NASA Analysis of Space Mission Options for the 2025 Planetary Defense Conference Hypothetical Asteroid Impact Threat Scenario
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Astronomy and AstroPhysics↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “scenario”
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.
Dual-Particle Visualization with HoloLens 2 in an Inspection Scenario
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Lopez, Ricardo↗
FY2021 Information Exchange for MINOS: Multi-Informatics for Nuclear Operations Scenarios - Acoustics
This is a slide deck intended for use in a program review for our sponsor.
46 - INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AN↗
Grid Interconnection and Renewables Deployment Related Air Quality and Human Health Benefits in Southeast Asia
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has increasingly focused on multilateral electricity trade, improved grid resiliency and modernization. These opportunities in the power sector have been studied through the ASEAN Interconnection Masterplan Studies, the most recent of which is the ASEAN Interconnection Masterplan Study III (AIMS III). AIMS III assessed four different scenarios of power system in the ASEAN countries that include a base scenario and three additional scenarios (called optimum RE, ASEAN RE, and High RE) considering different levels of deployment of renewable energy (RE) and cross-border generation and trade of electricity for three years (2025, 2030, 2040). In this work, we quantify the potential air quality and public health co-benefits of AIMS III scenarios. For a rapidly expanding, energy hungry region like SE Asia generation is power generation is expected to increase significantly. The AIMS III scenarios' capacity expansion modeling suggest that: 1) Generation nearly doubles from 2025 to 2040 in all four AIMS III scenarios; 2) Most of the increased generation is met by coal in all four AIMS III scenarios; 3) While renewables generation increases in all four AIMS III scenarios, the fraction of total generation (its share) generally decreases because of the much greater increase in non-renewable sources, mostly coal. Only in the High RE Target scenario do renewables represent a higher share in 2040 than in 2025, though even here it is at the expense of natural gas rather than coal; 4) As a result, emissions of gaseous and aerosol pollutants increase significantly in all scenarios. Because emissions increase in 2040 compared to 2025 for all four AIMS III scenarios, so do PM2.5 concentrations. Even for the High RE Target scenario (the scenario with highest share of renewable energy), compared to the Base scenario in 2025, in 2040 PM2.5 concentrations are higher. Compared to the Base scenario in the same years, the Optimum RE and ASEAN RE Target scenarios do not differ very much from the Base in terms of PM2.5 concentration. The High RE Target scenario, on the other hand, yields noticeably lower PM2.5 concentration. For example, in 2040 the population-weighted decrease in annual average PM2.5 concentration in the High RE Target scenario relative to the Base scenario is 0.5 ug m-3. Compared to the Base scenario in 2040, each of the alternative AIMS III scenarios is estimated to result in net reductions in power-sector air quality-related excess mortality in the ASEAN region. Yet there are a few countries for which the Optimum RE and ASEAN RE Target result in increases in PM2.5-related excess mortality (Thailand and Vietnam for the ASEAN RE Target scenario and Thailand for the Optimum RE scenario). However, for the High RE Target scenario, all countries benefit and find reductions in excess mortality resulting from the power sector scenarios modeled in AIMS III with regionwide mortality decreasing by 16,000 compared to the Base scenario in 2040. In summary, our analysis finds that changing power generation emissions is a crucial lever for improving public health in ASEAN member countries and provides a pathway for policymakers to make decision backed by a realistic power sector expansion and air quality analyses.
air quality↗
Projected Urban Morphology of the Los Angeles Area by the Year 2100
This dataset provides projections of urban building morphologies for the Los Angeles urban area at 30-meter spatial resolution. It contains 192 raster files that detail two primary building attributes: building footprint fractions (ranging from 0 to 1) and average building heights (ranging from 0 to 75 meters). The projections account for a wide range of future pathways, covering two Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP3 and SSP5), two population scenarios, two developed land intensification scenarios, and four distinct levels of intensification. The dataset was created using dual Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) trained on 2015 land cover and building properties from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) and Model America datasets. Supporting information on the dataset has been described in the LAUrbanAreaMorphologyProjections2100_README.txt file.
