Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “existing hydropower assets”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

HydroBio: Hydropower Capacity and Freshwater Biodiversity in Conterminous United States Sub-basins

This dataset summarizes existing and potential hydropower capacity and freshwater biodiversity at the sub-basin level throughout the conterminous United States (CONUS). It contains descriptive information regarding each sub-basin (e.g., 8-digit hydrologic unit code identifier, name, states, and size) along with sub-basin-level summaries of: 1) existing hydropower capacity (MW), 2) potential nominal non-powered dam (NPD) capacity (MW), 3) potential capacity of new stream reach development (NSD) (MW), and 4) freshwater biodiversity, including the total richness of fish, crayfish, and mussels and metrics that account for how rare and threatened those species tend to be. Hydropower data were obtained from Oak Ridge National Laboratory data resources (Existing Hydropower Assets, Non-Powered Dam Technical Potential, and New Stream Reach Development). Freshwater biodiversity data were obtained from NatureServe. Sub-basin characteristic information was obtained from the United States Geological Survey. Additionally, long data that provide lists of unique elements within each sub-basin for each constituent data resource (e.g., NatureServe, Existing Hydropower Assets) are provided to enhance dataset utility for users. The dataset provides, for the first time, a national-level assessment of existing and potential hydropower capacity in the context of freshwater biodiversity and is a valuable resource for stakeholders tasked with providing affordable, reliable energy to the American public while maintaining or enhancing invaluable freshwater resources. The dataset contains six data files in comma separated (*.csv) format that are within a zipped file.

Bozeman, Bryan [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORN↗
DOE OSTI2025

HydroFish: freshwater fish co-occurrence with hydropower plants and non-powered dams in conterminous United States sub-basins

The HydroFish dataset lists all existing hydropower plants (EHAs) and non-powered dams (NPDs; ≥ 0.001 MW potential nominal capacity), delineates the hydrologic sub-basins in which they are situated, and then lists all freshwater fish species reported to occur in those sub-basins. This dataset was compiled using the HydroBio dataset (https://hydrosource.ornl.gov/data/datasets/hydrobio/) and contains 24 total variables that describe hydrologic sub-basins, each unique EHA (plant ID and name, geographic coordinates, permit type, capacity, etc.) and NPD (ID value, known names, geographic coordinates, and estimated potential nominal capacity), and freshwater fish species in the sub-basin (common and scientific name, origin, and migratory and threat status). The HydroBio dataset was built using Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s Existing Hydropower Assets Dataset (2024 version) and Non-powered Dam Technical Potential Dataset (2024 version), and NatureServe’s fish species distribution dataset (2023 version). The dataset also contains summary variables that report the unique number of EHAs, NPDs, and freshwater fish species per sub-basin. The HydroFish dataset contains two unique data files: 1) a .csv metadata file describing the dataset variables, and 2) a .csv data file containing the actual dataset. Note that there may be many rows per unique existing hydropower plant or non-powered dam given that distinct species are listed per existing plant or NPD per sub-basin. The dataset is downloadable as a zip file containing the metadata and dataset files.

Bozeman, Bryan [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORN↗
DOE OSTI2026

Hydropower Infrastructure - LAkes, Reservoirs, and RIvers (HILARRI), v4

HILARRI is a database of links between major datasets of operational hydropower dams and powerplants, and inland water bodies. These connections are critical for conducting large-scale analysis of hydropower infrastructure and their associated natural and engineered water systems. Features include: – Dams from the National Inventory of Dams (2025) and the Global Reservoir and Dam Database (GRanD v1.3) – Hydropower plants from the Existing Hydropower Assets dataset (EHA 2025) – Power plants that are listed in the 2025 U.S. Hydropower Development Pipeline Data or were listed in previous versions of the dataset These hydropower infrastructure features are linked to several major datasets that provide hydrologic and hydraulic information relevant for analysis of hydropower systems that includes the integral water resources. That information comes from: – Products from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) – NHDPlusV2 Medium Resolution river network flowlines, – NHD waterbodies (limited to lakes and reservoirs), – NHD Watershed Boundary Dataset (HUC12-level for the Conterminous United States (CONUS)) – NHD High Resolution waterbodies – HydroLAKES water bodies (lakes and reservoirs) – LAGOS-US lakes and reservoirs – EPA National Lakes Assessment (2007, 2012, 2017, and 2022) – The Reservoir Sedimentation Database (RESSED) – EPA SuRGE sampling locations Unique identifiers are used to facilitate joining to the original full datasets. For example, characteristics of NHD flowlines such as estimated average flow rate can be joined from the NHDPlusV2 dataset to a dam or power plant listed in HILARRI based on the ID field, “COMID”, that is common to both datasets. HILARRI only includes basic information about identifiers, location, and data quality or usage notes. It does not contain the attributes or time series data associated with these sites. The HILARRI dataset incorporates information from several datasets to facilitate more effective and accurate analysis of hydropower infrastructure and their associated waterbodies. For example, dams were checked against the most recent American Rivers Dam Removal Database to identify and flag facilities that may no longer exist. Additionally, dams that are listed multiple times in the NID are identified and flagged to avoid double-counting when analyzing and summarizing information. Other quality flags include certainty of operational hydropower (i.e., if one or more datasets indicates hydropower at a particular location), whether an associated water body is accurate or composed of multiple polygons, or whether there is a known issue with reported characteristics in one of the underlying datasets. These additional data flags are designed to increase confidence in data usage for individual to large-scale analyses.

