SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “installations”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 991 records · Page 55

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

CERF↗

DOE OSTI2024

DOE Cold Climate Heat Pump Challenge: Development, Metrics, and Early Field Observations

Space heating in residential buildings is a major contributor of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions in the United States. New, advanced electric heat pumps are poised to provide a low carbon alternative to traditional fossil-based heating, especially in colder climates. Widespread deployment of cold climate heat pumps could help address the significant portion of building emissions and primary energy used in American households, but these gains will require broader acceptance from consumers and decision makers. As part of the “Energy, Emissions, and Equity” (E3) initiative, the U.S. Department of Energy launched the Cold Climate Heat Pump Challenge (CCHP) in 2021 to accelerate the deployment of the next generation of air source heat pumps. The Challenge is currently focused on residential, centrally ducted, electric heat pumps, with a nominal cooling capacity greater than or equal to 24,000 Btu/h (2 tons) and less than or equal to 65,000 Btu/h (5 tons). The Challenge specifications represent a best-in-class heat pump product that provides high-efficiency heating performance in cold climates, employs environmentally friendly low-Global Warming Potential (GWP) refrigerants, and is designed to be grid interactive. Spearheaded by DOE in partnership with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), the CCHP Challenge brings together numerous major heat pump manufacturers and key stakeholders including utilities and state agencies across the country. In addition to performance testing in a laboratory environment, a key component of this research is evaluating the in-field performance of the prototype heat pumps developed as part of the Challenge. This paper will discuss the development of the CCHP Challenge, key performance specifications, and the energy and non-energy metrics that will be evaluated through the field study. The types of data that are being collected from the units installed in homes across North America as part of the field validation will be described, including details about the sensors and data acquisition system. Data cleaning and analysis methodologies will be discussed, along with early observations from the winter 2022-2023, spring and summer performance periods, and an assessment of non-energy metrics through pre- and post-installation homeowner surveys. Challenges uncovered and lessons learned throughout the process will also be discussed. Finally, the paper will discuss next steps for the second winter assessment period, areas needing additional research, and potential applications of the data collected and analyzed through this work.

Mendon, Vrushali V.↗

DOE OSTI2026

Automatic Calibration and Health Monitoring of Infrastructure Sensors

Smart transportation infrastructure relies on networks of heterogeneous sensors - cameras, radars, and lidars - continuously monitoring traffic conditions. However, executing the initial spatial calibration of multiple sensors and the subsequent health monitoring presents significant operational challenges. Environmental factors, mechanical vibrations, and gradual drift cause spatial misalignment, degrading fusion performance and tracking accuracy. Traditional calibration approaches require manual intervention with specialized targets or survey equipment, resulting in service interruptions and high maintenance costs. This work presents an automated framework for initial calibration and continuous health monitoring without human intervention or service disruption. Our approach addresses two critical problems: (1) detecting when sensors become miscalibrated during operation, and (2) automatically re-establishing spatial alignment using only operational traffic data. The health monitoring component analyzes measurement innovations - differences between sensor observations and predicted object states - to detect systematic biases indicative of calibration drift. By computing bias magnitude, directional consistency, and rejection rates, the system identifies miscalibrations as small as 0.5 meters. Unlike traditional methods requiring known calibration targets, our diagnostic operates continuously on live traffic observations, enabling early detection before fusion quality degrades. The automatic recalibration algorithm leverages overlapping sensor fields-of-view and temporal correlation of vehicle observations. Using graph-based optimization, the system automatically discovers which sensor pairs observe common regions, estimates pairwise spatial transformations using RANSAC-based robust estimation, and jointly optimizes all sensor poses through bundle adjustment. The framework handles practical deployment challenges, including different sensor sampling rates (1-10 Hz), varying installation positions, unknown orientations, and limited overlap regions (>10%). When approximate sensor positions are available from installation surveys (+/-1m accuracy), the algorithm additionally estimates sensor orientations, refining both position and rotation to sub-meter and sub-degree accuracy. We validate the framework on multi-hour traffic datasets from six heterogeneous sensors with sampling rates ranging from 1 Hz to 10 Hz. Results demonstrate successful calibration even with sparse overlap (<20%) and automatic detection of miscalibrations exceeding 0.8 meters. This work enables a "deploy-and-forget" sensor infrastructure that maintains calibration autonomously, reducing maintenance costs while improving tracking accuracy. The techniques generalize beyond transportation to any multi-sensor monitoring application requiring robust spatial alignment, including smart cities, industrial monitoring, and surveillance systems.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2026