Pandey, Bhartendu↗
How structural differences influence cross-model consistency: An electric sector case study
Multiple models are often employed to describe a range of possible outcomes for one or more scenarios, yielding insights into causal relationships and their uncertainties. Electric sector capacity expansion scenarios are a common topic of such efforts due to the economic influence of the electric sector, but model results typically span a broad solution space despite efforts to harmonize input assumptions, making decision implications difficult to discern. This study investigates the relationship between input harmonization and cross-model scenario consistency under disparate electric sector scenarios. We compare cross-model consistency between two state-of-the-art electric sector capacity expansion models (GCAM-USA and ReEDS) for six electric sector scenarios comprising alternate assumptions about fossil fuel resource availability, technology innovation, and long-term economy-wide transitions under four harmonization configurations varying model representations of electricity demand, fuel prices, renewable resources, and capacity retirements. These comparisons reveal that cross-model consistency can vary across scenarios under a given harmonization configuration, suggesting that harmonization efforts must often be scenario-specific if comparable cross-model consistency is desired. Model structural differences can hinder consistency, and the impact of these differences can depend on the scenario. Ultimately, thorough harmonization can reveal insights into cross-model consistency, which can be used to tighten uncertainty bounds and improve the decision-making implications of multi-model activities.
Cohen, Stuart↗
Integrated GW Farm ABM
This Data Repository includes data used for the integrated groundwater- farm ABM model, raw model output from scenario ensemble, and processed outputs that isolate the groundwater storage depletion outcomes for the 35,000 farm cells. Model Inputs: Farm ABM Inputs: This folder contains the input data used by the integrated groundwater - farm ABM modelling script (Python file) used for the high performance computing (HPC) experiments. The sub-folder "data inputs" contains all of the farm attribute data, while the three files in the folder have the hydrogeological data lookup table (NLDAS Cost Curve Attributes.csv), a lookup table (Theis well function table.csv) for the groundwater cost curve function, and the farm indexes and corresponding NLDAS ids for all of the cells run in this experiment (nldas farms subset final.csv). NLDAS Cost curve hydrogeological data: Hydrogeological data aggregated to 1/8 degree resolution and aligned with the NLDAS grid. Parameters include: water depth below ground surface [meters], subsurface porosity [unitless], aquifer depth from ground surface to aquifer bottom [meters], annual average recharge (USGS: mm, Doll: meters), and three different hydraulic conductivity (K) values (meters/day). The three K values represent the mean value from Gleeson et al. (2018), one standard deviation above the mean from Gleeson et al. (2018), and the de Graaf et al. 2020 modifications to certain lithologies. Additional information about these datasets and their processing are documented in the supplement to Yoon et al. 2025 (in review). Output: Raw outputs: This folder contains a .zip file that has model outputs for the entire scenario ensemble. There is one csv for each farm id, using the format "farm farmid cases.csv". The relationship between the farm id and NLDAS id is defined by the "nldas farms subset final.csv" located in the Farm ABM Inputs folder. Each csv has 625 rows, corresponding to 625 combinations of different scenario parameter values. Each row (scenario) represents the outcome of a 100 year simulation. Columns define scenario settings and summary statistics for each scenario. The first four columns define the scenario settings: "hydro ratio," "econ ratio," "K scenario," and "gamma scenario." The hydro and econ ratios are values passed to the modeling script that influence multipliers for other model parameters, as documented in the supplement to Yoon et al. 2025 (in review). The gamma multiplier is a coefficient multiplier applied to the baseline gamma values (values below 1 represent lower unobserved costs compared to baseline, values above 1 represent higher costs). The K scenario names represent K values of: "low": 0.5 m/d, "int 1": 2.5 m/d, "int 2": 10 m/d, "high": 50 m/d, and "gleeson": mean Gleeson K value. "Perc vol depleted" is the fraction of groundwater depleted at the end of the 100 simulation. Processed Output: Derived depletion outcomes from raw outputs: All of the individual csv files from the Raw outputs were aggregated into a single file that has the scenario settings and fraction depletion "Perc vol depleted" for every farm cell, for every scenario. The other two files define relationships between the farm id, NLDAS id, and local and major aquifer units, used for aquifer-level depletion analysis.