Hansen, Carly [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000193280838)↗
DOE OSTI2020

The 2018 National Hydropower Map, Version 1

This map poster uses Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s 2018 Existing Hydropower Assets Plant Dataset to visualize the geospatial distribution and characteristics of existing hydropower plants in the United States.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hydropower Energy Storage Capacity (HESC) Dataset

The Hydropower Energy Storage Capacity (HESC) Dataset catalogs characteristics that are relevant to evaluating reservoir storage and estimates of energy storage capacity based on varying levels of detail. Hydropower dams and reservoirs were included based on information from the National Inventory of Dams (NID; USACE, 2021) and Global Reservoir and Dam (GRanD v1.3) and Existing Hydropower Assets datasets. These data provide a foundation for understanding available resources at existing hydropower facilities and their potential to provide storage of energy and more flexible generation. Estimates of energy storage capacity include: • Level 1 – nominal energy storage capacity based on maximum storage capacities and hydraulic head • Level 2 – nominal energy storage capacity based on historical models or observations of reservoir volume and hydraulic head. These estimates are provided based on capacity from the entire historical period as well as monthly values. • Level 3 – modeled energy generation based on volume-elevation relationships, historical storage, observed/modeled inflows, and hydraulic capacity of turbines and calculated both as overall and on a monthly basis. • Level 4 – modeled energy generation incorporating information from Level 3 and operational constraints. For facilities where installed capacity is known, there are also estimates for discharge duration (the length of time when a facility could provide generation at a given capacity).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hydropower Capital and O&M Costs: An Exploration of the FERC Form 1 Data

This report explores the potential for using responses from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) “Electric Utility Annual Report,” also known as FERC Form 1, as a cost database for conventional and pumped storage hydropower (PSH). The report outlines the process used to compile an easy-to-access database from the original FERC Form 1 data and discusses the historical cost/performance data. The steps for developing the database include downloading the annual FoxPro files from the FERC website (FERC, 2020), reading them into an Excel format, and reconciling naming issues across years, repeated entries, and shared assets, among others. The cleaned and compiled Form 1 database is available on Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL’s) HydroSource website. For this report, the compiled Form 1 database was linked to two other hydropower databases, the National Inventory of Dams and the ORNL Existing Hydropower Assets, that provide additional information on the characteristics and other features of plants in the Form 1 data. Explorations of the plant characteristics, performance, capital costs, and operation and maintenance (O&M) cost data in the combined database were presented separately for conventional hydropower and PSH projects. Form 1 has several advantages as a hydropower cost database. First, the cost data is reported directly by plant owners. Second, Form 1 provides cost breakdowns of capital and operating costs for large conventional and PSH plants enabling more detailed tracking of hydropower costs compared with typical total cost estimates. Third, although the Form 1 data is not reported by all operational hydropower plants in the United States, the available data represents a wide range of plant characteristics and a sizable proportion of the hydropower fleet (61% of PSH plants and 22% of conventional hydropower plants by capacity). The lower proportion of the conventional hydropower fleet is because Form 1 reporting requirements apply only to private utilities that meet given size thresholds, leaving out federally owned facilities and many smaller hydropower plants. Overall, the Form 1 cost database represents a unique, publicly available database on hydropower asset capital and O&M costs. This report leads to a compiled database for the reporting years 1994 to 2020 that helps resolve issues with accessibility and use of the FERC Form 1 data by hydropower plant owners, project developers, technology developers, and regulators.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydropower Infrastructure – LAkes, Reservoirs, and RIvers (HILARRI)

