Results for “Tracking Progress” — Page 3

DOE OSTI2020

Technical Resilience Navigator

The Technical Resilience Navigator (TRN) is a systematic approach to identifying vulnerabilities with energy and water systems, and prioritizing solutions that reduce risk. The ultimate outcome of the TRN is a set of actionable resilience solutions that address the site's most important gaps in resilience and enhance the ability to maintain mission continuity. The TRN is designed to step users through this planning process, providing a framework to: assign roles and responsibilities; collect and document information and data; document key inputs and outputs for each of the TRN modules (Site Level Planning, Baseline Development, Risk Assessment, Solution Development, and Solution Prioritization); document prioritized list of resilience solutions; and track progress through the entire process. Currently "software as a service" at the listed website.

Rotondo, Julia↗

DOE OSTI2024

PIPES (Pipeline for Integrated Projects in Energy Systems) [SWR-24-89]

The Pipeline for Integrated Projects in Energy Systems (PIPES) is a comprehensive project, data, and workflow management tool designed for integrated modeling teams. PIPES facilitates the management of data requirements, tasks, and progress tracking, serving as a higher-level integration layer that works across various data and modeling software. This tool integrates models, data, and tools to perform large-scale, integrated analysis work at scale. PIPES is designed to streamline integrated modeling projects, enhance collaboration, and ensure the quality and efficiency of data management and workflow processes. https://github.com/nrel-pipes/pipes-api https://github.com/nrel-pipes/pipes-web https://github.com/nrel-pipes/nrel-pipes

Gu, Jianli↗

DOE OSTI2026

EPWgen (EPW generator) [SWR-26-017]

EPWgen fetches hourly station observations (NOAA/Meteostat), fills gaps with MERRA2 reanalysis, merges data, and writes EPW files with computed headers (HDD/CDD, ground temperatures). It also runs QC checks, supports CSV-driven batch and metered-variable exports, and provides a PyQt5 GUI with mapping and progress tracking for single/multi-year workflows.

Bianchi, Carlo [National Laboratory of the Rockies↗

DOE OSTI2026

Automated, reliable, and efficient continental-scale replication of 7.3 petabytes of computational simulation data: A case study

We report on our experiences replicating 7.3 petabytes (PB) of Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) computational simulation data from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California to Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) in Illinois and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in Tennessee—a task motivated by a need for increased reliability, capacity, and performance. This task presented significant challenges: the need to move 29 million files twice under time pressure from aging storage hardware; a source file system bottleneck limiting throughput to 1.5 GB/s; frequent site maintenance windows; and the need for complete reliability at scale. We addressed these challenges using a simple replication tool that invoked Globus to transfer large bundles of files while tracking progress in a database, dynamically rerouting transfers to work around maintenance periods and file system limitations. Under the covers, Globus organized transfers to make efficient use of the high-speed Energy Sciences network (ESnet) and the data transfer nodes deployed at participating sites, and also addressed security, integrity checking, and recovery from a variety of transient failures. This success demonstrates the considerable benefits that can accrue from the adoption of performant data replication infrastructure. The replication tool is available at https://github.com/esgf2-us/data-replication-tools.