Agent based modeling↗
A heuristic tool to assess regional impacts of renewable energy infrastructure on conservation areas
Wind and hydropower are important renewable components of national energy portfolios, but their infrastructure negatively affects biodiversity. Regional development requires identification of scenarios that minimize the cumulative impacts of multiple facilities. We introduce the cumulative impact plot (CIP) to quantify cumulative impacts of renewable energy development within a region. Summed impacts of facilities are plotted as a function of the number of facilities, with facilities ranked by increasing (the best-case scenario) or decreasing (worst-case scenario) individual impact. These curves represent lower and upper bounds to which alternative development scenarios (e.g., facilities ranked by generating capacity) can be compared. We used CIPs to assess overlap of potential wind and hydropower facilities with two types of conservation area in the United States: (1) federally protected lands and (2) critical habitats of federally threatened and endangered species. Here, we evaluated two alternative scenarios: facilities ranked by (A) decreasing generating capacity and (B) increasing distance from urban centers. Differences between the best-case and worst-case scenarios were large, thus revealing opportunities to develop facilities with limited impact on conservation areas. Alternative scenarios maximizing energy density generally resulted in conservation area overlap intermediate to best-case and worst-case scenarios. CIPs can also identify the proportion of wind versus hydropower favored under alternative scenarios. Build-out scenarios aimed at minimizing conservation area overlap favor hydropower, whereas alternative scenarios favor wind power. We conclude that CIPs can (1) complement—but should not replace—project-level environmental impact assessment, (2) integrate strategic, cumulative, and scenario-based assessments, and (3) harness rapidly growing geospatial data.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
IM3 Data Center Driven Grid Stress Dataset for the U.S. Western Interconnection
This dataset provides projected grid stress and reliability results (including all model inputs and outputs from an open-source grid operations modeling framework - GO), for the Integrated Multisector, Multiscale Modeling (IM3) project, under varying levels of data center demand growth between 2025 and 2035 in the U.S. Western Interconnection. The scenarios and sensitivity experiments are combinations of different data center demand growth rates and energy, weather, population and economic pathways. Data center demand growth projections were sourced from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The data center demand growth projection names are: Low (3.71% annual data center demand growth) Moderate (5% annual data center demand growth) High (10% annual data center demand growth) Higher (15% annual data center demand growth) Energy, weather, population and economic pathways are informed by two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) and two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) following the hotter general circulation model (GCM) forcing group from a set of perturbed thermodynamics simulations. The resulting pathway names are: rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 The main scenarios and sensitivity experiments are detailed below. Reference scenario: The projected grid stress and reliability results for the U.S. Western Interconnection from a previous study. This scenario does not consider data center demand growth explicitly. Data center scenario: Building on the reference scenario, this scenario considers various data center growth rates and how they impact the U.S. Western Interconnection. Data center loads are modeled as flat 8760-hr profiles. This scenario does not consider new generation and transmission capacities specifically designed to meet the new data center demands. The related folder is named "flat". Delayed generator retirements sensitivity experiment: Building on the data center scenario, this experiment explores the impact of different levels of natural gas and nuclear generator retirement delays. The resulting scenario names are: (1) postponing 100% nuclear retirements; (2) postponing 100% nuclear and 25% natural gas retirements; (3) postponing only 50% natural gas retirements; (4) postponing 100% nuclear and 50% natural gas retirements; (5) postponing 100% nuclear and 75% natural gas retirements; and (6) postponing 100% nuclear and 100% natural gas retirements. The related folder names are: no_gen_retire_0_gas, no_gen_retire_25_gas, no_gen_retire_50_gas, no_gen_retire_50_gas_only, no_gen_retire_75_gas, and no_gen_retire_100_gas. Demand