Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “public administration”

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 OSTI2021

ASER Annual Site Environmental Report 2020

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations, as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The following chapters in this report discuss our success in complying with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs and Analytical Data Quality); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and climate conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Protection); how we monitor the movement of chemicals and radionuclides by storm water runoff and the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in deposited sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the presence, levels, and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, soil, and vegetation (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radionuclide dose or risk from chemical exposure members of the public may experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2021 Annual Site Environmental Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (LANL’s or the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2022 Annual Site Environmental Report (Rev. 2)

Los Alamos National Laboratory (Laboratory) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The chapters in this report discuss our compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance and assure the quality of data from analysis of environmental samples (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs and Analytical Data Quality); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and for weather conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Protection); how we monitor the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in storm water runoff and sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the levels and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, soil, and vegetation (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radioactive dose or risk from chemical exposure that members of the public could experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2023 Annual Site Environmental Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory (Laboratory) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Los Alamos National Laboratory 2024 Annual Site Environmental Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory (Laboratory) annual site environmental reports are prepared each year by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 4, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

An Environmental and Societal Analysis of the US Electrical Energy Industry Based on the Water–Energy Nexus

To meet rising energy demands, power plant operations will expand, influencing the interactions between the water–energy nexus and society. However, a major challenge is integration of social dimensions within electricity generation. To address this, we generate a baseline dataset using US public data (2014–2019) from the Energy Information Administration and US Bureau of Labor Statistics. We identify the rate of energy consumed, CO 2 , SO 2 and NO x emissions generated, and water used per MWh net electricity as well as employee wellbeing per unit MW capacity during electricity generation. Rates of energy consumption (MMBtu/MWh) decreased 4.9%, but water consumption and withdrawal (m 3 /MWh) both increased 0.93% and 0.31%, respectively. Emissions of CO 2 , SO 2 and NO x decreased 22.64%, 75% and 25% MT/MWh, respectively. Thermoelectric cooling withdrawal and consumption is led by natural gas (50.07%, 38.31%), coal (29.61%, 25.07%), and nuclear energies (13.55%, 18.99%). Electric power generation contributes 0.06 injuries–illnesses/TWh and 0.001 fatalities/TWh, of which fossil fuels contributed 70% and 15%, respectively. Fossil fuels led in average annual employment (0.02 employees/MW) with low cost salaries (USD 0.09/MW) likely due to high collective capacity, which is declining. Estimated rates in this study and framework will aid power industry transition and operational decision makers.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Chelation Modeling of a Plutonium-238 Inhalation Incident Treated with Delayed DTPA

This work describes an analysis, using a previously established chelation model, of the bioassay data collected from a worker who received delayed chelation therapy following a plutonium-238 inhalation. The details of the case have already been described in two publications. The individual was treated with Ca-DTPA via multiple intravenous injections and then nebulizations beginning several months after the intake and continuing for four years. The exact date and circumstances of the intake are unknown. However, interviews with the worker suggested that the intake occurred via inhalation of a soluble plutonium compound. The worker provided daily urine and fecal bioassay samples throughout the chelation treatment protocol, including samples collected before, during, and after the administration of Ca-DTPA. Unlike the previous two publications presenting this case, the current analysis explicitly models the combined biokinetics of the plutonium-DTPA chelate. Further, using the previously established chelation model, it was possible to fit the data through optimizing only the intake (day and magnitude), solubility, and absorbed fraction of nebulized Ca-DTPA. This work supports the hypothesis that the efficacy of the delayed chelation treatment observed in this case results mainly from chelation of cell-internalized plutonium by Ca-DTPA (intracellular chelation). It also demonstrates the validity of the previously established chelation model. As the bioassay data were modified to ensure data anonymization, the calculation of the “true” committed effective dose was not possible. However, the treatment-induced dose inhibition (in percentage) was calculated.