Globus↗

DOE OSTI2020

Energy Intensity Baselining and Tracking Guidance

Each company joining the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program (Better Plants) commits to establishing an energy consumption and energy intensity (EI) baseline and to tracking its energy performance over a 10-year period against that baseline. The baseline must reflect a company’s energy consumption over a 12-month period, covering all its U.S.-based operations. Energy consumption is calculated by fuel type in terms of primary energy (also known as source energy). EI is broadly defined as the amount of energy consumed per unit of output produced. For this guidance document and for the program, the term energy performance represents an evaluation of a facility’s capacity to use energy efficiently. Metrics used to assess a facility’s energy performance can include EI, energy consumption, improvements in EI, etc. Establishing an energy baseline and tracking system is a critical first step in effectively managing energy use. Developing a baseline can help a company understand energy use within the corporation and give it a point of comparison to evaluate future efforts to improve energy performance. It can also support efforts to validate a company’s energy management activities, improve comparative analyses when using benchmarks, and help in predicting future energy needs. In addition, a company that normalizes its performance data can determine highly defensible measures of energy savings generated through implemented energy efficiency projects. Establishing a baseline and tracking energy performance is also a requirement for ISO 50001 certification. Although basic energy data can be collected through utility bills, most manufacturers will have to perform additional analyses to develop accurate and robust energy baselines and tracking systems. Energy is consumed in many ways within the manufacturing sector and can come from multiple sources. Energy is sometimes generated and sold to other parties or captured and reused on-site. External events can exert a significant impact on a facility or company’s energy use independent of any purposeful efforts to improve energy efficiency. Operational changes, such as production shifts—which may be inevitable for some companies over the 10-year period covered by the program—can also make a big difference in energy use. Since Better Plants asks companies to account for all their U.S.-based operations, mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures can also have significant implications for a company’s energy metrics. This document aims to demystify the sometimes complex baselining process. It devotes special attention to the task of normalizing and adjusting energy consumption to account for external factors, such as weather and production changes. A key recommendation is that companies use regression analysis to normalize their energy consumption data whenever possible. Regression analysis is a statistical technique that estimates the dependence of a variable (i.e., energy use in the context of Better Plants) on one or more independent variables such as ambient temperature, while controlling for the influence of other variables at the same time. A properly developed regression analysis can provide a reliable estimate of energy savings resulting from energy improvement strategies and projects by accounting for the effects of variables such as annual production levels and weather. DOE has developed a companion Energy Performance Indicator software tool (EnPI) to simplify the baselining process. This tool can run regression models, calculate changes in EI at the facility level, and automatically compile facility-level data into a corporate-wide metric. Note that although the relevant equations used to calculate EI are provided in this document, the EnPI tool will automatically perform most calculations for the user. Additionally, Better Plants Partners (Partners) can call on their Technical Account Manager (TAM) to help them establish a baseline and assist with the necessary calculations to track progress.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2021

Foothill Transit Battery Electric Bus Evaluation (Final Report)

This report summarizes results of a battery electric bus (BEB) evaluation at Foothill Transit, located in Southern California. Foothill Transit began a demonstration of three Proterra BEBs in October 2010 to evaluate the battery technology and determine if the BEBs could meet Foothill Transit’s service requirements. Since that pilot project, the agency has added 31 BEBs to its fleet. Foothill Transit is collaborating with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate the buses in revenue service. The focus of the evaluation is to compare performance and cost of the BEBs to that of conventional technology in similar service and track progress over time. This report summarizes the results of the BEB and baseline fleets through December 2020.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2021

U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmark: Q1 2021 [Slides]

Our benchmarking method includes bottom-up accounting for all necessary system and projectdevelopment costs incurred when installing residential, commercial, and utility-scale systems, and it models the Q1 2021 costs for such systems, excluding any previous supply agreements or contracts. In general, we attempt to model the typical installation techniques and business operations from an installed-cost perspective, and our benchmarks are national averages. The residential PV-only benchmark and the commercial rooftop PV-only benchmark average costs by inverter type (string inverters, string inverters with direct current [DC] optimizers, and microinverters), weighted by inverter market share. The residential PV-only benchmark is further averaged across small installer and national integrator business models, weighted by market share. All benchmarks include variations—accounting for the differences in size, equipment, and operational use (particularly for storage)—that are currently available in the marketplace. All benchmarks assume nonunionized construction labor; residential and commercial PV systems predominantly use nonunionized labor, and the type of labor required for utility-scale PV systems depends heavily on the development process. All benchmarks assume the use of monofacial monocrystalline silicon PV modules. Benchmarks using cadmium telluride or bifacial modules could result in significantly different results. The data in this annual benchmark report inform the formulation of and track progress toward the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Solar Energy Technologies Office’s Government Performance and Reporting Act cost targets.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Duluth Transit Authority Battery-Electric Bus Evaluation

Duluth Transit Authority (DTA) collaborated with the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate a fleet of seven battery-electric buses (BEBs) in revenue service in Duluth, Minnesota. The focus of the evaluation was to compare performance and cost of the BEBs to that of conventional technology buses in similar service and track progress over time. DTA enlisted the help of the Center for Transportation and the Environment (CTE) to manage the project and provide technical services with the BEB fleet and infrastructure. This report summarizes the results of the BEB evaluation and contains a combination of analyses performed by NREL and by CTE during the overall data collection period of December 2018 through February 2022.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2022