response through curtailment sensitivity experiment: Building on the data center scenario, this experiment explores the impact of different participation and compensation levels of data center demand response. The resulting scenario names are: (1) 5% demand available for curtailment with 750 $/MWh compensation; (2) 5% demand available for curtailment with 500 $/MWh compensation; (3) 5% demand available for curtailment with 250 $/MWh compensation; (4) 15% demand available for curtailment with 750 $/MWh compensation; (5) 15% demand available for curtailment with 500 $/MWh compensation; and (6) 15% demand available for curtailment with 250 $/MWh compensation. The related folder names are: dr_cost_250_drup_0_drdown_5, dr_cost_250_drup_0_drdown_15, dr_cost_500_drup_0_drdown_5, dr_cost_500_drup_0_drdown_15, dr_cost_750_drup_0_drdown_5, and dr_cost_750_drup_0_drdown_15. Combination of delayed generator retirements and demand response through curtailment sensitivity experiment: The impact of combining postponing 100% nuclear and 25% natural gas retirements with 5% demand available for curtailment with 750 $/MWh compensation is simulated. The related folder is named "dr_cost_750_drup_0_drdown_5_nuc_100_gas_25". Please refer to the README file for a detailed description of the dataset including individual files and references.
Artificial Intelligence↗
Calculation of Operations Efficiency Factors for Mars Surface Missions
For planning of Mars surface missions, to be operated on a sol-by-sol basis by a team on Earth (where a "sol" is a Martian day), activities are described in terms of "sol types" that are strung together to build a surface mission scenario. Some sol types require ground decisions based on a previous sol's results to feed into the activity planning ("ground in the loop"), while others do not. Due to the differences in duration between Earth days and Mars sols, for a given Mars local solar time, the corresponding Earth time "walks" relative to the corresponding times on the prior sol/day. In particular, even if a communication window has a fixed Mars local solar time, the Earth time for that window will be approximately 40 minutes later each succeeding day. Further complexity is added for non-Mars synchronous communication relay assets, and when there are multiple control centers in different Earth time zones. The solution is the development of "ops efficiency factors" that reflect the efficiency of a given operations configuration (how many and location of control centers, types of communication windows, synchronous or non-synchronous nature of relay assets, sol types, more-or-less sustainable operations schedule choices) against a theoretical "optimal" operations configuration for the mission being studied. These factors are then incorporated into scenario models in order to determine the surface duration (and therefore minimum spacecraft surface lifetime) required to fulfill scenario objectives. The resulting model is used to perform "what-if" analyses for variations in scenario objectives. The ops efficiency factor is the ratio of the figure of merit for a given operations factor to the figure of merit for the theoretical optimal configuration. The current implementation is a pair of models in Excel. The first represents a ground operations schedule for 500 sols in each operations configuration for the mission being studied (500 sols was chosen as being a long enough time to capture variations in relay asset interactions, Earth/Mars time phasing, and seasonal variations in holidays). This model is used to estimate the ops efficiency factor for each operations configuration. The second model in a separate Excel spreadsheet is a scenario model, which uses the sol types to rack up the total number of "scenario sols" for that scenario (in other words, the ideal number of sols it would take to perform the scenario objectives). Then, the number of sols requiring ground in the loop is calculated based on the soil types contained in the given scenario. Next, the scenario contains a description of what sequence of operations configurations is used, for how many days each, and this is used with the corresponding ops efficiency factors for each configuration to calculate the "ops duration" corresponding to that scenario. Finally, a margin is applied to determine the minimum surface lifetime required for that scenario. Typically, this level of analysis has not been performed until much later in the mission, and has not been able to influence mission design. Further, the notion of moving to sustainable operations during Prime Mission - and the effect that that move would have on surface mission productivity and mission objective choices - has not been encountered until the most recent rover missions (MSL and Mars 2018).