Supply Chain for Photovoltaics in the United States: 2024 in Review

Solar photovoltaic (PV) and battery energy storage system (BESS) technologies are two immediately available options for meeting U.S. electricity demands, which are increasing due to expansion of loads from end uses including data centers, buildings, vehicles, and factories. Globally, PV and BESS supply chains are dominated by products manufactured in China and elsewhere by Chinese companies. However, U.S. PV and BESS manufacturing have recently grown, with some capacity in each step of the PV supply chain, albeit not enough to currently meet demand with domestic manufacturing alone. This study analyzes U.S. PV supply chains and costs in 2024, for the crystalline silicon and cadmium telluride module supply chains. The full report additionally addresses the PV balance of system, inverter and BESS supply chains. The study concludes with an analysis of technology installation trends, government support for domestic manufacturing, manufacturing jobs, and the domestic content of PV systems installed in the United States in 2024.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Distributed PV permitting survey responses

In 2019, NREL, in partnership with the Solar Energy Industries Association, developed a survey for PV installers on their experiences with delays and cancelations in the adoption process, including the impacts of permitting and interconnection. This dataset includes the anonymized responses from 147 representatives from 136 solar install companies.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Solar permitting, inspection, and interconnection cycletimes and requirements

Twenty three small-to-large residential, commercial, and industrial PV installers submitted project-level data for analysis, which included timestamps for major components of the permitting, inspection, and interconnection process as well as contract and installation dates. NREL calculated median timelines for these processes across the authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs) and utilities represented in the data. Also included are relevant permitting requirements for AHJs and interconnection process requirements for utilities. This dataset represents the underlying results shown in the Solar Time-based Residential Analytics and Cycle time Estimator (SolarTRACE) viewer. This dataset has been reviewed but errors may exist, and it may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources (e.g., AHJ permitting requirements lists from data partners) may be duplicated in the dataset.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Q1 2023 U.S. Solar Photovoltaic System and Energy Storage Cost Benchmarks With Minimum Sustainable Price Analysis Data File

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) aims to accelerate the advancement and deployment of solar technology in support of an equitable transition to a decarbonized economy no later than 2050, starting with a decarbonized power sector by 2035. Its approach to achieving this goal includes driving innovations in technology, hardware, and soft cost reductions to make solar affordable and accessible for all. As part of this effort, SETO must track solar cost trends so it can focus its research and development (R&D) on the highest-impact activities. The benchmarks in this report are bottom-up cost estimates of all major inputs to PV and energy storage system installations. Bottom-up costs are based on national averages and do not necessarily represent typical costs in all local markets. Like last year's report, this year's report includes two distinct sets of benchmarks: minimum sustainable price (MSP) benchmarks and modeled market price (MMP) benchmarks. MSP benchmarks can be interpreted as the minimum price a company needs to charge to remain financially solvent in the long term based on the minimum sustainable prices of all inputs including minimum sustainable profit margins. MMP benchmarks can be interpreted as the actual cash sales price a company charges in the given benchmark period. These simplified estimates are useful for tracking technological progress, but they do not reflect all experiences. In fact, no individual estimate under any approach can reflect the diversity of the PV and storage manufacturing and installation industries.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

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↗

DOE OSTI2020

ICRF antenna matching systems with ferrite tuners for the Alcator C-Mod tokamak

Real-time fast ferrite tuning (FFT) has been successfully implemented on the ICRF antennas on Alcator C-Mod. The former prototypical FFT system on the E-port 2-strap antenna has been upgraded using new ferrite tuners. A new FFT system with two ferrite tuners and one fixed-length stub has been installed on the transmission line of the D-port 2-strap antenna. These two systems are able to achieve and maintain the reflected power to the transmitters to less than 1% in real time under almost all plasma conditions and help ensure reliable high power operation of the antennas. The loading insensitivity feature vs. plasma conditions of the innovative field-aligned (FA) 4-strap antenna on the J-port allows us to significantly improve the matching by installing a carefully designed stub on each of the two transmission lines. The reduction of the RF voltages in the transmission lines has enabled the J-port FA antenna to deliver 3.7 MW RF power to plasmas out of 4 MW source power. The matching on the J-port antenna can be further improved by adding a single ferrite tuner under real-time control on each transmission line and this scheme will be implemented in the near future.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Design of the DUNE APATF cryogenic system