U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmarks, With Minimum Sustainable Price Analysis: Q1 2022

NREL's bottom-up cost models can be used to assess the minimum sustainable price (MSP) and modeled market price (MMP) of PV and storage systems having various configurations. MSP can be used to estimate future potential cost-reduction opportunities for PV and PV-plus-storage systems, thus helping guide research and development aimed at advancing cost-effective system configurations. MMP can be used to understand the cost of systems under recent market conditions. The MSP data in this annual benchmarking report will be used to inform the formulation of, and track progress toward, the Solar Energy Technologies Office's Government Performance and Reporting Act cost targets.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Energy Storage Grand Challenge: Energy Storage Market Report

As part of the Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Storage Grand Challenge (ESGC), DOE intends to synthesize and disseminate best available energy storage data, information, and analysis to inform decision-making and accelerate technology adoption. The ESGC Roadmap provides options for addressing technology development, commercialization, manufacturing, valuation, and workforce challenges to position the United States for global leadership in the energy storage technologies of the future. This report provides a baseline understanding of the numerous, dynamic energy storage markets that fall within the scope of the ESGC via an integrated presentation of deployment, investment, and manufacturing data from the best, publicly-available sources. This report covers the following energy storage technologies: lithium ion batteries, lead acid batteries, pumped storage hydropower, comrpessed air energy storage, redox flow batteries, hydrogen, building thermal energy storage, and select long duration energy storage technologies. Not all energy storage technologies and markets could be addressed in this report. Due to the wide array of energy technologies, market niches, and data availability issues, this market report only included a select group of technologies. For example, thermal energy storage technologies are very broadly defined and cover a wide range of potential markets, technology readiness levels, and primary energy sources. In other areas, data scarcity necessitates a greater understanding of future applications and emerging science. Future efforts will update data presented in this report and be expanded to include other energy storage technologies. This data-driven assessment of the current status of energy storage markets is essential to track progress toward the goals described in the Energy Storage Grand Challenge and inform the decision-making of a broad range of stakeholders. At the same time, gaps identified through the development of this report can point to areas where further data collection and analysis could provide an even greater level of understanding of the full range of markets and technologies. Finally, numerous complementary analyses are planned, underway, or completed that will provide a deeper understanding of the specific technologies and markets covered at a high-level in this report.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2024

Site-specific Design Case Study for Wet Waste Hydrothermal Liquefaction and Biocrude Upgrading to Hydrocarbon Fuels

Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) is a thermal process that converts wet biomass to renewable hydrocarbon fuel blendstocks (i.e., renewable naphtha, renewable diesel, and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF)). It can utilize a wide range of pure and blended wet feedstocks, including sewage sludge from water resource recovery facilities (WRRF), food and agriculture wastes, algae, fats, oils and greases (FOG) and blends of dry and wet wastes/feedstocks. Historically, techno-economic analysis (TEA) and annual state of technology (SOT) assessments with standard economic assumptions used by the Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) were conducted for the wet waste HTL pathway leveraging experimental data collected from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s (PNNL) continuous flow reactor systems. The objective of the SOT assessment has been to guide and track progress of BETO’s HTL research and development (R&D) toward reduced cost and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the pathway. However, gaps exist between BETO’s traditional SOT updates and the needs of key external stakeholders that – if addressed – will accelerate technology adoption. This Business Case Study aims to bridge this gap by providing an updated design, TEA, and LCA based on PNNL’s FY23 R&D with added analyses and information that provide enhanced relevance for stakeholders of the HTL technology. This includes specific siting, regional wet waste resource inventory and transportation cost analyses, fuel market information, sustainable fuel policy impacts, economic metrics of net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analysis, and statistical analysis of cost and technical uncertainties of the HTL plant design. The study focuses on the “Detroit combined statistical area (CSA)” region for siting of a wet waste HTL plant adjacent to the Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA) facility with guidance from industry participants. Regional resource and siting analyses were conducted to identify feedstock availability, scale, and cost, as well as a beneficial site location. TEA with detailed rigorous capital cost estimation for the specific site application was conducted to evaluate the key economic metrics of most value to industrial partners. These include total capital investment, operating costs, minimum fuel selling price (MFSP) of the biocrude and fuel blendstock, and NPV and internal rate of return IRR with sustainable fuel credits. Life cycle analysis was conducted to evaluate the supply chain greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the wet waste HTL process as compared with petroleum derived diesel. This study is also informed by years of R&D and process de-risking learnings and was conducted with a basic engineering HTL plant design and costing that akin to a “first-of-a-kind” plant economics. This differs from our conventional “nth plant ” SOT assessments. Specifically, the HTL process model has been updated with more operationally reliable methods for feed heating and phase separations. Further, we have implemented additional spare equipment for redundancy, a more rigorous installed equipment cost estimation approach, and additional costs associated with feed formatting and delivery, building, piping and site development. An Excel-based cost sheet based on the basic engineering design is also released alongside the report that allows users to conduct customized TEA with their own feed composition and financial assumptions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Advancing INFCIRC/908 Insider Threat Mitigation International Working Group: Activity Roadmap, 2025-2027

