Results for “Technologies” — Page 57

NASA NTRS2016

High Density Packaging Technologies for RF Electronics in Small Spacecraft

This paper will describe a few high density packaging technologies which we are currently exploring for use in current and future small spacecraft applications. The three categories of technologies include organic multichip modules (MCMs), ceramic leadless surface mount technology (SMT) and 3D printed waveguide structures. There are many other packaging technologies that currently exist but these three were selected in part due to their long heritage in various commercial, military and space applications along with each having a relatively clear path to flight. For each of these technologies, detailed examples will be included in which hardware has been fabricated and tested for use in RF electronics for spacecraft transponders. The organic MCM example will be described in most detail and it utilizes a packaging technology by the name of CoreEZ which is a trademark of i3 Electronics. This MCM has shrunk a portion of our electronics down to 1/8th of its previous area. The CoreEZ technology has been shown to be rad hard beyond a total ionizing dose (TID) of 300kRad and the MCM which was fabricated has gone through thermal cycling and shown to have no degradation in performance. The ceramic leadless package examples include packages from high reliability manufactures by the name of KCB solutions and Barry Industries. In the case of KCB solutions, we have multiple products that will be described including a hermetic ceramic carrier which houses three microwave monolithic integrated circuits (MMICs) along with small discrete components. Finally, we will discuss the results of our search for a 3D printing process that allows us to reduce the cost and volume of our waveguide filters and diplexers for low cost small satellite applications. We have fabricated a few prototypes using direct metal laser sintering (DMLS) and metal coated plastics. Each of these packaging technology discussions will have a brief overview of its current and future use.

Schatzel, Donald↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development for Exploration: 2020 to 2021 Overview

This paper provides an overview of NASA supported activities developing Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) technologies in the following capability areas: life support, environmental monitoring, fire safety, and logistics. NASA has been refining technology needs for deep space missions including Gateway, lunar surface, Mars transit, and Mars surface missions. Validating technologies in relevant environments, both in low earth orbit (LEO) and ground tests is critical in understanding technology performance and long duration performance. On-orbit and ground tests inform NASA’s technology decisions to fill exploration gaps. NASA has multiple technology projects across the technology readiness spectrum with potential to fill or partially fill exploration gaps. For each capability area, this paper will describe select capability gaps, NASA technology project maturation over the past year, and how key performance parameters (KPPs) are being used to measure the degree of capability gap closure. KPPs are evolving but they still provide a useful measure in communicating progress and identifying development needs to fill exploration gaps. The intent is to provide a very high-level overview describing the strategic approach to gap closure and provide references to additional technical details, progress, and KPPs.

Life Support↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development for Exploration: 2020 to 2021 Overview

This paper provides an overview of NASA supported activities developing Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) technologies in the following capability areas: life support, environmental monitoring, fire safety, and logistics. NASA has been refining technology needs for deep space missions including Gateway, lunar surface, Mars transit, and Mars surface missions. Validating technologies in relevant environments, both in low earth orbit (LEO) and ground tests is critical in understanding technology performance and long duration performance. On-orbit and ground tests inform NASA’s technology decisions to fill exploration gaps. NASA has multiple technology projects across the technology readiness spectrum with potential to fill or partially fill exploration gaps. For each capability area, this paper will describe select capability gaps, NASA technology project maturation over the past year, and key performance parameters (KPPs). KPPs are evolving but they still provide a useful measure in communicating progress and identifying development needs to fill exploration gaps. The intent is to provide a very high-level overview describing the projects that are supporting gap closure and provide references to additional technical details, progress, and KPPs.

James Lee Broyan↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Environmental Control and Life Support Technology Development for Exploration: 2020 to 2021 Overview

This PowerPoint presentation supports the following paper submission's abstract (STRIVES 20210015025). This paper provides an overview of NASA supported activities developing Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) technologies in the following capability areas: life support, environmental monitoring, fire safety, and logistics. NASA has been refining technology needs for deep space missions including Gateway, lunar surface, Mars transit, and Mars surface missions. Validating technologies in relevant environments, both in low earth orbit (LEO) and ground tests is critical in understanding technology performance and long duration performance. On-orbit and ground tests inform NASA’s technology decisions to fill exploration gaps. NASA has multiple technology projects across the technology readiness spectrum with potential to fill or partially fill exploration gaps. For each capability area, this paper will describe select capability gaps, NASA technology project maturation over the past year, and key performance parameters (KPPs). KPPs are evolving but they still provide a useful measure in communicating progress and identifying development needs to fill exploration gaps. The intent is to provide a very high-level overview describing the projects that are supporting gap closure and provide references to additional technical details, progress, and KPPs.