Layback, Sharon L.↗
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↗
Ectomycorrhizal effects on decomposition are highly dependent on fungal traits, climate, and litter properties: A model-based assessment. Dataset.
To simulate the effects of mycorrhizal fungi on soil organic matter cycling, we incorporated mycorrhizal processes into the Carbon, Organisms, Rhizosphere, and Protection in the Soil Environment (CORPSE) model to develop a new soil model Myco-CORPSE. The new model was calibrated and evaluated against soil measurements taken at temperate forests in New Hampshire (NH) and Georgia (GA). A series of scenario analysis were also conducted to explore the conditions under which ectomycorrhizal (ECM) N acquisition processes can induce different soil C accumulation in ECM systems compared to arbuscular (AM) systems.In this data package, we included:-The Python codes of the standard Myco-CORPSE model we developed: "Standard Myco_CORPSE python codes.zip". The main program is the "gradient_sim.py" which calculates the bulk soil microbes and CN content along a user defined gradient of clay, soil temperature, soil moisture and mycorrhizal dominance, and relies on two subprograms "CORPSE_deriv.py" and "CORPSE_integrate.py". "CORPSE_deriv.py" calculated the changes in all simulated soil stock within every time step and "CORPSE_integrate.py" integrate the changes in all simulated soil stock within simulated time period. The program "Plot.py" is used to plot the major outputs produced by the main program "gradient_sim.py".-The modified Python codes of Myco-CORPSE models with site-level environmental inputs (in NH and GA) used to conduct simulations in NH and GA sites: "NH_GA model simulations.zip". -The Python codes used to evaluate the Myco-CORPSE simulation outputs in NH and GA sites against site-level measurements: "Plot NH_GA simulation against measurements.zip". It includes both the evaluation Python code, the model outputs on NH and GA sites, and the measured soil properties in both sites.-The modified Python codes of Myco-CORPSE models "Scenario analysis_model simulations.zip" that is used to conduct scenario analysis of how different litter properties, mycorrhizal fungal traits, climate, and seasonal variation in temperature and vegetation phenology impact the mycorrhizal effects on soil CN properties. The sub file folder "Scenario analysis_litter traits" contains the codes for scenario analysis of different litter properties; The sub file folder "Scenario analysis_ECM types" contains the codes for scenario analysis of different ECM fungal traits; The sub file folder "Scenario analysis_climate&seasonality" contains the codes for scenario analysis of different climate and seasonalities;-"Scenario analysis_model results and plotting codes.zip" contains all the output files from the the scenario analysis of Myco-CORPSE model as described above and the plotting codes used to the generate the heatmaps and scatterplots shown in the manuscript "Ectomycorrhizal effects on decomposition are highly dependent on fungal traits, climate, and litter properties: A model-based assessment"The majority of the model outputs did not have specific geographic information or temporal coverage because the analysis we conducted are mainly hypothetical model simulations. We only provided geographic description, coordinates and temporal coverage for those soil measurements which we used for model evaluations (included in the "Plot NH_GA simulation against measurements.zip").
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Integrating Models and Observations
For the past ten years, the coronal loops community has held bi-annual workshops to discuss the analysis of coronal loop observations and the latest efforts to model the loop structures. During this time, several heating scenarios have been proposed to explain loop observations. These heating scenarios rely on different heating frequencies, locations, and durations, as well as different loop sub-structure. Often the scenarios are developed to explain an observation, hence all heating scenarios match some observational criteria. The key to discriminating between the competing heating scenarios is to first identify the distinguishing observables. For instance, both effectively steady and nanoflare-heating scenarios can produce quasi-steady intensities. Observing quasi-steady intensities, then, does not help determine which heating scenario is most likely. These heating scenarios may, however, predict different velocities or different emission measure distributions. In this talk, I will discuss a few of the expected observations for some simple heating scenarios. I will ask the modeling community to calculate similar observations for the different heating scenarios to generate a standard list of expected observations. After the community develops this list, comparisons with actual loop observations can then distinguish the most likely heating scenario.