This 2-year work plan provides a roadmap for activities the IWG and other stakeholders will undertake between 2025 and 2027. Members of the IWG Steering Committee (SC) are responsible to (1) engage the broader insider threat mitigation community of practice to inform and promote work plan activities, (2) track progress towards goals, and (3) provide updates to the IWG at regular intervals. This work plan is a living document and will be updated periodically to assess progress towards goals and will be revised as needed to address emergent and exigent areas of concern identified by the IWG.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

DOE OSTI2025

Pipeline for Integrated Projects in Energy Systems (PIPES): A Tool for Integrated System Planning [Slides]

The Pipeline for Integrated Projects in Energy Systems (PIPES) is a comprehensive project, data, and workflow management tool designed for integrated modeling teams. PIPES facilitates the management of data requirements, tasks, and progress tracking, serving as a higher-level integration layer that works across various data and modeling software. This tool integrates models, data, and tools to perform large-scale, integrated analysis work at scale. PIPES is designed to streamline integrated modeling projects, enhance collaboration, and ensure the quality and efficiency of data management and workflow processes. This presentation introduces PIPES a multi-model tool for integrated system planning; it describes the underlying architecture, deep dives into common user workflows, and outlines the upcoming development roadmap beyond its current alpha state.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2024

DOE BSSD Performance Management Metrics Report Q2

The vision of the National Microbiome Data Collaborative (NMDC) centers on the concept of connecting data, people, and ideas to advance microbiome innovation and discovery. Building data infrastructure, while key to NMDC’s ability to execute on our vision, can only go so far in creating scientific impact. By fostering strong community partnerships and developing a set of robust community outreach and training programs, we are able to turn our products – the Submission Portal, NMDC EDGE, and the Data Portal – into tools that empower the scientific community. Our multi-pronged community building approach spans individual researchers, research teams, consortia and scientific societies, and institutions and federal agencies. To foster a collaborative and inclusive community-centered environment, we have identified three strategic objectives to promote an inclusive and connected community: (1) recognize and support the diverse research needs and perspectives of the microbiome research community; (2) promote best practices across the microbiome community, from researchers to funders, through community-driven practices (FAIR, CARE, and TRUST); and (3) build a microbiome ecosystem that enables scientific discovery and innovation across stakeholders. These strategic objectives allow our team to focus on impact across a diverse range of activities, from launching the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) Microbiome Data Prize to supporting the Ambassador and Champions programs fostering learning and building a collaborative network. We broadly communicate our work through social media (X/Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram), The Microbiome Standard (our quarterly newsletter), and Annual Reports. All our work is underpinned by a strong commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion as articulated in our Action Plan that tracks progress towards key metrics. A core component of our engagement strategy is user research. User research ensures the Submission Portal, NMDC EDGE, Data Portal, and the new Field Notes mobile app are designed with and for the scientific community. Our user research efforts consist of asking researchers exploratory questions to collect information on researcher priorities, methodologies, and perceptions to ensure that we are aware of the current state of microbiome research. Our usability testing provides researchers with prototypes or test environments of the NMDC products, and we capture valuable information on how users interact with the products to make improvements. Given the diverse nature of microbiome work, we acknowledge that we are not aware of all pressing data challenges and thus rely on the research community to help us identify the most important issues to prioritize. To date, we have conducted 24 interviews and one beta-testing call with 10 participants across all NMDC products, which have generated 321 insights and 120 action items. Herein, we describe the ways we engage with the microbiome research community to advance the NMDC mission.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Supporting data for Site-specific Design Case Study for Wet Waste Hydrothermal Liquefaction and Biocrude Upgrading to Hydrocarbon Fuels

Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) is a thermal process that converts wet biomass to renewable hydrocarbon fuel blendstocks (i.e., renewable naphtha, renewable diesel, and sustainable aviation fuel (SAF)). It can utilize a wide range of pure and blended wet feedstocks, including sewage sludge from water resource recovery facilities (WRRF), food and agriculture wastes, algae, fats, oils and greases (FOG) and blends of dry and wet wastes/feedstocks. Historically, techno-economic analysis (TEA) and annual state of technology (SOT) assessments with standard economic assumptions used by the Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) were conducted for the wet waste HTL pathway leveraging experimental data collected from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory’s (PNNL) continuous flow reactor systems. The objective of the SOT assessment has been to guide and track progress of BETO’s HTL research and development (R&D) toward reduced cost and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the pathway. However, gaps exist between BETO’s traditional SOT updates and the needs of key external stakeholders that – if addressed – will accelerate technology adoption. This Business Case Study aims to bridge this gap by providing an updated design, TEA, and LCA based on PNNL’s FY23 R&D with added analyses and information that provide enhanced relevance for stakeholders of the HTL technology. This includes specific siting, regional wet waste resource inventory and transportation cost analyses, fuel market information, sustainable fuel policy impacts, economic metrics of net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR), greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analysis, and statistical analysis of cost and technical uncertainties of the HTL plant design. The study focuses on the “Detroit combined statistical area (CSA)” region for siting of a wet waste HTL plant adjacent to the Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA) facility with guidance from industry participants. Regional resource and siting analyses were conducted to identify feedstock availability, scale, and cost, as well as a beneficial site location. TEA with detailed rigorous capital cost estimation for the specific site application was conducted to evaluate the key economic metrics of most value to industrial partners. These include total capital investment, operating costs, minimum fuel selling price (MFSP) of the biocrude and fuel blendstock, and NPV and internal rate of return IRR with sustainable fuel credits. Life cycle analysis was conducted to evaluate the supply chain greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the wet waste HTL process as compared with petroleum derived diesel. This study is also informed by years of R&D and process de-risking learnings and was conducted with a basic engineering HTL plant design and costing that akin to a “first-of-a-kind” plant economics. This differs from our conventional “nth plant ” SOT assessments. Specifically, the HTL process model has been updated with more operationally reliable methods for feed heating and phase separations. Further, we have implemented additional spare equipment for redundancy, a more rigorous installed equipment cost estimation approach, and additional costs associated with feed formatting and delivery, building, piping and site development. An Excel-based cost sheet based on the basic engineering design is also released alongside the report that allows users to conduct customized TEA with their own feed composition and financial assumptions.

Li, Shuyun↗

DOE OSTI2023

Harmonising the land-use flux estimates of global models and national inventories for 2000–2020

