region comprising parts of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. The project characterized and investigated the suitability of Triassic age sedimentary formations for potential geologic CO2 storage. The project team drilled and cored two test wells to define the sedimentary geologic formations underlying the basin and to document or reach basement rock. With this geologic characterization phase, an integration of seismic, geologic, borehole, and formation core results provided a higher resolution assessment of CO2 storage potential. The Stockton Formation is known to be a potentially favorable geologic storage formation in the basin. In 2011, the 1-NYSTA Tandem Lot stratigraphic test well was drilled to a depth of 6,855 feet in the northern portion of the Newark Basin in southern New York State. Approximately 9 miles south-southeast on the Lamont Doherty Campus, TW-4 was drilled and cored in 2013 to a depth of 1,802 feet and contacted apparent igneous basement at a depth of 1,712 feet. Both wells penetrated the Palisades Sill ranging from 800 feet thick in the eastern well to approximately 1,800 feet in thickness at the 1-NYSTA Tandem Lot deep drill site. A diabase sill can provide an excellent seal and dense confining layer for potential CO2 storage reservoirs and flow layers that are situated beneath it within the Stockton Sandstone. The Stockton Sandstone was encountered beneath the sill in the TW-4 well on the Lamont campus, and data integration suggests that it was likely observed near total depth in the deep 1-NYSTA Tandem Lot well. The test wells confirm and define reservoirs are present beneath the sill and offer CO2 storage potential. The integration of geologic and reservoir characterization of well logs, formation cores, and formation fluids indicated Triassic age lacustrine playa lake and mudbank shales of the Upper Passaic Group can provide an effective seal for the porous and permeable underlying sandstone reservoir layers. This project acquired seismic data, drilled borehole well logs, acquired core samples, and integrated these findings to provide a better understanding of the subsurface geologic formations in the Newark Rift Basin. These findings have contributed to a higher degree of accuracy in predicting potential geologic storage opportunities, while refining geologic storage capacity estimates for the indicated reservoirs and flow units.

.las↗

DOE OSTI2025

Packages of Distributed Energy Technologies Demonstrating Demand Flexibility at Community Scale

The combination of increased electric load growth across all sectors, deferred electrical infrastructure investment, and other factors resulting in variable electric power supply, has created technical challenges to maintaining a resilient and reliable grid. Many federal, regional, and local efforts are in play to modernize the electric grid, including advancing building technologies and distributed energy resources (DERs) that are utilizing smarter controls to become responsive to both occupant and grid needs. This report reviews ten pilot projects demonstrating how groups of buildings combined with behind-the-meter (BTM) DERs such as electric vehicle (EV) charging, battery storage, flexible HVAC and domestic hot water systems, and photovoltaic systems can reliably and cost effectively provide grid services. Each of the ten pilot projects aim to deliver both energy efficiency and demand flexibility (DF) while supporting load growth. The ten demonstration teams are piloting flexible DER packages across diverse communities of residential and commercial buildings to address a variety of regional grid needs. The outcomes of these pilot projects will be used to inform future scaling through utility program development. This paper characterizes the ten teams, showcasing the decision-making process used by each group to develop their packages (Section 2), the grid services they plan to deliver (Section 3), the types of DER packages selected for deployment within building sectors (Section 4) and trends between building sector, DER types, and grid services In order to achieve community scale benefits, the pilot projects must utilize aggregated control mechanisms for coordinating buildings and DERs together. Several types of coordinated control architectures have evolved amongst the teams, influenced by use type, existing market conditions, and integration type. Three coordinated controls architectures have been characterized, highlighting their use cases, benefits, challenges, and tradeoffs in their design. These insights can aid utilities, control vendors, and developers in scaling community-level energy systems (Paul, 2024). Ultimately, the technology packages selected by the ten teams will be coordinated to provide power system services, also known as grid services. Insights from these demonstrations will be useful for grid operators, regulators, aggregators and other stakeholders as they look to deploy demand flexible resources as grid services in the future. The grid services that each team is targeting for demonstration are described in Section 3 and Section 4. Methods for evaluating the grid services have been described in the paper Metrics for Evaluating Grid Service Provision from Communities of Grid-interactive and Efficient Buildings and other DER (MacDonald, 2023). To identify technology packages for demonstration, Section 2 shows that project teams used a range of analysis approaches, including building energy modeling, AMI data analysis, cost-benefit frameworks, and utility pilot data. Some teams emphasized technical modeling to quantify grid impacts and demand reduction potential, while others prioritized economic evaluations, stakeholder input, or exploratory pilots to inform deployment decisions. This diversity reflects the need to tailor selection methods to project goals, available data, and organizational context. Section 5 discusses trends between the DER technologies deployed and the grid service provisions from each team. Residential buildings (multifamily and single family) lean towards technologies that enhance energy efficiency (e.g. weatherization upgrades, smart thermostats) and onsite power generation integration (e.g. solar PV). Commercial building demonstrations prioritize technologies that ensure operational reliability (e.g. battery storage) and centralized energy management systems and optimization solutions. Teams that are deploying controllable storage-based technologies are more likely to provide grid services that require a near real-time response. Teams incorporating load shifting technologies like smart thermostats with HEMs are likely to include energy markets participation and customer bill management offerings. Campus demonstrations are adopting diverse sets of DERs to emphasize renewable generation, paired with centralized control. This section also describes technologies that were considered during project planning but ultimately excluded from final deployment. These demonstrations reveal that effective DER package design should be tailored to building type, customer segment, and construction vintage. Multifamily buildings benefit from centralized HVAC upgrades and supervisory controls, while single-family homes are well-suited for individualized technologies like solar, storage, and smart home energy monitors. Commercial and campus settings prioritize EMIS integration and load optimization. New construction enables cost-effective integration of DER-ready infrastructure, whereas retrofits require deployments aligned with owner and tenant value streams. For utility program planners, early coordination with developers and building owners, paired with segmented and modular program offerings, can improve adoption, scalability, and grid impact.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2024