Womebarger, Amy↗
Evaluation of thermostat location for multizone commercial building performance
In multi-zone buildings, it is often found that a single shared thermostat controls more than one conditioned zones. Although these shared zones are supposed to have similar thermal needs (e.g., cooling and heating load), in reality, they are not mainly due to different orientations, sizes of windows, occupancy, space types, etc. This can cause unnecessary energy waste or thermal discomfort for the occupants. How to quantify this impact in multizone buildings remains a research gap. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impact of different sensor (i.e., thermostat) locations for multizone commercial buildings through a comprehensive modeling study. Here, two different scenarios for the sensor locations were selected to evaluate the impact in terms of energy and thermal comfort. The scenario (1) is that one to five sensors distributed among the five zones, but the sensor readings from selected zones will be used for no-sensor zones, which is no-mean sensor scenario. The scenario (2) is that one to five sensors distributed among the five zones, but the average temperature from the shared zones will be used for each of the shared zones, which is a mean sensor scenario. The uncertainty analysis was performed for different sensor location scenarios.(a)The major findings from an energy perspective, for scenario (1), the differences of cooling energy go as high as 17% more or 12% less, compared with the baseline. For heating energy consumption, the discrepancies go as high as 51% more or 52% less, compared with baseline. For site energy consumption, the discrepancies go as high as 3.2% more or 3.2% less, compared with baseline. For fan energy consumption, the discrepancies go as high as 3.2% more or as low as 1.0% less, compared with baseline. For scenario (2), the discrepancies of cooling energy go as high as 3% more, or 0.5% less, compared with the baseline. For heating energy consumption, the discrepancies, are go as high as 10.1% more or as low as 3.0% less, compared with baseline. For site energy consumption, the discrepancies go as high as 1.3% more or 0.3% less, compared with baseline. For fan energy consumption, the discrepancies go as high as 3.1% more or as low as 1.0% less, compared with baseline.(b) In terms of the indoor thermal comfort, for the no-mean-sensor scenarios, the discrepancies of unmet hours for cooling mode can be as high as 1,200 h, compared with the baseline. The discrepancies of unmet hours for heating mode can be as high as 740 h, compared with the baseline. For the mean-sensor scenarios, the discrepancies of unmet hours for cooling mode can be as high as 750 h, compared with the baseline. The discrepancies of unmet hours for heating mode can be as high as 50 h, compared with the baseline.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Evaluation of Electrical Resistivity Tomography to Monitor the Transport of Past Releases Beneath Tank Farms
Underground storage tanks at the Hanford Site, in southeastern Washington State, hold radioactive waste generated from four decades of plutonium production. The 149 single-shell tanks and the 28 double-shell tanks have all exceeded their initial design life of approximately 25 years. At least 67 tanks are assumed to have leaked in the past, resulting in radioactive releases into the vadose zone. Gamma ray logging within dry monitoring wells is currently the primary method for tracking the migration of leaked tank waste through the vadose zone. While this approach provides an accurate assessment of radioactive contamination, that information is only provided near (within ~1m) the borehole, leaving most of the vadose zone unmonitored, particularly the important region directly beneath the tank. This report describes a numerical study that investigates the feasibility and performance of time-lapse 3D electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) for long-term monitoring of a hypothetical tank waste location and migration through the vadose zone. ERT is a method of remotely imaging the bulk electrical conductivity (EC) of the subsurface, which is significantly impacted by the presence of conductive solid and liquid tank waste. The release of liquid tank wastes increases subsurface fluid conductivity and saturation over time, creating a target to use time-lapse ERT for long-term monitoring. Although the presence of metallic infrastructure can cause ERT interference, recent advancements in ERT data processing enable the deleterious effects of buried metallic infrastructure (e.g. pipes, wellbore casings, tanks) to be removed to better determine the liquid tank waste migration over time. Three hypothetical realistic scenarios were simulated in the ERT evaluation. The first two scenarios assume