HILARRI is a database of links between major datasets of operational hydropower dams and powerplants, and inland water bodies. These connections are critical for conducting large-scale analysis of hydropower infrastructure and their associated natural and engineered water systems. Features include: – Dams from the National Inventory of Dams (2024) and the Global Reservoir and Dam Database (GRanD v1.3) – Hydropower plants from the Existing Hydropower Assets dataset (EHA 2024) These hydropower infrastructure features are linked to several major datasets that provide hydrologic and hydraulic information relevant for analysis of hydropower systems that includes the integral water resources. That information comes from: – Products from the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) – NHDPlusV2 Medium Resolution river network flowlines, – NHD waterbodies (limited to lakes and reservoirs), – NHD Watershed Boundary Dataset (HUC12-level for the Conterminous United States (CONUS)) – NHD High Resolution waterbodies – HydroLAKES water bodies (lakes and reservoirs) – LAGOS-US lakes and reservoirs – EPA National Lakes Assessment (2007, 2012, 2017, and 2022) – The Reservoir Sedimentation Database (RESSED) Unique identifiers are used to facilitate joining to the original full datasets. For example, characteristics of NHD flowlines such as estimated average flow rate can be joined from the NHDPlusV2 dataset to a dam or power plant listed in HILARRI based on the ID field, “COMID”, that is common to both datasets. HILARRI only includes basic information about identifiers, location, and data quality or usage notes. It does not contain the attributes or time series data associated with these sites. The HILARRI dataset incorporates information from several datasets to facilitate more effective and accurate analysis of hydropower infrastructure and their associated waterbodies. For example, dams were checked against the most recent American Rivers Dam Removal Database to identify and flag facilities that may no longer exist. Additionally, dams that are listed multiple times in the NID are identified and flagged to avoid double-counting when analyzing and summarizing information. Other quality flags include certainty of operational hydropower (i.e., if one or more datasets indicates hydropower at a particular location), whether an associated water body is accurate or composed of multiple polygons, or whether there is a known issue with reported characteristics in one of the underlying datasets. These additional data flags are designed to increase confidence in data usage for individual to large-scale analyses.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Advanced Hydropower and PSH Capacity Expansion Modeling (Final Report on HydroWIRES D1 Improvements to Capacity Expansion Modeling)

Hydropower and pumped-storage hydropower (PSH) have played a key role in providing flexible, low-carbon electricity to the U.S. electricity system for over a century. As variable generation (VG) deployment increases the demand for flexible, dispatchable generation, it is important to use all available methods for understanding how hydropower and PSH interfaces with VG in a future low-carbon grid. Capacity expansion models (CEMs) of electricity systems are often used to study future electricity scenarios, but these tools often have difficulty representing site- and technology-details of hydropower and PSH due to limited spatial, temporal, or process resolution. This report demonstrates a set of model advancements to improve hydropower and PSH representations in CEMs and other models that consider hydropower and PSH's role in electricity systems. Model advancements include new data integration to define closed-loop PSH resource availability and cost, along with site-level parameterizations of existing PSH capacity and energy storage specifications. Shifting energy across seasons for both hydropower and PSH is explored to demonstrate the potential value of long-duration storage. New representations of hydropower upgrades offer opportunities to increase dispatchability, add pumps, or independently add capacity or energy depending on what is most valuable. New model structures and data are demonstrated individually and in combination to observe their impact on model results and provide initial insights into what is most important for analysts, electricity system planners, and hydropower decision-makers to consider when assessing future roles of hydropower. Improving flexibility of existing hydropower assets has the potential to reduce CO 2 emissions through complementing VG technologies and/or improve electricity system economics by reducing the need to deploy higher-cost systems. Large-scale energy storage is also shown to provide opportunities for balancing seasonal differences in VG, particularly solar photovoltaics (PV). Initial analysis with a new closed-loop PSH resource and cost dataset also demonstrate the potential for new PSH deployment to offer new grid flexibility opportunities. Future analysis and modeling of hydropower's role in the U.S. and other electricity systems could include methodological improvements based on those discussed here along with sensitivity analysis to better represent current and future potential hydropower and PSH flexibility. Improvements to geospatial and site-level data can further improve the understanding of how hydropower and PSH can be upgraded and operated in response to future electricity system needs. This work lays the groundwork to use advanced planning models to explore the range of roles hydropower and PSH can play in the grid of the future.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Hydropower Infrastructure - LAkes, Reservoirs, and RIvers (HILARRI)

HILARRI is a database of links between major datasets of operational hydropower dams and powerplants (National Inventory of Dams (2019), Global Reservoir and Dam Database (GRanD v1.3), Existing Hydropower Assets (EHA 2020), and inland water bodies (NHDPlusV2 river network, NHD water bodies, NHD Watershed Boundary Dataset, HydroLAKES).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hydropower Infrastructure - LAkes, Reservoirs, and RIvers (HILARRI), V2

HILARRI Version 2 is a database of links between major datasets of operational hydropower dams and powerplants (National Inventory of Dams (2021), Global Reservoir and Dam Database (GRanD v1.3), Existing Hydropower Assets (EHA 2022), and inland water bodies (NHDPlusV2 river network, NHD water bodies, NHD Watershed Boundary Dataset, HydroLAKES).

