Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Agreements”

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 811 records · Page 45
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Model results and data for Nontechnical Barriers to Geothermal Development

Data included in this submission support the analysis conducted for the report "Nontechnical Barriers to Geothermal Development" which is linked bellow. These data include information about the power purchase agreements (PPAs) analyzed for the report, inputs and model results for the pro forma economic analysis, and outputs from the regression analysis conducted on PPAs comparing geothermal and other power generation technologies.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Big Hole Drilling Support for Nuclear Testing, 1985-1992: An Architectural Survey of the Area 1 Subdock, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) planned to demolish two buildings at the Area 1 Subdock at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada, to meet environmental management mission requirements. A review was conducted under Title 54 United States Code (USC) § 306101 (commonly known as Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act) and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800. As a result, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was developed to mitigate the effects of the building demolitions. Stipulation III.B of the MOA requires an architectural survey of the Area 1 Subdock. Prior to this survey, the Subdock had not been systematically recorded. Therefore, an area of approximately 33 hectares (81 acres) was surveyed for historic properties by Desert Research Institute personnel. This effort resulted in the identification, recording, and evaluation of the potential Area 1 Subdock Historic District (SHPO Resource No. D377), including the identification of its contributing components. This district is recommended as eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criteria A and C. It contains 14 primary resources which include individual buildings, structures, storage yards, and infrastructure. Of these resources, all except one are recommended as elements that contribute to the district during its period of significance corresponding to nuclear testing from 1985 through 1992. Four of the resources (B18847, B18848, S2772, S2773) are recommended as individually eligible for the NRHP.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Area 6 Control Point: An Architectural Survey of the Area 6 Control Point, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) proposes to demolish five buildings and five accessory resources in the Area 6 Control Point at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) in Nye County, Nevada. The demolition and removal of the buildings and accessories constitute an undertaking subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (54 United States Code [USC] § 306101) and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800. The buildings and accessories were recorded in Identification and Evaluation of 14 Architectural Resources Scheduled for Demolition, Area 6 Control Point and Vicinity, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada (Menocal et al. 2020). The report found that the five buildings were not individually eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP, National Register) but were potentially eligible as contributing elements to an unrecorded Area 6 Control Point district. The report also found that the five accessory resources were not individually eligible for the NRHP but they contributed to other historic properties, including the contributing elements to the unrecorded district. Finally, the report found that the undertaking would result in an adverse effect to historic properties. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) concurred with the report’s findings regarding the eligibility of the buildings and structures in the Area of Potential Effect (APE) and that the undertaking would result in an adverse effect (Reed 2020). The NNSA/NFO, in consultation with the SHPO, then developed the Memorandum of Agreement DE-GM58-21NA25543 Between the U.S. Department of Energy and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding Demolition of Fourteen Buildings and Structures in Area 6 of the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, hereafter referred to as the MOA. The MOA stipulates that a district boundary be delineated with an accompanying boundary report and supporting photographs (Stipulation III.A) followed by an architectural survey of the potential historic district (Stipulation III.B). The SHPO reviewed and concurred with the proposed district boundary and accompanying boundary report and photographs (O’Neill et al. 2021) on August 23, 2021, in fulfillment of Stipulation III.A (Reed 2021). This architectural survey report has been prepared in accordance with Stipulation III.B. It includes an NRHP evaluation of the district, identifies contributing and non-contributing elements, and is accompanied by Architectural Resource Assessment (ARA) forms. The NRHP evaluation concludes that the Area 6 Control Point is recommended eligible as a historic district under the Secretary of the Interior’s Significance Criterion A at the national level as the location of the command center and various support facilities directly related to timing and firing operations for nuclear testing on the NNSS from 1951 to 1992. It is also recommended eligible under Significance Criterion C for embodying the distinctive characteristics of a nuclear command center in the context of the Cold War and as a significant and distinguishable entity. There are a total of 29 primary resources within the district boundary. Of these, 28 are recommended as contributing elements to the Area 6 Control Point Historic District and one is recommended as non-contributing.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electricity Costs and Carbon Implications for CO 2 -to-Fuels in Selected Locations in 2030