63 RADIATION, THERMAL, AND OTHER ENVIRON. POLLUTAN↗
DOE OSTI2023

Changes in trachoma indicators in Kiribati with two rounds of azithromycin mass drug administration, measured in serial population-based surveys

Baseline mapping in the two major population centers of Kiribati showed that trachoma was a public health problem in need of programmatic interventions. After conducting two annual rounds of antibiotic mass drug administration (MDA), Kiribati undertook trachoma impact surveys in 2019, using standardized two-stage cluster surveys in the evaluation units of Kiritimati Island and Tarawa. In Kiritimati, 516 households were visited and in Tarawa, 772 households were visited. Nearly all households had a drinking water source and access to an improved latrine. The prevalence of trachomatous trichiasis remained above the elimination threshold (0.2% in ≥15-year-olds) and was virtually unchanged from baseline. The prevalence of trachomatous inflammation—follicular (TF) in 1–9-year-olds decreased by approximately 40% from baseline in both evaluation units but remained above the 5% TF prevalence threshold for stopping MDA. TF prevalence at impact survey was 11.5% in Kiritimati and 17.9% in Tarawa. Infection prevalence in 1–9-year-olds by PCR was 0.96% in Kiritimati and 3.3% in Tarawa. Using a multiplex bead assay to measure antibodies to the C. trachomatis antigen Pgp3, seroprevalence in 1–9-year-olds was 30.2% in Kiritimati and 31.4% in Tarawa. The seroconversion rate, in seroconversion events/100 children/year, was 9.0 in Kiritimati and 9.2 in Tarawa. Seroprevalence and seroconversion rates were both assessed by four different assays, with strong agreement between tests. These results show that, despite decreases in indicators associated with infection at impact survey, trachoma remains a public health problem in Kiribati, and provide additional information about changes in serological indicators after MDA.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

100% Carbon-Free Electricity for Sandia NM and KAFB Using Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) (SAND Report)

This report provides a design study to produce 100% carbon-free electricity for Sandia NM and Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB) using concentrating solar power (CSP). Annual electricity requirements for both Sandia and KAFB are presented, along with specific load centers that consume a significant and continuous amount of energy. CSP plant designs of 50 MW and 100 MW are then discussed to meet the needs of Sandia NM and the combined electrical needs of both Sandia NM and KAFB. Probabilistic modeling is performed to evaluate inherent uncertainties in performance and cost parameters on total construction costs and the levelized cost of electricity. Total overnight construction costs are expected to range between ~$300M - $400M for the 50 MW CSP plant and between ~$500M - $800M for the 100 MW plant. Annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs are estimated together with potential offsets in electrical costs and CO 2 emissions. Other considerations such as interconnections, land use and permitting, funding options, and potential agreements and partnerships with Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM), Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), and other entities are also discussed.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Validation of the Public Radiation Exposure Calculation for the Incident at the National Institute of Standards and Technology Center for Neutron Research on February 3, 2021

The Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration Consequence Management Program was contacted by the Health Physics Chief of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Center for Neutron Research (NCNR) to review public radiation exposure calculations for an event that occurred on its Gaithersburg, Maryland, campus on February 3, 2021. Subject matter experts from the Nuclear Emergency Support Team (NEST) assets, specifically the Consequence Management Home Team (CMHT) and the National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center (NARAC), were selected to provide support. CMHT used three separate modeling codes to validate the results the scientists at NCNR calculated using the HotSpot model. The analyses were performed using NARAC’s in-house Lagrangian dispersion codes known as LODI and Aeolus, as well as the Turbo FRMAC software from Sandia National Laboratories. The team used parameters provided by the NCNR scientists regarding the site, applicable observable meteorological data, and environmental survey and sampling data to estimate public exposure. Each model estimated public dose at much less than 0.5 mrem. CMHT concurs with the NCNR public radiation exposure calculations which state that members of the public at the 400-meter boundary would have received a radiological dose of less than 0.5 mrem.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Low-Income Energy Affordability Data - LEAD Tool - 2022 Update

The Low-Income Energy Affordability Data (LEAD) Tool was created by the Better Building's Clean Energy for Low Income Communities Accelerator (CELICA) to help state and local partners understand housing and energy characteristics for the low- and moderate-income (LMI) communities they serve. The LEAD Tool provides estimated LMI household energy data based on income, energy expenditures, fuel type, housing type, and geography, which stakeholders can use to make data-driven decisions when planning for their energy goals. From the LEAD Tool website, users can also create and download customized heat-maps and charts for various geographies, housing, energy characteristics, and population demographics and educational attainment. Datasets are available for 50 states plus Puerto Rico and Washington D.C., along with their cities, counties, and census tracts, as well as tribal areas. The file below, "01. Description of Files," provides a list of all files included in this dataset. A description of the abbreviations and units used in the LEAD Tool data can be found in the file below titled "02. Data Dictionary 2022". A list of geographic regions used in the LEAD Tool can be found in files 04-11. The Low-Income Energy Affordability Data comes primarily from the 2022 U.S. Census American Community Survey 5-Year Public Use Microdata Samples and is calibrated to 2022 U.S. Energy Information Administration electric utility (Survey Form-861) and natural gas utility (Survey Form-176) data. The methodology for the LEAD Tool can viewed below (3. Methodology Document). For more information, and to access the interactive LEAD Tool platform, please visit the "10. LEAD Tool Platform" resource link below. For more information on the Better Building's Clean Energy for Low Income Communities Accelerator (CELICA), please visit the "11. CELICA Website" resource below.