Life Support↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Hybrid NEP-Chemical Vehicle and Propulsion Technology Study for Crewed Mars Missions

Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP) is a suite of technologies with the potential to enable crewed opposition-class missions to Mars. Each subsystem comprising an NEP system has multiple technology options that present tradeoffs in vehicle sizing and technology development risk. Multiple vehicle concepts have been studied in the past and are currently being studied at NASA. Three models have been developed to illustrate the impact of key technology parameters on overall sizing for a crewed Mars transportation vehicle. Vehicle mass required to close the mission as a function of NEP system alpha (kWe/kg) and specific impulse (Isp) is estimated with a detailed trajectory model. A power system mass model estimates alpha as a function of power and radiator mass assumption. A power conversion system thermodynamic model predicts the radiator area required to close a Brayton cycle power conversion system. Combined with the architecture mass required for mission closure, the radiator area and alpha model provide insight into how technology development may impact the mission. Our focus is on parametric sweeps of the whole design space rather than any particular point design. Results from the mission model comparing electric propulsion technology (Hall, Ion, Magnetoplasmadynamic) and both 2039 and 2042 opposition-class mission launch windows are included. The results of the study illustrate the technology parameters that can result in mission closure and illustrate where the architecture is sensitive to variations in technology performance or requirements.

Matthew Duchek↗

NASA NTRS2022

Coordinating Innovative Technology Development at NASA

Innovation requires continually using and coordinating new knowledge on the current, anticipated, and even unanticipated developments in a given area. You do not want to simply repeat what others are doing, so you must remain aware of other activities in your area of interest. You also have to maintain awareness of where the cutting edge is, because the limit of what’s possible is continually pushed and redefined. Finally, “smart” innovation involves not only seeking innovative solutions to anticipated problems but also being prepared to respond to unanticipated problems or even unanticipated solutions. As the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must remain at the forefront of innovation. NASA enables innovation in technology development through a coordinated effort among its internal mission directorates and its partners in government, commercial, and academic sectors. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides the coordination effort necessary to ensure innovation. OTPS uses and coordinates inputs from a broad community of experts. With these inputs, OTPS identifies and communicates shared needs and opportunities for partnership. OTPS provides strategic advice to synergize and ultimately facilitate innovative technology development both within and outside NASA. This paper summarizes NASA’s approach to ensuring innovation through a deliberately coordinated effort. In this paper, we first provide examples of how this coordination has enabled innovative technology development. We then describe how NASA’s mission directorates use input from a broad community of experts to inform innovative technology development. Finally, we describe OTPS’s role in coordinating inputs from both internal and external experts, including standardizing communication about technology developments, facilitating conversations with external partners on shared technology needs and solutions, and advising on strategies and policies to ensure innovative technology development. This paper can help members of the aerospace community understand their role in NASA’s innovation efforts and how to engage OTPS in conversations about potential partnership.

Erica Rodgers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coordinating Innovative Technology Development at NASA

Innovation requires continually using and coordinating new knowledge on the current, anticipated, and even unanticipated developments in a given area. You do not want to simply repeat what others are doing, so you must remain aware of other activities in your area of interest. You also have to maintain awareness of where the cutting edge is, because the limit of what’s possible is continually pushed and redefined. Finally, “smart” innovation involves not only seeking innovative solutions to anticipated problems but also being prepared to respond to unanticipated problems or even unanticipated solutions. As the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must remain at the forefront of innovation. NASA enables innovation in technology development through a coordinated effort among its internal mission directorates and its partners in government, commercial, and academic sectors. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides the coordination effort necessary to ensure innovation. OTPS uses and coordinates inputs from a broad community of experts. With these inputs, OTPS identifies and communicates shared needs and opportunities for partnership. OTPS provides strategic advice to synergize and ultimately facilitate innovative technology development both within and outside NASA. This paper summarizes NASA’s approach to ensuring innovation through a deliberately coordinated effort. In this paper, we first provide examples of how this coordination has enabled innovative technology development. We then describe how NASA’s mission directorates use input from a broad community of experts to inform innovative technology development. Finally, we describe OTPS’s role in coordinating inputs from both internal and external experts, including standardizing communication about technology developments, facilitating conversations with external partners on shared technology needs and solutions, and advising on strategies and policies to ensure innovative technology development. This paper can help members of the aerospace community understand their role in NASA’s innovation efforts and how to engage OTPS in conversations about potential partnership.