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydropower Capacity Factor Trends & Analytics for the United States

This data repository contains all code, input data, and data generated for Turner et al. (2024)—“Hydropower capacity factors trending down in the United States”. File descriptions: – hydro-cf-trends-inputs.zip: Full set of input data used in this study, organized for direct entry into “/data” directory of hydro-cf-trends data processing pipeline. – hydro-cf-trends.zip: Full data processing pipeline, coded using the R {targets} framework. This is a snapshot release (v1.0) of the code repository stored at https://code.ornl.gov/turnersw/hydro-cf-trends/. – hydro-cf-trends-results.zip: Provides all dam level results required to reproduce results and graphics in Turner et al. (2024). Dams are identified by the “complxID” (root of the hydropower plant ID in the Existing Hydropower Assets Database, inherited from HILARRI). Results include: • dam_CF_trends.csv: Table of long-term trends in annualized capacity factors for 610 dams and modeled annualized capacity factors for 362 modeled dams (naturalized and assimilated flows). • dam_annualized_CF_gen.csv: Annualized time series of the following variables for each of 610 hydropower dams with nameplate > 5MW – Reported nameplate capacity (MW) – Implied maximum annual generation (MWh) – Reported net generation (MWh) – Computed annual capacity factor – Modeled annual capacity factor (362 modeled plants only)

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Interactive Hydropower Generation Map

This interactive map shows the spatial distribution and temporal trends of net generation for hydropower facilities in the U.S., as included in the Existing Hydropower Assets (EHA) Net Generation Plant Database.

Schmidt, Erik [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL↗
DOE OSTI2022

Environmental Flow Requirements from FERC Licenses Across the US

Environmental flow requirements included in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) hydropower licenses are important for balancing natural properties and benefits of river ecosystems (e.g., healthy species, recreation, water supply, flood control) supporting hydropower production. In some cases, environmental flow requirements may limit operational flexibility given current operational schemes and make a hydropower plant less able to provide power to the electric grid on demand. Hydropower plants may gain some flexibility as hydropower scheduling time periods are made to be more responsive to the short-term needs of an energy grid increasingly reliant on intermittent renewables. However, many flow requirements focus on the daily, monthly, or seasonal flow fluctuations which matches the time scale of most paradigms linking flow alterations to the health of river ecosystems. This dataset seeks to provide a greater understanding of how flexibility in environmental requirements can be leveraged to create positive outcomes for both the power system and the environment. It contains information on environmental flow requirements from the Protection, Mitigation, and Enhancement section of 50 randomly selected FERC licenses: 25 issued from 1998-2013 that were also included in the ORNL Mitigation Database (Schramm et al. 2015) and 25 issued from 2014-present. The information on environmental flow requirements was extracted from the PM&E section of 50 randomly selected FERC licenses: 25 issued from 1998-2013 that were also included in the ORNL Mitigation Database (Schramm et al. 2015) and 25 issued from 2014-present. The flow requirements were then categorized into flow augmentation categories based on whether the license stated a specific water management purpose for the given requirement called augmentation categories (i.e., fisheries or habitat, recreation or boating, industry, and general or unspecified; Table B). Requirements were also grouped into flow type categories (e.g., minimum flow rate, maximum flow rate, ramping rate). Additional information related to flow requirements such as the augmentation time-period and whether the flow rate was continuous (i.e., condition must be present at all-times) or instantaneous (i.e., condition present at a point in time) was also extracted from the licenses. Some licenses had specific flow requirements based on whether the project was in a wet, dry, or normal water year. If that information was presented in the license, it was also included in the data set. The location within the project was noted, hereafter, zone, in the dataset for flow requirements relating to specific areas of hydropower projects (Dam, Powerhouse, Bypass Reach). Maximum discharge capacities of hydropower facilities were also extracted from both the Existing Hydropower Assets (EHA) data set and the National Inventory of Dams (NID) databases. Each facility was coded with project identification codes from the EHA dataset to facilitate cross-referencing between datasets.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

ORNL Hydropower Cost Database Extract from FERC Form-1

The ORNL FERC Form 1 Hydropower Cost Database Extract is a cleaned and compiled version of the hydropower component of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) Electric Utility Annual Report, also known as Form-1. The database includes conventional and pumped storage hydropower plants owned by non-federal major utilities that submitted the Form 1 data from 1994-2020, representing about 22% of existing conventional hydropower capacity and 61% of pumped storage capacity. The database includes the escalation factors and describes the methods used to scale costs to a common data year, as well as tables of identifiers necessary to link the hydropower plants to two other relevant databases, the National Inventory of Dams and the ORNL Existing Hydropower Assets database. This database provides historical capital and operating costs for three schedules/classes defined in Form 1: Large Hydro, Pumped Storage Hydro, and Small Hydro. The Large Hydro and Pumped Storage Hydro data include cost items, such as land, structures, facilities, etc.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