Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Baseline”

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 973 records · Page 54
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Baseline vs. DER Scenario

Projections and associated uncertainty estimates are generated for a variety of user-selectable EV charging sessions, electricity tariffs, subsidy levels, revenue schemes, charging station configurations, and on-site solar and/or storage options. The outputs are presented in CHIP's web portal browser in the form of easily interpretable graphics (interactive graphs and bar charts) that facilitate convenient comparison among different scenarios to aid decision-making. The user should bring assumptions for modeling on simulation planning horizon, number of EV charging sessions per year, electricity costs (energy and demand charge rates; flat versus time-of-use rate), site capital costs (equipment for EV chargers and transformer), solar PV, and battery energy storage (kW).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

EXCHANGE Campaign 1: A Community-Driven Baseline Characterization of Soils, Sediments, and Water Across Coastal Gradients

The EXploration of Coastal Hydrobiogeochemistry Across a Network of Gradients and Experiments (EXCHANGE) program is a consortium of scientists working together to improve our understanding of how the two-way exchange of water between estuaries or large lake lacustuaries and the terrestrial landscape influence the state and function of ecosystems across the coastal interface. EXCHANGE Campaign 1 (EC1) focuses on the spatial variation in biogeochemical structure and function at the coastal terrestrial-aquatic interface (TAI). In the Fall of 2021, the EXCHANGE Consortium gathered samples from 52 TAIs. Samples collected from EC1 were analyzed for bulk geochemical parameters, bulk physicochemical parameters, organic matter characteristics, and redox-sensitive elements.Please download ec1_README.pdf for a complete list of available data in each .zip folder, package version history, and detailed information about the project. This README will serve as the central place for EC1 Data Package updates. Experimental setup and v1 methods are documented in Myers-Pigg and Pennington et al., 2023 (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-023-02548-7).EC1 Data Package Structure:ec1_README.pdfec1_methods.pdfec1_metadata_v3.zip...ec1_dd.csv...ec1_flmd.csv...ec1_sample_catalog.csv...ec1_metadata_kitlevel.csv...ec1_metadata_collectionlevel.csv...ec1_data_collectionlevel.csv...ec1_igsn_metadata.csvec1_soil_v3.zipec1_sediment_v3.zipec1_water_v3.zipec1_processingscripts_v3.zipThis data package is on v3 and was originally published May 2023 (v1). Subsequent updates will be published here with new version numbers. Please see the Change History section in ec1_README.pdf for detailed changes.---Acknowledging EXCHANGE: General Support and Data Product UseWe ask that users of EXCHANGE data add the following acknowledgement when publishing data in scholarly articles and data repositories:"This research is based on work supported by COMPASS-FME, a multi-institutional project supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research as part of the Environmental System Science Program."

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Modeling spatial patterns in soil arsenic to estimate natural baseline concentrations

ABSTRACT Arsenic in soil is an important public health concern. Toxicity guidelines and models based on laboratory studies (i.e., U.S. EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System) should consider natural soil As concentrations to avoid unnecessary remediation burdens on society. We used soil and stream sediment samples from the USGS National Geochemical Survey database to assess the spatial distribution of natural As in a 1.16E+5 km2 area. Samples were collected at 348 soil and 144 stream locations, providing approximately one sample for every 290 km2. Sample sites were selected to minimize the potential influence of anthropogenic inputs. Samples were processed using acid digestion of whole samples (concentrated HCl and ascorbic acid) and concentrations were measured using hydride-generation atomic absorption spectrometry. Soil As ranged from 2.0 to 45.6 mg kg-1. Geostatistical techniques were used to model and map the spatial variability of As. The mean and variance at unsampled locations were estimated using sequential Gaussian simulation. Five areas of elevated concentration (> the median of 10 mg kg-1) were identified and the relationships to geologic parent materials, glacial sedimentation patterns, and soil conditions interpreted. Our results showed As concentrations >10 mg kg-1 were common, and >20 mg kg-1 were not unusual for the central and west central portions of Ohio (USA). In contrast, concentrations <4 mg kg-1 were rare. Measured concentrations typically exceeded the soil As human generic screening levels of 0.39 mg/kg (1); the calculated value that corresponds to a cancer risk level of 1 in 1,000,000 for soil ingestion. Because the As content of Ohio soils is similar to many world soils, the USEPA generic soil screening level of 0.39 mg/kg is of little utility. A more useful and practical approach would be the uses of natural background levels. Regional soil As patterns based on geology and biogeochemistry and not political boundaries should be used for soil screening and other risk assessment determinations.

arsenic, background, mapping, geostatistics, toxic↗