Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “County”

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 793 records · Page 44

Inspection Status Report of Site A/Plot M (Report for 2020)

The Site A/Plot M, Decommissioned Reactor Site was inspected on September 24, 2020. Site A/Plot M is located in the Palos Area Preserves, operated by the Forest Preserve District of Cook County. The site was found to be in good condition with minimal erosional concerns across the grass covered mound at Plot M. Landscaping timbers installed along the footpath north of Plot M is effective in reducing erosion down the hill. Erosion concerns at Plot M are being addressed by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). The bike trail installed by Cook County Forest Preserve to the east of Plot M has helped reduce traffic at the site. The Plot M monument appears solid with no visible cracks. The Site A monument has several cracks present that will possibly widen over time. No cause for a follow up inspection was identified.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Opportunities for Solar Industrial Process Heat in the United States

Energy used in the production and processing of materials and products represents a significant fraction of the overall energy footprint of the industrial sector. Solar technologies may provide suitable alternative to existing combustion technologies, but their relevance for industries in the United States has been largely unexplored at the necessary levels of spatial, temporal, and operational detail. To provide the first assessment of the technical opportunities for solar technologies to meet the demand for process heat in the United States, we first develop estimates of energy use by process temperature at the county and hourly resolutions for all manufacturing industries. We then estimate the opportunities for seven solar technology packages—comprised of solar thermal and photovoltaic-connected electrotechnologies—to meet process heat demand given solar resources and available land area by county.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Well Stimulation Treatment in California: Evaluation of Disclosure Data, May 2015 – October 2019

In this document, disclosure data from 1,228 well stimulations occurring May 2015 to October 2019 in California are evaluated. This evaluation updates a previous study that was based on 618 well stimulations occurring May 2015 to June 2016 (Stringfellow, W.T., Camarillo, M.K., and Jordan, P. 2017, Status of Well Stimulation in California Since Implementation of SB-4 Regulations, Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA). While the goal of the previous study was to provide a summary of information obtained since passage of California Senate Bill No. 4—Oil and Gas, the goal of the current evaluation is to provide a basis for studying chemical indicators that could potentially be used to detect aquifer contamination. We evaluate chemical indicators is a separate document using the data contained herein as well as data from monitoring wells located within oil fields. Compared with the data used by Stringfellow et al. 2017, the current evaluation is based on a more diverse data set. While the previous study contained data for only two oil fields with more than 30 well stimulations, the current data set contains four oil fields with more than 30 well stimulations, making these data more ideal for comparisons using statistical tests. More producers and a new oil field, Buena Vista Nose, are represented in the current data set. Some well stimulation practices remain relatively unchanged since the previous study. Well stimulation is mostly occurring in Kern County with the exception of a single well stimulation in Orange County. Almost all well stimulations are hydraulic fracturing. The current data set contains two acid fracturing treatments and one matrix acidizing treatment. The median number of chemicals added per well stimulation—excluding water and proppant—was previously 21; the number in the expanded data set is 20. Median water added per well stimulation was previously 89,000 gallons and is now 98,000 gallons. While this water use represents a 10% increase, water use for hydraulic fracturing in California is still lower than water use in other oil and gas fields. Chemical formulations appear to have shifted since the previous study. This shift may be related to a change in the predominant service company. We identified 26 chemicals for which the frequency of use has changed by more than 30%. The total number of chemicals used has also expanded. Previously, 178 unique chemicals were identified as being added to well stimulation fluids. The total number of unique chemicals is now 205. Analytical data available for base and recovered fluids has expanded. The number of base fluid samples has increased from 12 to 35 and the number of recovered fluid samples has increased from 1,078 to 2,166. The expanded data set is more ideal for an evaluation of indicator chemicals and comparisons across different formations. The analytical data for recovered fluid samples indicates that many ions, radioactive constituents, and organics are consistently observed, making these chemicals ideal for consideration as potential indicators of aquifer contamination.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Coal-dependent Communities in Transition: Identifying Best Practices to Ensure Equitable Outcomes

The U.S. coal industry is experiencing a sharp increase in the numbers of retired and/or decommissioned coal-fired power plants across the U.S. In the years between 2010-2019, around 102 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired generating capacity has been announced to be decommissioned, representing more than 546 coal-fired power plant units, and an additional 17 GW is planned to be decommissioned by 2025. This change in the energy production landscape presents an impact on the social, environmental, and economic prospects of coal-dependent communities. This report examined the role of communities in the coal power plant decommissioning process and provided community-identified best practices to ensure an equitable process. The experiences of four coal-dependent communities—Wise County, VA, Muskegon, MI, Anderson County, TN, and Becker, MN—are presented as case studies to understand the impacts of the decommissioning process, and associated best practices, from the communities’ perspective. The report results highlight the need to recognize that the decommissioning decision-making process must be community-based to be equitable. Each community’s input is key to the transition away from coal power because there is no one-size-fits-all development plan. In other words, each community’s trajectory through the decommissioning process—from the retirement decision-making stage to the final site redevelopment phase—is unique because each community has distinct needs and wants from the energy transition. What is best for one community may not be suited for another. Ultimately, the framework for site development and community revitalization post-decommissioning cannot be universal because each community’s profile—from a social, cultural, and economic perspective—is different. Community impacts of power plant decommissioning are not limited to job and revenue losses. Communities are likely to be impacted culturally, socially, environmentally, and have long-term health-based impacts that should be acknowledged and addressed in post-retirement plans. Commonly identified decommissioning best practices include: Early and continued engagement throughout, with a number of mediums for communication and feedback (e.g., in-person sessions, virtual meetings, written comment opportunities); Early planning of post-decommissioning projects to replace lost jobs, revenue, and economic activity; Recognition (and mitigation, if possible) of social impacts on the community due to plant closure; Transparency throughout the process, with trusted information being provided about the decommissioning process and timeline; potential impacts on the workforce, economy, and environment; and the feasibility of alternative site uses; Identification of funding sources, technical experts, and/or strategic partnerships to support decommissioning and the affected communities upfront; and, Acknowledgment of communities as stakeholders who have a role in the conversation and right to determine their futures. Three key areas for assisting coal-dependent communities affected by the energy transition: Technical assistance: assessment of site feasibility for alternative uses or to repower with new technologies; Cross-partnership engagement and collaboration: facilitate knowledge-sharing of “lessons learned” about the decommissioning process between communities and provide guidance for decision-making processes; and, Financial assistance: access to grant and/or loan programs to assist with redevelopment survey, bolster community economic security through job creation, and cover environmental clean-up costs. Technical assistance, cross-partnership engagement, and financial aid can be mobilized to help communities throughout various stages of the decommissioning process, including the retirement decision, the site reclamation phase, and eventual revitalization of the site and surrounding community.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