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FNAL) is developing the international Long- Baseline Neutrino Facility (LBNF) and Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) to advance neutrino science. The flagship of the DUNE project consists of a large particle detector constructed one-mile (1.6 km) beneath the surface at the Sanford Underground Research Facility (SURF) in Lead, SD. The SURF detector is the largest of its type ever built and is comprised of four cryostats totaling 70,000 tons of liquid argon (LAr) to record neutrino interactions with unprecedented precision. Each cryostat houses a detector, the first includes 150 Anode Panel Assemblies (APA) submersed within 17,500 tons of LAr. Before installing 150 APA within the SURF detector they will be cryogenically cooled to nominally 90 K at the APA Test Facility (APATF) utilizing nitrogen flows. The APATF cryogenic system is entirely located one-mile underground at the SURF facility and includes nominally 13 kW of refrigeration at 80 K, cryogenic transfer lines, APA test cryostats, a cryogenic control system, and various control and pressure safety elements to ensure performance and safety requirements are achieved. The APATF preliminary design is in progress and major considerations include an efficient, costeffective mechanism to deliver the required refrigeration to the APATF underground, support of rigid testing intervals to support the DUNE operating schedule, temperature stability of the APA and electronics within cryostats, efficient cryogenic system operation to minimize heat leak and/or liquid nitrogen consumption, thermo-mechanical stability and flexibility of components, and pressure safety of the APATF cryogenic system. Installation and integration of the APATF cryogenic system within the footprint and to adjacent sub-systems is also discussed.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Remote Hardware-in-the-Loop Approach for Microgrid Controller Evaluation: Preprint

Utilities have been installing microgrids due to the advancements in the distributed energy resources technologies. Microgrids also improve the resiliency of the system due to their capability to isolate themselves from the grid and run in islanded mode of operation. Microgrid controllers are management systems that can run the microgrids under varied operating condition and enable the smooth operation of microgrids under various system conditions. It is of high value to de-risk the installation of such controllers. Hardware-in-the-loop evaluation is used by controller developers and utilities to evaluate the controllers under stressful conditions to understand the performance and to understand the necessary improvements to the microgrid controller. In this research work, the team has leveraged the existing infrastructure of real-time simulation at the Energy Systems Integration Facility (ESIF) and the capability of the microgrid controller to control assets over the Internet Protocol (IP) to evaluate a university developed microgrid controller in an efficient and cost-effective manner. The full paper will provide the complete setup, the experimental use cases and the results. In this abstract, one use case will be expalined, and the results from the use case is provided.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Remote Hardware-in-the-Loop Approach for Microgrid Controller Evaluation

Utilities have been installing microgrids because of the increased resilience and reliability advantages they may provide to the distribution system. A microgrid controller is a critical component in microgrids. It is of great benefit to derisk the installation of microgrid controllers before field deployment. Hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing is used by controller developers and utilities to evaluate the controllers under stressful conditions. In this work, a microgrid control function developed by the Synchrophasor Grid Monitoring and Automation (SyGMA) laboratory at the University of California, San Diego is tested in a remote HIL (RHIL) setup. The digital real-time simulation of the detailed microgrid system was operated at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's Energy Systems Integration Facility. Under such RHIL setup, successful controller operation is contingent on understanding and characterizing the communications channel and in particular network latencies. The novelty of this paper is the proposed use of a RHIL setup that leverages existing power system communications protocols to evaluate the controller in conjunction with the simulation capabilities of a remote facility. The work presented here will provide the complete setup of the HIL evaluation platform, the details of the communications protocols used by the setup for data transfer between the two organizations, test cases developed to evaluate the controller, and the results from the experiments.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Idaho National Laboratory Advanced Reactor Technologies Quality Assurance Program Plan

This QAPP covers INL ART R&D, licensing, and program support activities. QA implementing procedures will be identified for all activities to ensure work is documented and the results are capable of successfully completing a technical review by DOE. For work performed by other organizations under contract or other agreements with INL, applicable requirements will be flowed down through the contract or other agreements, but the organizations will be responsible to implement the flowed down requirements through their own specific implementing procedures. This QAPP also covers implementation of software QA (SQA) requirements for software used exclusively by INL ART. Software that is used to support multiple INL programs/projects is not covered by this QAPP; the responsibility for implementing SQA requirements for that software resides with the owners and respective managers of the software. This QAPP does not cover activities for installing and operating experiments in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at INL, nor does it cover ATR facility modifications designed to meet INL ART testing needs (such as temperature, pressure, gas flow, and control systems). Those activities are controlled by the INL QAP and specific ATR implementing procedures. ATR facility management and INL ART management jointly approve experiment designs and functional system requirements. This QAPP does apply to INL ART R&D experiments that will be inserted into ATR and any support activities associated with those R&D activities. This QAPP does not cover activities for installing and operating general post irradiation examination (PIE) test equipment in Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) facilities. Those activities are controlled by the INL QAP and MFC implementing procedures. However, this QAPP does apply to MFC facility modifications designed to meet specific INL ART testing needs. It also applies to INL ART experiments that will have PIE performed on them and any support activities associated with the PIE activities.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Transactive Electric Water Heater Agent: Design and Performance Evaluation