Determining Unabated Airborne Radionuclide Emissions Monitoring Requirements Using Inventory-Based Methods

Compliance with the airborne radionuclide emission monitoring requirements in the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP; Title 40 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations Part 61, Subpart H) and State requirements in Washington Administrative Code 246–247: Radiation Protection – Air Emissions and 173-480: Ambient Air Quality Standards and Emission Limits for Radionuclides were evaluated for Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) operations. Additional guidance may be found in the U.S. Department of Energy Handbook, Environmental Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance. To meet regulatory requirements, reviews of planned or proposed projects and activities provide the basis for implementing necessary monitoring adjustments or for implementing changes to projects and activities in a timely manner. Potential unabated off-site doses were evaluated for emission locations managed by PNNL and licensed to the Department of Energy. These locations were at facilities in Richland, Washington (i.e., the Hanford Site and PNNL–Richland campus) and in Sequim, Washington, (PNNL–Sequim campus). This report describes the inventory-based methods and provides the results for the NESHAP assessment performed in January 2024 for calendar year ending 2023.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

DOE OSTI2024

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Facility Radionuclide Emission Points and Sampling Systems

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

EMP, Attachment 1: Sampling and Analysis Plan (Rev.1)

This Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) is written for the Environmental Radiation Task activities related to radioactive air emissions (stack) monitoring and environmental radiological ambient air surveillance of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) operations at the PNNL-Richland campus and PNNL-Sequim campus. PNNL is a U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science laboratory in Richland, Washington. This plan is an attachment to PNNL’s Environmental Radiological Air Monitoring Plan (EMP) (PNNL-20919) and addresses a discrete, vital subject area that is subject to revision independent of the main text of the EMP document. This SAP provides the requirements for planning sampling events and the requirements imposed on the services provided by the analytical laboratory to the PNNL Environmental Radiation Task.

40 CFR 61 Subpart H↗

DOE OSTI2024

New York-Presbyterian and Columbia University Irving Medical Center Requirements (Analysis Report)

EPOC uses the Deep Dive process to discuss and analyze current and planned science, research, or education activities and the anticipated data output of a particular use case, site, or project to help inform the strategic planning of a campus or regional networking environment. This includes understanding future needs related to network operations, network capacity upgrades, and other technological service investments. A Deep Dive comprehensively surveys major research stakeholders’ plans and processes in order to investigate data management requirements over the next 5–10 years. Between February and June 2024, staff members from the Engagement and Performance Operations Center (EPOC) met with researchers and staff from New York-Presbyterian (NYP), Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC), and NYSERNet for the purpose of a Deep Dive into scientific and research drivers. The goal of this activity was to help characterize the requirements for a number of campus use cases, and to enable cyberinfrastructure support staff to better understand the needs of the researchers within the community. Material for this event included the written documentation from each of the profiled research areas, documentation about the current state of technology support, and a write-up of the discussion that took place via e-mail and video conferencing. The case studies highlighted the ongoing challenges and opportunities that NYP and CUIMC have in supporting a cross-section of established and emerging research use cases. Each case study mentioned unique challenges which were summarized into common needs.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