With the growing interest in converting carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) to fuels and products to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions and extend carbon from biogenic and other sources, the development of carbon capture and utilization (CO2U) technologies and industry is crucial. The Markets, Resources, and Environmental and Energy Justice of CO 2 -to-Fuels Technologies (short title: MarkeRs & EEJ) project supports this goal by assessing the resource and market potential and infrastructure requirements for mid-term (-2030) and long-term (-2050) deployment of CO2U technologies. The overall project analyzes CO2U economic and resource requirements as well as sustainability and environmental and energy justice (EEJ) metrics. This report focuses on short-term (-2030) aspects of the project. It identifies three CO2U locations in the Midwestern United States and quantifies the costs for potential electricity resources and marginal emissions for each site in the near term (e.g., 2030). We focus on four electricity purchase options, including retail rate, physical power purchase agreement (PPA), financial PPA, and real-time pricing (RTP), for each of the three sites and consider potential policies such as production tax credits (PTCs). We also assess time-dependent hourly marginal electricity costs and the marginal emission rates using modeled scenarios from Cambium (Gagnon et al. 2021).The results of the analysis are expected to inform other projects within the U.S. Department of Energy's CO 2 -to-Fuels Consortium, especially the Economics and Sustainability of CO 2 Utilization Technologies with Techno-Economic Analysis and Life Cycle Analysis (TEA/LCA) project, led by Michael Wang of Argonne National Laboratory and Ling Tao of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The project results are also expected to inform the investment and technology communities and policymakers at the U.S. Department of Energy, state, and regional levels and guide investment by government and industry in research and development portfolios.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Near-Term Electricity Requirement and Emission Implications for Sustainable Aviation Fuel Production with CO 2 -to-Fuels Technologies

Aviation contributed approximately 10% of the U.S. transportation sector's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and about 3% of the nation's total GHG production before the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic (EPA 2022). Unlike the ground transportation sector, which can be decarbonized by using batteries and hydrogen fuel cell powertrain technologies, the technical and economic challenges of aviation electrification open the opportunity for CO 2 utilization (CO2U) using clean power sources. The U.S. government set a goal to produce 3 billion gallons per year of sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) by 2030 and scale up the production to 35 billion gallons per year by 2050 (Bioenergy Technologies Office 2022). In this report, we examine three potential locations, in California, Iowa, and Louisiana, for SAF production using two production pathways that are expected to be available by 2030. We analyze the electricity cost to satisfy 10% of the SAF production potential for the select locations. Specifically, we consider (1) retail electricity cost from the default local utility in each location; (2) physical power purchase agreement (PPA) for renewable power and battery storage hybrid systems with preset prices; (3) financial PPA from a dedicated renewable plant; and (4) estimated real-time pricing (RTP) from the wholesale power market with utility delivery adders. Retail rates are available for the three potential locations; however, the developer should negotiate with the local utility in Iowa for new tariff riders, because the load of the proposed SAF plant (1.4 GW) is significantly higher than the current industrial tariff structure requirement (200 kW). The developers are not able to claim federal credits (i.e., the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022) when sourcing electricity from local utilities. Developers could consider prioritizing physical and financial PPAs as purchase options. While physical PPAs can be imported out of state, this structure imposes availability issues as developers must locate in the same electricity grid regions. Financial PPAs do not have the same location restrictions and provide the same cost savings as physical PPAs, but financial PPAs impose financial risks in the event of system curtailment and grid interruption. RTPs are available for customers in California with flexible load and hourly load management capability; however, utilities in our studied regions in Louisiana and Iowa only offer time-of-use and curtailment programs to incentivize lower energy usage in peak hours. These utilities do not currently offer RTP programs, and the developer may need to have further negotiations with the local utilities to access RTP programs. The results show that purchased electricity prices may range from 2.6 cents/kWh to 7.1 cents/kWh for the three studied plants.