Erica Rodgers↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Coordinating Innovative Technology Development at NASA

Innovation requires continually using and coordinating new knowledge on the current, anticipated, and even unanticipated developments in a given area. You do not want to simply repeat what others are doing, so you must remain aware of other activities in your area of interest. You also have to maintain awareness of where the cutting edge is, because the limit of what’s possible is continually pushed and redefined. Finally, “smart” innovation involves not only seeking innovative solutions to anticipated problems but also being prepared to respond to unanticipated problems or even unanticipated solutions. As the leading U.S. agency for aeronautics development, cutting-edge scientific discovery, and human space exploration, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) must remain at the forefront of innovation. NASA enables innovation in technology development through a coordinated effort among its internal mission directorates and its partners in government, commercial, and academic sectors. As an independent office, NASA’s Office of Technology, Policy, and Strategy (OTPS) provides the coordination effort necessary to ensure innovation. OTPS uses and coordinates inputs from a broad community of experts. With these inputs, OTPS identifies and communicates shared needs and opportunities for partnership. OTPS provides strategic advice to synergize and ultimately facilitate innovative technology development both within and outside NASA. This paper summarizes NASA’s approach to ensuring innovation through a deliberately coordinated effort. In this paper, we first provide examples of how this coordination has enabled innovative technology development. We then describe how NASA’s mission directorates use input from a broad community of experts to inform innovative technology development. Finally, we describe OTPS’s role in coordinating inputs from both internal and external experts, including standardizing communication about technology developments, facilitating conversations with external partners on shared technology needs and solutions, and advising on strategies and policies to ensure innovative technology development. This paper can help members of the aerospace community understand their role in NASA’s innovation efforts and how to engage OTPS in conversations about potential partnership.

Erica Rodgers↗

DOE OSTI2013

ENTERPRISE SRS: LEVERAGING ONGOING OPERATIONS TO ADVANCE RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGIES

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is repurposing its vast array of assets to solve future national issues regarding environmental stewardship, national security, and clean energy. The vehicle for this transformation is Enterprise SRS which presents a new, strategic view of SRS as a united endeavor for “all things nuclear” as opposed to a group of distinct and separate entities with individual missions and organizations. Key among the Enterprise SRS strategic initiatives is the integration of research into facilities in conjunction with ongoing missions to provide researchers from other national laboratories, academic institutions, and commercial entities the opportunity to demonstrate their technologies in a relevant environment and scale prior to deployment. To manage that integration of research demonstrations into site facilities, The DOE Savannah River Operations Office, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) have established a center for applied nuclear materials processing and engineering research (hereafter referred to as the Center). The key objective of this initiative is to bridge the gap between promising transformational nuclear materials management advancements and large-scale deployment of the technology by using SRS assets (e.g. facilities, staff, and property) for those critical engineering-scale demonstrations necessary to assure the successful deployment of new technologies. The Center will coordinate the demonstration of R&D technologies and serve as the interface between the engineering-scale demonstration and the R&D programs, essentially providing cradle-to-grave support to the R&D team during the demonstration. While the initial focus of the Center will be on the effective use of SRS assets for these demonstrations, the Center also will work with research teams to identify opportunities to perform R&D demonstrations at other facilities. Unique to this approach is the fact that these SRS assets will continue to accomplish DOE’s critical nuclear material missions (e.g., processing in H-Canyon and plutonium storage in K-Area). These demonstrations can be accomplished in a more cost-effective manner through the use of existing facilities in conjunction with ongoing missions. Essentially, the R&D program would not need to pay the full operational cost of a facility, just the incremental cost of performing the demonstration. Current Center activities have been focused on integrating advanced safeguards monitoring technology demonstrations into the SRS H-Canyon and advanced location technology demonstrations into K-Area Materials Storage. These demonstrations are providing valuable information to researchers and program owners. In addition these demonstrations are providing the Center with an improved protocol for demonstration management that can be exercised across the entire SRS (and to offsite venues) to ensure that future demonstrations are done efficiently and provide an opportunity to use these unique assets for multiple purposes involving national laboratories, academia, and commercial entities. Key among the envisioned future use of SRS assets is the demonstration of new radioactive waste management technologies critical for advancing the mission needs of the DOE-EM program offices in their efforts to cleanup 107 sites across the United States. Of particular interest is the demonstration of separations technologies in H-Canyon. Given the modular design of H-Canyon, those demonstrations would be accomplished using a process frame. The demonstration equipment would be installed on the process frame and that frame would then be positioned into an H-Canyon cell so that the demonstration is performed in a radiological environment involving prototypic nuclear materials.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

