Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “INDUSTRY”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1987

IECON '87: Industrial applications of control and simulation; Proceedings of the 1987 International Conference on Industrial Electronics, Control, and Instrumentation, Cambridge, MA, Nov. 3, 4, 1987

Recent advances in control-system design and simulation are discussed in reviews and reports. Among the topics considered are fast algorithms for generating near-optimal binary decision programs, trajectory control of robot manipulators with compensation of load effects via a six-axis force sensor, matrix integrators for real-time simulation, a high-level control language for an autonomous land vehicle, and a practical engineering design method for stable model-reference adaptive systems. Also addressed are the identification and control of flexible-limb robots with unknown loads, adaptive control and robust adaptive control for manipulators with feedforward compensation, adaptive pole-placement controllers with predictive action, variable-structure strategies for motion control, and digital signal-processor-based variable-structure controls.

Hartley, Tom T.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Service Quality in the U.S. Airline Industry: Variations in Performance Within Airlines and Between Airlines and the Industry

This study examined the service quality of 25 U.S. airlines (1987-1996) using data from the Department of Transportation's Air Travel Consumer Report. After a total quality and total complaint rate was calculated for these airlines, a 95 percent confidence interval was placed around the yearly and company means calculated to examine those cases that were significantly different from the mean. Results indicate that while the major carriers are converging toward a higher level of quality, there continues to be significant yearly variation. The service quality of regional carriers was much lower than major carriers and showed much greater variation.

Rhoades, Dawna L.↗
DOE OSTI2018

Closure Plan for the Idaho National Laboratory Site's Materials and Fuels Complex Industrial Waste Ditch

The Materials and Fuels Complex industrial waste system currently consists of the Industrial Waste Pond and Industrial Waste Ditch, associated piping, lift station, and flow meter. The Industrial Waste Pond and Industrial Waste Ditch, are land application sites permitted under Idaho Department of Environmental Quality Reuse Permit I-160-02, Modification 1. The Reuse Permit allows for 17 million gallons of industrial wastewater to be discharged to the land application sites. For Reuse Permit year 2017, approximately 7.569 million gallons were discharged to the land application sites, of which 1.649 million gallons were discharged to the Industrial Waste Ditch. A project (MFC West Campus Utility Corridor project) is proposed to begin in the summer of 2018. The project will install a new utility corridor along the west and north sides of the Materials and Fuels Complex. As part of the design, it is proposed to reroute the wastewater currently discharged to the Industrial Waste Ditch into an underground pipe that would connect into the existing Industrial Waste Pipeline. The Industrial Waste Ditch pipe would enter the existing Industrial Waste Pipeline upstream of the existing flow meter and sampling location. This would allow for the combined wastewater streams to be monitored for flow and sampled for parameters required by the Reuse Permit. In accordance with the Reuse Permit, this closure plan is being submitted to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality for review and approval. Once the closure plan is approved, the Reuse Permit will be modified to remove the Industrial Waste Ditch from the permit. The closure plan includes: • Brief background of the Materials and Fuels Complex. • Reuse Permit history. • Site characteristics. • Description of the Industrial Wastewater System. • History of discharges to the Industrial Waste Ditch. • Summary of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act characterization, evaluation, and remediation of the Industrial Waste Ditch. • Contaminant concentrations in the effluent discharged to the Industrial Waste Ditch. • Contaminant concentrations in cross gradient, downgradient, and background monitoring wells. Based on the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act characterization and remediation of the Industrial Waste Ditch, low volumes and contaminant concentrations in the effluent subsequently discharged to the Industrial Waste Ditch, and contaminant concentrations at or near background levels in the monitoring wells, it is recommended that the Industrial Waste Ditch should be closed without further characterization.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2017

Air Pollutant Emissions Projections for the Cement and Steel Industry in China and the Impact of Emissions Control Technologies