02 PETROLEUM↗
DOE OSTI2024

Benefits and Burdens: Exploring the Role of Community Benefits in Wind Energy Development [Slides]

In this webinar hosted by the U.S. Department of Energy's WINDExchange initiative, NREL will provide an introduction to community benefit agreements (CBAs) and related funds and investments that serve as voluntary mechanisms that developers may utilize to provide additional financial and/or non-financial benefits for communities impacted by wind energy projects. Community benefits can come in different forms, be developed through diverse processes, and have varying impacts on key outcomes in the wind industry like project success and equity. This webinar explores the nuances of community benefits from multiple angles and provides insights that are relevant to land-based wind energy, offshore wind energy, and other renewable energy technologies.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

An Architectural Survey of the Area 25 Nuclear Rocket Development Station, Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada (Volume 1 of 3)

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO), and the U.S. Department of Energy Environmental Management Nevada Program (EM NV) plan to implement corrective action activities (under the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order, agreed to by the State of Nevada) and demolition of the Engine Maintenance, Assembly, and Disassembly (E-MAD) facility and the Test Cell C Historic District. These are major components of the unrecorded Nuclear Rocket Development Station (NRDS) Historic District, which is eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP, National Register). The NRDS is in Area 25 of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), formerly known as the Nevada Test Site, in Nye County, Nevada. Demolition and removal of the buildings and accessories constitutes an undertaking subject to review under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (54 United States Code [USC] § 306101) and its implementing regulations, 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 800.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Shared Understanding and Paths Forward for Community Benefit Mechanisms: Workshop Summary Report

On October 7-8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory hosted an in-person workshop focused on research needs and strategies for community benefit mechanisms (CBMs) used in the deployment of renewable energy infrastructure. Community benefit mechanisms (such as community benefit agreements, funds, and donations) are used to provide increased benefits and/or mitigate negative impacts of energy development for the communities that are impacted. The workshop aimed to assess the current state of knowledge, tools, practices, and lessons learned, as well as to identify research and other work needed to improve the impact and effective implementation of CBMs. This report describes the purpose and structure of the workshop and summarizes key themes, questions, issues, and ideas that arose from the workshop.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Standardized CROAs Key Legal Provisions [Slides]

Standardized Carbon Dioxide Removal Agreements (CROA) Key Legal Provisions were compiled after the stakeholder discovery interviews and reviewing the existing contracts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data Center Cybersecurity, Supply Chain Risk Management, and Emerging Regulation Cohort Summary: Takeaways and Action Plans

This report summarizes the outcomes of the Data Center Cohort under the Department of Energy’s Technical Assistance for Digital Assurance (TADA) initiative, aimed at enhancing grid resilience through cybersecurity, supply chain risk management (SCRM), and Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE). The cohort engaged 17 organizations across utilities, data center operators, vendors, and technology providers in three sessions combining presentations, discussions, and exercises. Key topics included AI-driven load behavior, cybersecurity vulnerabilities in UPS/BESS and cooling systems, governance gaps at utility–data center boundaries, and supply chain integrity. Five cross-cutting themes emerged: interconnection architecture vulnerabilities, fragmented governance, AI-driven stability risks, lack of regulatory frameworks, and long-term supply chain concerns. Actionable recommendations were developed, including implementing DMZ segmentation, formalizing vendor access agreements, designing AI workload limits, and advancing standards through NERC and state-level programs. These strategies aim to strengthen resilience, clarify responsibilities, and ensure secure integration of data centers into the grid.

24 - POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Utility-Scale Solar, 2021 Edition

Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2021 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2020, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.

2021↗
DOE OSTI2022

Utility-Scale Solar, 2022 Edition: Analysis of Empirical Plant-level Data from U.S. Ground-mounted PV, PV+battery, and CSP Plants (exceeding 5 MWAC)

Berkeley Labs "Utility-Scale Solar", 2022 Edition presents analysis of empirical plant-level data from the U.S. fleet of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV), PV+battery, and concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) plants with capacities exceeding 5 MWAC. While focused on key developments in 2021, this report explores trends in deployment, technology, capital and operating costs, capacity factors, the levelized cost of solar energy (LCOE), power purchase agreement (PPA) prices, wholesale market value, and interconnection queue data.