An integrated systems-based approach to mercury research and technology development

A 3-year strategic planning process was undertaken in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to develop a research and technology development approach that can help guide mercury remediation in East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC). Mercury remediation is a high priority for the US Department of Energy s (DOE s) Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management because of large historical losses of mercury to the environment at the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12). Because of the extent of mercury losses and the complexities of mercury transport and fate in the stream environment, the success of conventional options for mercury remediation in the downstream sections of EFPC is uncertain. The overall Oak Ridge mercury remediation strategy focuses on mercury treatment actions at Y-12 in the short-term and research and technology development to evaluate longer-term solutions in the downstream environment. The technology development strategy is consistent with a phased, adaptive management paradigm and DOE s Technology Readiness Level guidelines. That is, early evaluation includes literature review, site characterization, and small-scale studies of a broad number of potential technologies. As more information is gathered, technologies that may have the most promise and potential remediation benefit will be chosen for more extensive and larger-scale pilot testing before being considered for remedial implementation. Field and laboratory research in EFPC is providing an improved level of understanding of mercury transport and fate processes in EFPC that will inform the development of site-specific remedial technologies. Technology development has centered on developing strategies that can mitigate the primary factors affecting mercury risks in the stream: (1) the amount of inorganic mercury available to the stream system, (2) the conversion of inorganic mercury to methylmercury, and (3) the bioaccumulation of methylmercury through the food web. Given the downstream complexities and interdependencies between sources and processes in EFPC, no one task or approach is likely to solve the mercury problem in the creek, thus highlighting the importance of using an integrated, systems-based approach to develop remedial solutions.

Peterson, Mark J↗

DOE OSTI2017

Measures of International Manufacturing and Trade of Clean Energy Technologies

The technologies that produce clean energy, such as solar photovoltaic panels and lithium ion batteries for electric vehicles, are globally manufactured and traded. As demand and deployment of these technologies grows exponentially, the innovation to reach significant economies of scale and drive down energy production costs becomes less in the technology and more in the manufacturing of the technology. Manufacturing innovations and other manufacturing decisions can reduce costs of labor, materials, equipment, operating costs, and transportation, across all the links in the supply chain. To better understand the manufacturing aspect of the clean energy economy, we have developed key metrics for systematically measuring and benchmarking international manufacturing of clean energy technologies. The metrics are: trade, market size, manufacturing value-added, and manufacturing capacity and production. These metrics were applied to twelve global economies and four representative technologies: wind turbine components, crystalline silicon solar photovoltaic modules, vehicle lithium ion battery cells, and light emitting diode packages for efficient lighting and other consumer products. The results indicated that clean energy technologies are being developed via complex, dynamic, and global supply chains, with individual economies benefiting from different technologies and links in the supply chain, through both domestic manufacturing and global trade.