the same leak amount and rate (i.e., between 1/1/1951 and 12/31/1951 at the rate of 347 m 3 per year) but different leaky tanks. Scenario 1 assumes leaks under tank B-102, which is located on the edge of the B-tank farm and surrounded by a few metallic infrastructure including cased pipes/wells/tanks. Scenario 2 assumes leaks under tank B-108, which is located near the center of the B-tank farm and surrounded by larger amount of metallic infrastructure than B-102. Scenario 3 assumes the same metallic infrastructure as B-102, with a more recent contaminant leak that was simulated to have occurred between 1/1/2018 and 12/31/2023 at a rate of 1.89 m 3 per year. The leak time in Scenarios 1 and 2 corresponds to a historical overfill event in 1951 and Scenario 3 corresponds to a recent found tank leak in 2019. In each scenario, a “true” bulk EC model vs. time reflecting contaminant migration was generated. ERT data was simulated from these “true” bulk EC models and a time-lapse ERT inversion produced “imaged” bulk EC vs. time. Three electrode configurations in two, four and eight boreholes surrounding the leak tank were used in the ERT simulations in each scenario. These borehole configurations were considered logistically feasible and cost-effective for monitoring. The hypothetical ERT boreholes are assumed to have non-metallic casing. By comparing the “imaged” bulk EC with the “true” bulk EC, it was demonstrated that the three configurations of wells used (two, four, and eight wells) were able to successfully monitor the migration of tank leaks through the vadose zone, with bulk EC resolution increasing with the number of down borehole ERT arrays for all scenarios. Therefore, the use of eight boreholes to perform ERT monitoring beneath the tanks provided the best spatiotemporal information.
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection
Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection Description This dataset contains input and output data for the manuscript Mongird, K. et al. (under review) titled "Energy Infrastructure Futures: A Multiscale Evaluation of Projected Power Plant Siting Across the Western Interconnection". Input data corresponds to gridded spatial siting attributes that are necessary to conduct a random forest machine learning analysis of siting feature importance. Output data includes SHAP feature analysis outputs, and classification report values. For data on power plant siting results referred to in the manuscript, please refer to the CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations data download page. The downloadable data includes values for eight different future scenarios for the Western US. 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 Technical Information The dataset includes two sets of data files: (1) CERF gridded siting parameters and (2) Feature analysis outputs and classification reports. All downloadable data is in csv file format. Files with x/y coordinate information use the Albers Equal Area Conic projection (ESRI:102003). 1. CERF Gridded Siting Parameters This directory provides a balanced sample of gridded CERF siting parameters data for eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055, seven different technologies, and eight timesteps. This data serves as input to the feature analysis. It contains the following parameters. region_name - name of region (i.e., state) sited - binary value representing whether the grid cell received a siting of that technology type (1=True) rcp - binary value representing scenario resource concentration pathway (0 = RCP4.5, 1 = RCP8.5) ssp - binary value representing scenario shared socioeconomic pathway (0 = SSP3, 1 = SSP5) climate - binary value representing cooler (0) or hotter (1) GCM forcing tech_name - generation technology name sited_year - year that values correspond to transmission_cost - cost of transmission interconnection pipeline_cost - cost of natural gas pipeline interconnection interconnection_cost - total interconnection cost (sum of transmission cost and gas pipeline cost) lmp - associated locational marginal value ($/MWh) associated with the grid cell, timestep, scenario, and technology xcoord - x-coordinate of location ycoord - y-coordinate of location 2a. Feature Analysis Output The dataset includes the feature analysis shap output for locational marginal price and interconnection cost. It contains the following parameters. technology - generator technology name scenario - name of scenario feature - name of feature, either locational_marginal_price or interconnection_cost value - the mean of absolute value of SHAP values for given feature 2b. Feature Analysis Classification Report This download includes the classification report associated with each random forest model. The dataset contains the following parameters. technology - generation