Electric water heaters (EWHs) are usually equipped with inbuilt thermostats to measure water temperature near the installed positions. Most of the existing EWHs have only two thermostats and often do not have water flow sensor installed. Estimation of state of heat energy (SOHE) inside the hot water tank, which is crucial for efficient control and operation of the EWH, under such imperfect system conditions is very challenging. This paper, therefore, designs a transactive EWH agent (TEWHA) to better estimate SOHE in presence of measurement errors and imperfect system knowledge. The TEWHA, built-in Python, approximates the EWH physics using limited measurements obtained from the ground truth GridLABD model. The performance of the TEWHA is validated against ground truth system for three scenarios: a) ideal condition where TEWHA has complete knowledge of the system, b) imperfect condition where TEWHA has incomplete system information, and c) noised condition where TEWHA measurements contain random errors. Finally, an optimization problem is formulated and solved to demonstrate how TEWHA could use the estimated and measured parameters for a transactive control of EWH. Index Terms—Demand flexibility

demand flexibility, distribution system, electric ↗

DOE OSTI2020

Door assembly with collapsible carrier

A door assembly for a motor vehicle comprised of an outer door panel and an inner door panel interconnected to define a door panel structure having an internal door cavity. A collapsible carrier module is configured to be oriented in a collapsed arrangement to facilitate installation into the door cavity through an opening in the inner door panel. The collapsible carrier module can be moved from its collapsed arrangement into an expanded arrangement upon installation within the door cavity to facilitate subsequent mounting to the door panel structure. The collapsible carrier module includes a two-piece carrier plate formed to integrally include a pair of laterally-spaced glass run channels and a pair of laterally-spaced slider rails.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Energy Master Planning: Identifying Framing Constraints that Scope Your Technology Options

This paper addresses the framing constraints for building and community energy projects that must be considered when energy master planning (EMP) is conducted. The constraints cover emissions, sustainability, resilience, regulations and directives, and regional and local limitations such as available energy types, local conditions, and project requirements. The paper reflects development results from participants in an International Energy Agency project on energy master planning and in a U.S. Department of Defense project on technology integration to achieve resilient, low-energy use military installations. It identifies a comprehensive list of framing constraints categorized into locational threats, locational resources, energy and water distribution and storage systems, building and facility, indoor environmental, and equipment in buildings and district systems constraints. In addition, it identifies limits for these constraints that exist in seven participating countries. Some framing constraints can profoundly impact technology selection while others impact the installation of technologies (as in hardening) and have little to no impact on technology selection. Furthermore, framing constraints can be assessed in different ways and there are resources available to help EMP stakeholders evaluate them. Finally, a case is made that identifying and applying framing constraints early in EMP can bring efficiencies and better focus to the EMP process. We come to the conclusion that (1) for holistic energy planning, it is essential to identify and assess the framing constraints that bound an optimized EMP solution, (2) framing constraints limits should be evaluated as either hard or soft or promising technologies may fall out of an EMP analysis, (3) to maintain consistent quality in the EMP process, the identification of framing constraints and their limits, and perhaps their evaluation, should be standardized, (4) a standardized approach could establish a baseline that can be used, built upon, and improved, (5) as automated EMP tools are improved or developed, the resources in this paper could possibly contribute to their interworkings relative to technology screening, and (6) continued climate change and resulting aggressive goal setting will likely drive a continued and strong emphasis on EMP.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Model, Design, and Control for Power Conversion in Wave Energy Converter System

Wave energy, if all been harvested along the U.S. coastline, can power around 65% of the energy consumption in U.S.. Comparing to other renewable energy sources like solar or wind, ocean wave can provide up to 90% of steady uptime. With the high energy density (2-3 kW/m 2 ), it can produce more energy with the same amount of installation area comparing to the energy density of wind turbine (0.6 kW/m 2 ) and solar panel(0.2 kW/m 2 ). The predictability of wave provides advantages like planning installation, power dispatching, and maintenance activities. Although with all these advantages, wave energy converter system is still in the research stage due to its high system cost per electricity production. One of the challenges that need to be solved is the irregularity from the wave motion that leads to high instantaneous peak power into the wave energy converter, which usually reaches up to 10 - 20 times of the average power. The high peak power will not only bring high mechanical/electrical stress but also result in an overrating design of the components in the system. Another obstacle that prevents the wave energy system from moving forward is the high testing cost from the validations in wave-energy-test sites or tank-test sites. A high-fidelity multi-disciplinary system model, including hydrodynamics, mechanical dynamics, electromagnetics, and power electronics, is needed to predict the behavior of the system and reduce the cost of design validation.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2020

Emergency Diesel Generator Backup Power Systems for Military Bases

Backup power systems on military installations must provide reliable power during a grid outage. The risks of blackouts and loss of electric power are not new. Outages of just a few hours are well known, but longer duration outages are becoming more frequent. The U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force now require backup power from one to two weeks. For multiday outages, the reliability of emergency diesel generators will have a significant impact on the installation’s backup power system’s ability to provide power for critical missions.

backup power↗