2017↗

DOE OSTI2017

Assessment of Sensor Technologies for Advanced Reactors

This paper provides an assessment of sensor technologies and a determination of measurement needs for advanced reactors (AdvRx). It is a summary of a study performed to provide the technical basis for identifying and prioritizing research targets within the instrumentation and control (I&C) Technology Area under the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Advanced Reactor Technology (ART) program. The study covered two broad reactor technology categories: High Temperature Reactors and Fast Reactors. The scope of “High temperature reactors” included Gen IV reactors whose coolant exit temperatures exceed ≈650 °C and are moderated (as opposed to fast reactors). To bound the scope for fast reactors, this report reviewed relevant operating experience from US-operated Sodium Fast Reactor (SFR) and relevant test experience from the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF). For high temperature reactors the study showed that in many cases instrumentation have performed reasonably well in research and demonstration reactors. However, even in cases where the technology is “mature” (such as thermocouples), HTGRs can benefit from improved technologies. Current HTGR instrumentation is generally based on decades-old technology and adapting newer technologies could provide significant advantages. For sodium fast reactors, the study found that several key research needs arise around (1) radiation-tolerant sensor design for in-vessel or in-core applications, where possible non-invasive sensing approaches for key parameters that minimize the need to deploy sensors in-vessel, (2) approaches to exfiltrating data from in-vessel sensors while minimizing penetrations, (3) calibration of sensors in-situ, and (4) optimizing sensor placements to maximize the information content while minimizing the number of sensors needed.

Korsah, Kofi↗

DOE OSTI2022

WBS 1.2.3.405 - Life Cycle Assessment of Storage Technologies

Recent commitments by the Biden administration have established targets to achieve a net-zero energy system by 2050. Meeting these targets will spur a rapid transition to clean energy technologies and a commensurate need to develop and deploy energy storage technologies at scale. Pumped Storage Hydro (PSH) is expected to be part of this solution because its ability to provide grid flexibility and stability and enable the dispatching of disparate variable renewable energy technologies. Despite PSH being a mature technology with a history of deployment dating back several decades, there is very little information on the greenhouse gas (GHG) implications of PSH as compared to other storage technologies. The objective of this project is to perform a full lifecycle assessment (LCA) of new PSH projects in the U.S. This LCA includes all project phases (resource extraction, construction, operation, maintenance, end-of-life). The functional unit for this study is 1 kWh electricity delivered by system to grid substation connection point and the estimated lifetime for our base case is 80 years. Data used in this study are based on over 30 potential PSH projects that are in preliminary planning phases and are represent a wide range of potential closed-loop PSH systems in terms of location, technology, and capacity. The project approach, data sources, and modeling assumptions have been informed by a technical review committee of stakeholders that include experts from academia, national and international government, industry, and utilities. The GHGs and energy return on investment (EROI) from PSH will be compared to other storage technologies (e.g., stationary battery storage). Results from this project will improve the PSH community's understanding of the environmental impacts and sustainability of new PSH projects and how PSH compares to other storage technologies. The approach used in this project relies on open-source programming. The analysis framework (source code and data) and will be made publicly available at the end of the project. In addition to reporting results for the base case, we will perform rigorous sensitivity analysis to identify the major drivers, understand impacts of different configurations, and future energy markets. Results from this project will be published in a suitable journal.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY,HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2013

Enterprise SRS: leveraging ongoing operations to advance radioactive waste management technologies