AMI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Model acetylcholinesterase‐Fc fusion glycoprotein biotechnology system for the manufacture of an organophosphorus toxicant bioscavenging countermeasure

Abstract Organophosphate (OP) toxicants remain an active threat to public health and to warfighters in the military. Current countermeasures require near immediate administration following OP exposure and are reported to have controversial efficacies. Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) fused to the human immunoglobulin 1 (IgG1) Fc domain (AChE‐Fc) is a potential bioscavenger for OP toxicants, but a reproducible AChE‐Fc biomanufacturing strategy remains elusive. This report is the first to establish a comprehensive laboratory‐scale bioprocessing strategy that can reproducibly produce AChE‐Fc and AChE(W86A)‐Fc which is a mutated AChE protein with reduced enzymatic activity. Characterization studies revealed that AChE‐Fc and AChE(W86A)‐Fc are N ‐glycosylated dimeric fusion glycoproteins but only AChE‐Fc had the capability to bind to paraoxon (a model OP). This AChE‐Fc fusion glycoprotein bioprocessing strategy can be leveraged during industrial biomanufacturing development, while the research‐grade AChE‐Fc proteins can be used to determine the potential clinical relevance of the countermeasure against OP toxicants.

Biel, Thomas G.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Land of Opportunity: Potential for Renewable Energy on Federal Lands

Renewable energy (RE) in the United States has historically been deployed primarily on private lands, but the growing interest in RE development, generally across the country and specifically on federal lands, raises questions about the potential for RE on public lands. This study seeks to estimate RE technical potential on federal lands and project the amount of RE to be developed on federal lands under decarbonization scenarios for the contiguous United States. The study applied a combination of high-resolution geospatial analysis and power sector modeling and relied on multiple partner federal agencies and land administrators from the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the U.S. Department of Energy. In our reference siting access case, we estimate 44 million acres of federal land across the contiguous United States is potentially suitable for UPV development, which corresponds to a capacity technical potential of 5,750 gigawatts (GW) (Figure ES-1). Federal land area available for wind development is similar to UPV but wind’s generating capacity technical potential is lower (875 GW). The technical potential is estimated for two geothermal technologies, hydrothermal and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS), both of which have a smaller amount of federal land available for development (12 and 27 million acres, respectively). However, in terms of capacity, the technical potential for EGS (975 GW) is approximately equal to wind’s technical potential and there is an estimated 130 GW of hydrothermal potential. We also developed cases with more-limited land available for UPV and wind (for federal and non-federal lands) resulting in 96% reduction of wind capacity potential and 70% reduction for UPV. In a case with additional constraints applied to non-federal lands only (Limited Private), the overall (federal and non-federal) technical potential declines but the share of that technical potential on federal lands is higher than in the other siting cases. The technical potential is the maximum amount that could be developed, but only a small fraction would be developed or needed in the future. Across seven scenarios that achieve 100% carbon-free electricity by 2035, we estimate 26 GW to 270 GW of RE capacity could be deployed on federal lands by 2035. The three central scenarios have 51–84 GW of RE deployed by 2035 and requiring about 500,000 to 1,000,000 acres of total land area. Direct land consumption is less than total land use required, thus enabling co-use opportunities. The large technical potential estimates and the increasing deployment projections from the collection of scenarios show the opportunities for RE development on federal lands. Capturing these opportunities-while minimizing conflicts with other land uses, federal department or agency missions, and public interest, and simultaneously maximizing the economic, grid, and social value of the projects-would require collaborative planning among federal land administrators, grid planners, project developers, the public, and other stakeholders.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Packaged Combined Heat and Power Technology Overview and Market Profile