technology name scenario - name of scenario test - one of precision (the proportion of predicted positives that are actually correct), recall (the proportion of actual positives that were correctly identified), f1-score (the harmonic mean of precision and recall) 0.0 - value of test for classification of 0 (grid cell not chosen for siting) 1.0 - value of test for classification of 1 (grid cell chosen for siting) accuracy - accuracy of model (i.e., fraction of all predictions that were right) macro avg - Simple average of test values for all classes weighted avg - Weighted average of test values for all classes, weighted based on 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. License This data is made available under a CCBY4 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830
Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
Assessment of the polygeneration approach in wastewater treatment plants for enhanced energy efficiency and green hydrogen/ammonia production
Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) offer opportunities to optimize resource utilization and enhance energy efficiency. Here, this study provides a comprehensive analysis of using the polygeneration approach in WWTPs to reduce grid energy dependence, optimize energy distribution, and utilize surplus energy for hydrogen (H 2 ) and ammonia (NH 3 ) production. Several models were employed, including photovoltaic (PV) cells, parabolic trough collectors (PTCs), steam methane reforming, and polymer electrolyte membranes, to assess the feasibility of this approach. Three scenarios were evaluated and compared: Scenario 1 (Baseline) represents the current situation, Scenario 2 maximizes the Net Present Value (NPV), and Scenario 3 minimizes NH 3 production costs. Real data from As-Samra WWTP in Jordan was used to accurately assess the feasibility of each scenario. The results show that Scenario 2 offers the highest profitability and efficiency, with a NPV of 87.48 million USD and an annual NH 3 production of 15,417 tons, reducing both grid dependency and biogas fuel consumption. Both Scenarios 2 and 3 demonstrate the ability to meet thermal demands efficiently while generating significant revenue from NH 3 production. Scenario 3, in particular, achieves competitive H 2 and NH 3 production costs. Environmentally, Scenario 2 significantly reduces annual greenhouse gas emissions by 12.66 kilotons of CO 2eq , with near-zero carbon intensity for thermal energy due to solar reliance. In conclusion, the polygeneration approach offers a promising pathway for WWTPs to achieve greater sustainability, economic gains, and reduced environmental impact, providing valuable insights for decision-makers.
42 ENGINEERING↗
Regional Economic Impacts of the Los Angeles 100% Renewable Energy Transition
To help mitigate greenhouse gas (GHGs) generation from burning fossil fuels, many state and local governments are requiring utilities to dramatically increase the share of electricity generated from renewable sources. The City of Los Angeles has set a target of 100% renewable energy by 2045 and has formulated a plan that considers nine potential alternative scenarios that differ by technology, location, and timing. Each scenario has a unique set of local investments, operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, and concomitant rate structures. In this study we develop and apply a computable general equilibrium (CGE) model built specifically for LA to estimate and compare the economic impacts for each of the scenarios over time relative to a reference case. We find differences in economic impacts across scenarios, depending on the level and timing of investment and O&M expenditures, as well as differences in the relative rate changes across scenarios. Results show that employment and economic output are positively correlated with greater capital and O&M spending, while higher electricity rates can dampen economic activity. Several scenarios generate positive economic impacts relative to the reference case, showing that the transition need not have harmful economic impacts, and all scenarios generate a number of other positive co-benefits, such as reduced damage to health from the reduction of ordinary air pollutants. The net employment impacts from 2026 to 2045 across the scenarios range from a low of 3,600 job-year losses annually to 4,700 job-year gains, both around only 0.1% of the baseline average annual employment in the city over that period. The analysis also indicates that lower-income households are relatively more affected than others by the scenarios. Overall, even in the most negatively impactful case, the economic output and employment effects are quite small when taken in the context of the overall size of the regional economy and the large reduction in GHGs.
economic impact modeling↗