The Savannah River Site (SRS) is re-purposing its vast array of assets to solve future national issues regarding environmental stewardship, national security, and clean energy. The vehicle for this transformation is Enterprise SRS which presents a new, strategic view of SRS as a united endeavor for 'all things nuclear' as opposed to a group of distinct and separate entities with individual missions and organizations. Key among the Enterprise SRS strategic initiatives is the integration of research into facilities in conjunction with ongoing missions to provide researchers from other national laboratories, academic institutions, and commercial entities the opportunity to demonstrate their technologies in a relevant environment and scale prior to deployment. To manage that integration of research demonstrations into site facilities, The DOE Savannah River Operations Office, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, and the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) have established a center for applied nuclear materials processing and engineering research (hereafter referred to as the Center). The key objective of this initiative is to bridge the gap between promising transformational nuclear materials management advancements and large-scale deployment of the technology by using SRS assets (e.g. facilities, staff, and property) for those critical engineering-scale demonstrations necessary to assure the successful deployment of new technologies. The Center will coordinate the demonstration of R and D technologies and serve as the interface between the engineering-scale demonstration and the R and D programs, essentially providing cradle-to-grave support to the R and D team during the demonstration. While the initial focus of the Center will be on the effective use of SRS assets for these demonstrations, the Center also will work with research teams to identify opportunities to perform R and D demonstrations at other facilities. Unique to this approach is the fact that these SRS assets will continue to accomplish DOE's critical nuclear material missions (e.g., processing in H-Canyon and plutonium storage in K-Area). These demonstrations can be accomplished in a more cost-effective manner through the use of existing facilities in conjunction with ongoing missions. Essentially, the R and D program would not need to pay the full operational cost of a facility, just the incremental cost of performing the demonstration. Current Center activities have been focused on integrating advanced safeguards monitoring technology demonstrations into the SRS H-Canyon and advanced location technology demonstrations into K-Area Materials Storage. These demonstrations are providing valuable information to researchers and program owners. In addition these demonstrations are providing the Center with an improved protocol for demonstration management that can be exercised across the entire SRS (and to offsite venues) to ensure that future demonstrations are done efficiently and provide an opportunity to use these unique assets for multiple purposes involving national laboratories, academia, and commercial entities. Key among the envisioned future use of SRS assets is the demonstration of new radioactive waste management technologies critical for advancing the mission needs of the DOE-EM program offices in their efforts to cleanup 107 sites across the United States. Of particular interest is the demonstration of separations technologies in H-Canyon. Given the modular design of H-Canyon, those demonstrations would be accomplished using a process frame. The demonstration equipment would be installed on the process frame and that frame would then be positioned into an H-Canyon cell so that the demonstration is performed in a radiological environment involving prototypic nuclear materials. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

An Integrated, Systems-Based Approach to Mercury Research and Technology Development - 17252

A 3-year strategic planning process was undertaken in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, to develop a research and technology development approach that can help guide mercury remediation in East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC). Mercury remediation is a high priority for the US Department of Energy's (DOE's) Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management because of large historical losses of mercury to the environment at the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12). Because of the extent of mercury losses and the complexities of mercury transport and fate in the stream environment, the success of conventional options for mercury remediation in the downstream sections of EFPC is uncertain. The overall Oak Ridge mercury remediation strategy focuses on mercury treatment actions at Y-12 in the short-term and research and technology development to evaluate longer-term solutions in the downstream environment. The technology development strategy is consistent with a phased, adaptive management paradigm and DOE's Technology Readiness Level guidelines. That is, early evaluation includes literature review, site characterization, and small-scale studies of a broad number of potential technologies. As more information is gathered, technologies that may have the most promise and potential remediation benefit will be chosen for more extensive and larger-scale pilot testing before being considered for remedial implementation. Field and laboratory research in EFPC is providing an improved level of understanding of mercury transport and fate processes in EFPC that will inform the development of site-specific remedial technologies. Technology development has centered on developing strategies that can mitigate the primary factors affecting mercury risks in the stream: (1) the amount of inorganic mercury available to the 1 This manuscript has been authored by UT-Battelle, LLC under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The United States Government retains and the publisher, by accepting the article for publication, acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. The Department of Energy will provide public access to these results of federally sponsored research in accordance with the DOE Public Access Plan (http://energy.gov/downloads/doe-public-access-plan).stream system, (2) the conversion of inorganic mercury to methylmercury, and (3) the bioaccumulation of methylmercury through the food web. Given the downstream complexities and interdependencies between sources and processes in EFPC, no one task or approach is likely to solve the mercury problem in the creek, thus highlighting the importance of using an integrated, systems-based approach to develop remedial solutions. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2015