As the focus of climate policy shifts from pledges to implementation, there is a growing need to track progress on climate change mitigation at the country level, particularly for the land-use sector. Despite new tools and models providing unprecedented monitoring opportunities, striking differences remain in estimations of anthropogenic land-use CO 2 fluxes between, on the one hand, the national greenhouse gas inventories (NGHGIs) used to assess compliance with national climate targets under the Paris Agreement and, on the other hand, the Global Carbon Budget and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports, both based on global bookkeeping models (BMs). Recent studies have shown that these differences are mainly due to inconsistent definitions of anthropogenic CO 2 fluxes in managed forests. Countries assume larger areas of forest to be managed than BMs do, due to a broader definition of managed land in NGHGIs. Additionally, the fraction of the land sink caused by indirect effects of human-induced environmental change (e.g. fertilisation effect on vegetation growth due to increased atmospheric CO 2 concentration) on managed lands is treated as non-anthropogenic by BMs but as anthropogenic in most NGHGIs. We implement an approach that adds the CO 2 sink caused by environmental change in countries' managed forests (estimated by 16 dynamic global vegetation models, DGVMs) to the land-use fluxes from three BMs. This sum is conceptually more comparable to NGHGIs and is thus expected to be quantitatively more similar. Our analysis uses updated and more comprehensive data from NGHGIs than previous studies and provides model results at a greater level of disaggregation in terms of regions, countries and land categories (i.e. forest land, deforestation, organic soils, other land uses). Our results confirm a large difference (6.7 GtCO 2 yr —1 ) in global land-use CO 2 fluxes between the ensemble mean of the BMs, which estimate a source of 4.8 GtCO 2 yr —1 for the period 2000–2020, and NGHGIs, which estimate a sink of —1.9 GtCO 2 yr —1 in the same period. Most of the gap is found on forest land (3.5 GtCO 2 yr —1 ), with differences also for deforestation (2.4 GtCO 2 yr —1 ), for fluxes from other land uses (1.0 GtCO 2 yr —1 ) and to a lesser extent for fluxes from organic soils (0.2 GtCO 2 yr —1 ). By adding the DGVM ensemble mean sink arising from environmental change in managed forests (—6.4 GtCO 2 yr —1 ) to BM estimates, the gap between BMs and NGHGIs becomes substantially smaller both globally (residual gap: 0.3 GtCO 2 yr —1 ) and in most regions and countries. However, some discrepancies remain and deserve further investigation. For example, the BMs generally provide higher emissions from deforestation than NGHGIs and, when adjusted with the sink in managed forests estimated by DGVMs, yield a sink that is often greater than NGHGIs. In summary, this study provides a blueprint for harmonising the estimations of anthropogenic land-use fluxes, allowing for detailed comparisons between global models and national inventories at global, regional and country levels. This is crucial to increase confidence in land-use emissions estimates, support investments in land-based mitigation strategies and assess the countries' collective progress under the Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Q1-2024 Solar Cost Benchmarks

Each year, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) and its national laboratory partners develop cost benchmarks for U.S. solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. These benchmarks track progress toward reducing solar costs and guide R&D priorities. Unlike typical studies that report only $/W, SETO uses intrinsic units (e.g., $/m² for mounting structures) to better capture how technology improvements such as module efficiency would impact system costs. This allows flexible modeling where inputs can vary significantly to assess cost sensitivity. Costs are reported in two ways: Minimum Sustainable Price (MSP): Long term, financially viable price under stable market conditions. Modeled Market Price (MMP): Actual market price, influenced by short term distortions such as tariffs or subsidies. Three national labs collect cost data from industry stakeholders, ensuring no duplication in outreach to stakeholders. Data reflects real transactions (primarily from Q1) and is weighted based on the number of sources per cost element. The PV System Cost Model (PVSCM) divides total installed system cost into eight categories: 1. Module (PV) 2. Inverter 3. Energy Storage System (ESS) 4. Structural BOS (SBOS) 5. Electrical BOS (EBOS) 6. Fieldwork 7. Office work 8. Other (developer/EPC costs) The first five are hardware costs, while the last three are soft costs. Each category includes fixed and variable cost components, where “size” depends on context (e.g., manufacturing capacity for modules vs. system capacity for installation costs). Variable costs are expressed using appropriate intrinsic units. The model reflects the owner’s upfront overnight capital cost, excluding tax credits. Tariffs and subsidies are treated as temporary market distortions affecting MMP but not MSP. PVSCM is implemented in Excel, where cost elements are aggregated into total system cost. Additional sheets handle unit conversions and operation & maintenance (O&M), with O&M costs levelized over the system’s lifetime.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS1991

The FAA aging airplane program plan for transport aircraft

The FAA Aging Airplane Program is focused on five program areas: maintenance, transport airplanes, commuter airplanes, airplane engines, and research. These programs are complementary and concurrent, and have been in effect since 1988. The programs address the aging airplane challenge through different methods, including policies, procedures, and hardware development. Each program is carefully monitored and its progress tracked to ensure that the needs of the FAA, the industry, and the flying public are being met.

Aging Aircraft↗