Combined heat and power (CHP), sometimes referred to as cogeneration, is an efficient and clean approach to generating electric power and useful thermal energy onsite from a single fuel source, offering reliable and affordable energy services to businesses and institutions. Furthermore, CHP provides a cost effective opportunity to improve the environmental footprint and resilience of industrial and commercial facilities across the United States. CHP equipment can be custom-engineered or installed as a predesigned and assembled package. A packaged CHP system is a standardized, pre-engineered system that includes all equipment, piping, wiring, and ancillary components to deliver electricity and thermal energy to a host facility with minimal onsite engineering and design time. Packaged CHP systems can be shipped as single or multiple modules with standard interconnections (e.g., fuel; electrical; thermal—hot water, steam, and/or chilled water), which simplifies installation and reduces the costs associated with the project. Most containerized or single packaged CHP system offerings range from 10 kW to 3 MW in capacity. Packaged CHP systems are extending the operating, efficiency, and emissions benefits of CHP to nontraditional markets in commercial, institutional, multifamily, light manufacturing, government, and military applications. These markets tend to be served by smaller systems (less than 5 MW) that are conducive to pre-engineered packaging and/or modularization. Many of these sectors have limited CHP experience and technical resources to adequately evaluate, install, and maintain onsite CHP systems. The introduction of packaged CHP offerings from experienced CHP Packagers and Solution Providers has accelerated CHP adoption, lowered energy costs, reduced emissions, and strengthened energy resilience in these sectors. In 2019, the US Department of Energy (DOE) launched the Packaged CHP eCatalog to promote increased acceptance of efficient, cost-effective CHP in these applications. The Packaged CHP eCatalog is a web-based, searchable platform that hosts DOE-recognized packaged CHP systems with features designed to reduce economic and performance risks for designers, developers, owners, and facility operators interested in installing CHP. DOE established the Packaged CHP Accelerator at the same time to help launch and publicize the eCatalog, and to validate project performance, cost, and installation time of CHP packages across a variety of applications. Accelerator efforts documented installed cost reductions and installation time reductions of more than 20% for packaged CHP systems over 100 kW compared with custom-engineered systems. The Packaged CHP Accelerator and eCatalog established a peer-to-peer network connecting public and private sector partners including utilities, state energy offices, and energy efficiency program administrators interested in promoting cost-effective, efficient CHP systems, Packagers, and Solution Providers. Feedback from these partners, along with input from DOE’s CHP Technical Assistance Partnerships (CHP TAPs), was critical in understanding the current market for packaged CHP technologies, stimulating investment in these technologies, and guiding future directions for packaged CHP systems and their applications. This report provides background on packaged CHP systems, an overview of their benefits, a profile of current packaged CHP installations, and a summary of future market trends; this report is intended for facility owners, project developers, engineers, policymakers, and other stakeholders looking to increase the adoption of efficient, flexible, and resilient packaged CHP systems.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Lower Snake River Dams Contribution to Grid Services

Hydroelectric generation and water storage have long been components of the clean energy mix, providing both reliable steady output and operational flexibility. As variable renewable energy sources such as wind and solar increasingly replace traditional generation, the role of all flexible resources—including hydropower—in balancing supply and demand continues to evolve. This study examined the contribution of the Lower Snake River (LSR) Dam plants to Bonneville Power Administration grid services in maintaining power system reliability within the Western Interconnection. By analyzing publicly available data, the study evaluated various reliability services through performance metrics including energy capacity, balancing and ramping, voltage and reactive power support, frequency response, and transmission impact. Results indicated that the LSR plants deliver services as expected based on their size, contributing to the balancing process, ramping capabilities, and operational reserves, particularly during peak load conditions and weather events, while also providing measurable frequency and voltage support to the grid.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

The Foundational Industrial Energy Dataset (FIED): Open-Source Data on Industrial Facilities

The state of data on industrial energy use has co-evolved over several decades with the demands of industrial energy analysis. The most recent development - analysis in support of decarbonizing the industrial sector - has changed the characteristics of industrial data that are useful for analysts and model developers. Although data and its collection processes may be cast from a conventional viewpoint as objective and free from the influence of social dynamics, this provides an incomplete picture of not only the processes by which information is generated, but also the limitations and opportunities of data to be useful for analysis. The foundational industry energy data set (FIED) is a result of the confluence of trends in open data and the demand for higher resolution industrial energy analysis. The general approach to compiling the FIED involves accessing, filtering, and formatting data published by federal organizations on the Internet for public use. Unlike most industrial energy datasets, which are published by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the FIED relies on core datasets from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The FIED addresses several of the areas of growing disconnect between the demands of industrial energy analysis and the state of industrial energy data by providing unit-level characterization - including estimates of energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and design capacities - for facilities that are identified by latitude and longitude. This enables local-level analysis of existing combustion equipment, as well as regional comparisons with traditional industrial energy data estimates. The report summarizes the general logic behind compiling the FIED. The FIED itself and its Python code are available from OpenEI and GitHub, respectively.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