DOE nuclear separation technologies - 15148

Realizing that challenges are facing US actinide science, separations, and waste form research and development activities including meeting future manpower needs, the U.S Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Environmental Management (EM), Office of Nuclear Energy (NE), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) jointly co-sponsored a workshop entitled 'Separations Technologies: 'Going from Where We Are to Where We Want to Be' on nuclear separations technologies in Bethesda, Maryland (July 2011) to identify common needs and potential requirements in separations technologies and opportunities for program partnerships. Recognizing the different mission requirements of the sponsoring programs, participants were able to identify areas with common uses and related applications. The two follow-on technical workshops held during the Fall 2012 addressed both the chemical aspects and the physical aspects of nuclear separations. Each workshop consisted of technical discussions regarding future work relevant to DOE goals. The large number of subject matter experts from the national laboratories, academia, and headquarters staff developed a long list of existing and new technology developments in the areas of aqueous separations, pyrochemical processing, waste forms, fuel technology etc... Each of these workshops identified the current state of knowledge or technology, the resources needed, technology development opportunities, and the objectives to reach the desired end-state(s). A consolidated report with its eight appendices will be issued at the end of December 2014 summarizing the outcomes of these workshops. Some examples of these findings will be presented in our contribution. It is clear that, in the current environment of decreasing budgets it is illogical for NE, EM and NNSA to develop its own home-grown technology. Therefore, there is a strong case to be made for leveraging limited resources in order to accomplish all objectives while significantly reducing development costs. (authors)

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2018

Vitrification of High-Level Waste: how to Select the Best Suited Technology - 18117

Since more than 30 years now, a number of countries have selected and operated vitrification as the best industrial practice for safely and durably immobilizing the most active liquid waste. This now significant worldwide experience covers a wide range of waste compositions, from concentrated alkaline defense waste sludges with a variety of salts and chemicals (Na, Fe, Al, Cr, sulphate,... ) to relatively clear acidic HLLW from commercial, low salt, PUREX-type processes, waste that include dissolved cladding material (Al, Mg, stainless steel), waste that include high levels of noble metals and fines... The activity levels vary from 40- year old defense waste to relatively young waste from high burn-up commercial fuel. The current throughputs vary from about 5 kg/h of glass to about 90 kg/h of glass per melter. Even higher throughputs are currently being considered for Hanford facility for instance. In order to cope with the range of waste compositions, glass compositions have also evolved from low melting temperature borosilicate or phosphate glass to glass or glass ceramics with higher melting temperatures. More complex matrices are currently under study in a number of countries, to immobilize more complex waste and / or increase waste loadings. Each challenge is unique and, for each challenge, it is necessary to select the best combination of waste form and technology. For instance for very active solutions with high levels of noble metal particles that could settle, increase apparent glass viscosity, and impact electrical conductivity, one would select borosilicate glass in the mechanically-stirred hot wall induction melter with bottom pouring that has proven its efficiency in industrial conditions at La Hague. For high glass throughputs with low solids in a borosilicate melt (typically Defense waste), ceramic melters have proven their reliability and efficiency. For matrices that need higher temperatures, or with very high corrosiveness, Cold-Crucible Induction Melters are now considered, with one first industrial implementation at La Hague to produce borosilicate glass and a glass-ceramic. All these technologies have been improved over the years to increase throughput, waste loading, melting temperature, reliability... Other types of waste are now being studied worldwide, and for each, it is necessary to carefully select the adapted waste form and technology. The technologies studied will range from traditional technologies (such as hot-wall induction melter technology and liquid-fed ceramic melter technologies) to the more recent advanced technologies (such as Cold Crucible Induction Melter or Advanced Ceramic melters). In addition, the field of vitrification is extending to other types of waste; the current advances in this field will also be described. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2025

Quantum sensing for emerging energy technologies

The ability to exploit quantum phenomena has enabled sensing technologies with detection limits below the classical limit. Sensors with applications in energy discovery, production, transportation, and consumption can be enhanced through quantum or hybrid quantum-classical sensors. Here, in this Review, we provide an overview of commercial and emerging quantum sensor platforms and their opportunity areas specific to advanced energy technologies. Key examples include: power grid-enhancing-technologies, where quantum magnetometers can detect powerline and transformer faults; electric vehicle-to-grid applications, where chip-scale atomic clocks can enable grid synchronization; and carbon capture and storage, where quantum gravimeters and single-photo LiDAR can detect microscopic leaks. Quantum sensor deployment requires further research into miniaturization and ruggedization for field deployment, cost-reduction, and workforce development. The maturation of clean energy technologies and quantum sensors provide opportunities for synergy, with the integration of quantum sensors into advanced energy technologies maximizing their security, reliability, and efficiency.

critical metals↗