State Government Revenue Vulnerability Index and Local Government Revenue Vulnerability Index

The State Government Revenue Vulnerability Index (SGRVI) and Local Government Revenue Vulnerability Index (LGRVI) measure the vulnerability of government revenues by estimating monthly changes relative to a January 2020 baseline. Revenues included in both indices include: taxes on products and sales, transportation and housing revenues, individual income taxes, severance taxes and royalties, and property taxes. Local government revenues also include a local revenue from state revenue sharing component. In addition, the main index for the LGRVI for county-level governments includes revenue estimates for sub-county government units, including municipalities, school districts, and special districts. This revenue data is aggregated to produce the indices.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Power Over Ethernet Investigation Report

This report provides insight into collaboration between Savannah River National Laboratory’s (SRNL) Global Security Directorate, Augusta University (AU) and the Georgia Cyber Center (GCC) team with regards to device analysis, investigation, and R&D efforts. Most recently, the GCC/AU team approached SRNL to receive cybersecurity expertise in a joint effort to identify differences between a potentially questionable PoE injector recovered by Columbia County and an identical one purchased by the GCC. The questionable device was installed at a fire station operated in Columbia County, shown in the figure 1-1 below.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

Feasibility of Deep Direct-Use Geothermal on the West Virginia University Campus-Morgantown, WV

In 2010, research completed by the Southern Methodist University (SMU) Geothermal Laboratory estimated temperatures at reasonable drilling depths in the state of West Virginia (WV) were in the temperature range desirable for district heating. This higher temperature region extends from north-central WV (Monongalia County) to southeastern WV (Greenbrier County). The Morgantown campus of West Virginia University (WVU) is located within the north-central region, and as part of the 2016 study on Low-temperature Geothermal Play Fairway Analysis for the Appalachian Basin (GPFA-AB), Morgantown is identified as one of the priority locations for further analysis of the potential for deep direct-use (DDU) of geothermal energy. In this project, the feasibility of developing a Geothermal District Heating and Cooling (GDHC) system for the WVU campus in Morgantown, WV, to replace the current coal-fired steam heating and cooling system, is evaluated.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Computed Tomography Scanning and Petrophysical Measurements of the Wellington KGS 2-32 Core

This report describes the use of the computed tomography facilities and the Multi-Sensor Core Logger at the National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, West Virginia to characterize core from the Wellington KGS 2-32 well (API 15-191-22770). Core from the well was obtained as part of the Small-Scale Field Test Demonstrating Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Arbuckle Saline Aquifer and by CO 2 -Enhanced Oil Recovery at Wellington Field, Sumner County, Kansas (DE-FE0006821). The primary impetus of this work was to capture a detailed a digital representation of the core from the Wellington KGS 2-32 well (Sumner County, Kansas). The collaboration between the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) NETL and the Kansas Geological Survey (KGS) at the University of Kansas enables other research entities to access information about this potential carbon storage location and formations. The resultant datasets are presented in this report and can be accessed from NETL's Energy Data eXchange (EDX) online system using the following link: https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/wellington2-32-core.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗

Building Stock Segmentation Cluster Development: Technical Reference Document

The building stock in the United States (U.S.) varies significantly as a function of several macro variables such as: climate, building type, vintage, and density. These variables change across the U.S. and can also significantly impact energy usage of the individual buildings and overall stock. For example, the square foot density and building type varies by several orders of magnitude from Manhattan to the eastern plains of Colorado. The diversity in energy use of the building stock of different areas of the U.S. is significant, and as a result, analyses that require localized results need to consider the relevant geography and the current makeup of the building stock. This document discusses the development and implementation of a stock clustering algorithm that produces a technically rigorous, consistent, and repeatable collection of geographies which are used as the basis for localized analysis. This framework considers the impact of built environment density, diversity, and climate in creating groupings of counties that create a far more nuanced analysis framework than national averages. Clustering of counties together represents a similarity of building characteristics and climate zone.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in Des Moines, Cedar Rapids, and Sioux Falls: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in the Greater Little Rock Area: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in the Evansville and the Shawnee National Forest Area: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in the Rural Eastern Climate Zone 5A Area: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in Las Vegas: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in Eau Claire, La Crosse, Rochester, and Wausau: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in Boise-Twin Falls: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in Rural Lower Midwest and High Plains: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

Understanding Building Energy Use in the Rochester-Buffalo and Erie, PA Area: Basic Building Stock Characterization

This report is part of a publication series that focuses on approximately 100 different local geographies, or "clusters." Each report provides commercial and multifamily building characteristic and energy data for a local geography, with the intention of helping policymakers at the city, county and state levels better understand building energy use. Specifically, this report breaks down the building stock in the counties shown in Figure 1 by building type, size, energy consumption, and emissions.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