2022↗
DOE OSTI2024

To have value, comparisons of high-throughput phenotyping methods need statistical tests of bias and variance

The gap between genomics and phenomics is narrowing. The rate at which it is narrowing, however, is being slowed by improper statistical comparison of methods. Quantification using Pearson’s correlation coefficient ( r ) is commonly used to assess method quality, but it is an often misleading statistic for this purpose as it is unable to provide information about the relative quality of two methods. Using r can both erroneously discount methods that are inherently more precise and validate methods that are less accurate. These errors occur because of logical flaws inherent in the use of r when comparing methods, not as a problem of limited sample size or the unavoidable possibility of a type I error. A popular alternative to using r is to measure the limits of agreement (LOA). However both r and LOA fail to identify which instrument is more or less variable than the other and can lead to incorrect conclusions about method quality. An alternative approach, comparing variances of methods, requires repeated measurements of the same subject, but avoids incorrect conclusions. Variance comparison is arguably the most important component of method validation and, thus, when repeated measurements are possible, variance comparison provides considerable value to these studies. Statistical tests to compare variances presented here are well established, easy to interpret and ubiquitously available. The widespread use of r has potentially led to numerous incorrect conclusions about method quality, hampering development, and the approach described here would be useful to advance high throughput phenotyping methods but can also extend into any branch of science. The adoption of the statistical techniques outlined in this paper will help speed the adoption of new high throughput phenotyping techniques by indicating when one should reject a new method, outright replace an old method or conditionally use a new method.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Status and Trends in the Voluntary Market (2019 Data)

Green power refers to renewable electricity voluntarily purchased by retail electricity customers. Renewable energy sources for green power include solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and small-scale hydropower. This report summarizes data on the various ways in which voluntary purchasers - including residential, commercial, and institutional customers - purchase green power. We summarize key historic trends in U.S. voluntary green power markets and the current status of green power sales through seven products: utility green pricing programs, utility renewable contracts, competitive suppliers, unbundled renewable energy certificates, community choice aggregations, power purchase agreements, and community solar.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

ESPC ESA Overview and Requirements

This webinar is the first of a series that provides information, best practices, and resources for implementing energy savings performance contract (ESPC) energy sales agreement (ESA) projects.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2021

ESPC ESA Training Series: Photovoltaic (PV) Project Considerations

This training covers technical, economic and other photovoltaic (PV) project considerations. Technical topics include cost-effectiveness, resilience, cybersecurity, and electrical considerations. In addition, other topics, such as compatibility with agency mission, site plans, coordination with the serving utility, the National Environmental Policy Act, and agency approval requirements. Considerations specific to third-party owned/third-party financed PV projects are also covered, as well as available resources and templates for project development. The training also includes a recap of the first session in the Energy Savings Performance Contracts Energy Sales Agreements (ESPC ESA) Webinar Series.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2021

Working With Your Utility Series: Interconnection Basics

This training provided information on interconnection basics for federal agencies developing distributed energy projects. Considerations covered included: Understanding interconnection processes and timelines, interconnection siting considerations, technology-specific interconnection issues, and interconnect agreements. This webinar is the first in a multi-part series on working with electric utilities to develop distributed energy projects on federal sites.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2021

Need Help Planning for the Future of Electric Vehicles?

This brochure helps states find tools to make informed decisions about implementing electric vehicles (EVs) and their charging infrastructure. To do so, many states will use funds from the Environmental Mitigation Trust Agreements from the Volkswagen Clean Air Act Settlement. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its national laboratories provide extensive information on EVs including both community planning and charging infrastructure. This information can help states implement EV and charging infrastructure projects using settlement funds. The tools in this brochure represent a sampling of key DOE resources available to states and other jurisdictions.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS,ENERGY PLANNING, POLIC↗