China’s cement and steel industry accounts for approximately half of the world’s total cement and steel production. These two industries are two of the most energy-intensive and highest carbon dioxide (CO 2 )-emitting industries and two of the key industrial contributors to air pollution in China. For example, the cement industry is the largest source of particulate matter (PM) emissions in China, accounting for 40 percent of its industrial PM emissions and 27 percent of its total national PM emissions. The Chinese steel industry contributed to approximately 20 percent of sulfur dioxide (SO 2) emissions and 27 percent of PM emissions for all key manufacturing industries in China in 2013. In this study, we analyzed and projected the total PM and SO 2 emissions from the Chinese cement and steel industry from 2010–2050 under three different scenarios: a Base Case scenario, an Advanced scenario, and an Advanced EOP (end-of-pipe) scenario. We used bottom-up emissions control technologies data and assumptions to project the emissions. In addition, we conducted an economic analysis to estimate the cost for PM emissions reductions in the Chinese cement industry using EOP control technologies, energy efficiency measures, and product change measures. The results of the emissions projection showed that there is not a substantial difference in PM emissions between the Base Case and Advanced scenarios, for both the cement and steel industries. This is mainly because PM emissions in the cement industry caused mainly by production process and not the fuel use. Since our forecast for the cement production in the Base Case and Advanced scenarios are not too different from each other, this results in only a slight difference in PM emissions forecast for these two scenarios. Also, we assumed a similar share and penetration rate of control technologies from 2010 up to 2050 for these two scenarios for the cement and steel industry. However, the Advanced EOP scenario showed significantly lower PM emissions for the cement industry, reaching to 1.7 million tons of PM in 2050, which is less than half of that in the other two scenarios. The Advanced EOP scenario also has the lowest SO 2 emissions for the cement industry in China, reaching to 212,000 tons of SO 2 in 2050, which is equal to 40 percent of the SO 2 emissions in the Advanced scenario and 30 percent of the emissions in the Base Case scenario. The SO 2 emission is mainly caused by fuel (coal) burning in cement kiln or steel processes. For the steel industry, the SO 2 emissions of the Advanced EOP scenario are significantly lower than the other scenarios, with emissions declining to 323,000 tons in 2050, which is equal to 21 percent and 17 percent of the emissions of Advanced and Base Case scenarios in 2050, respectively. Results of the economic analysis show that for the Chinese cement industry, end-of-pipe PM control technologies have the lowest abatement cost per ton of PM reduced, followed by product change measures and energy efficiency measures, respectively. In summary, in order to meet Chinese national and regional air quality standards, best practice end-of-pipe emissions control technologies must be installed in both cement and steel industry and it must be supplemented by implementation of energy efficiency technologies and reduction of cement and steel production through structural change in industry.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Thermal Process Intensification: Transforming the Way Industry Uses Thermal Process Energy (Workshop Report)

The US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Advanced Manufacturing Office held the virtual workshop entitled “Thermal Process Intensification: Transforming the Way Industry Uses Thermal Process Energy” in November and December 2020. The workshop brought together participants from universities/laboratories, industries, equipment manufacturers, technology vendors, nongovernmental organizations, and subject-matter experts to discuss transformative technologies and strategies to substantially improve the performance (e.g., energy productivity, thermal efficiency, reduced greenhouse gas [GHG] emissions, reduced number of process steps) of thermal processing systems in the industrial sector. The US industrial sector accounts for 32% of the nation’s primary energy use (including feedstocks), and refining, chemicals, pulp and paper, iron and steel, and food products represent the top energy-consuming sectors. Thermal processing or process heating represents the largest energy use category; it accounts for 63% of all energy use in manufacturing. Additionally, thermal processing is the largest contributor of carbon dioxide (CO2) generation, resulting from combustion of fuels and process related chemical reactions, such as in the case of cement and lime production. The challenge of achieving net-zero industrial GHG emissions is colossal considering the established industrial base that depends mainly on carbon-based processes and energy sources; the time frame and cost to replace carbon-based energy sources and feedstocks; and the long-term outlook for development with large-scale adaptation of alternative non carbon–based technologies. The goals of the DOE Advanced Manufacturing Office Thermal Process Intensification Workshop were as follows: (1) Identify R&D gaps and opportunities to facilitate transformative improvement in industrial thermal processes beyond current technologies and allow for entirely new methods for processing materials; (2) Gain insight into new and innovative approaches to thermally intensify processes, reduce heat demand, harness waste heat, and use fuels and hydrocarbon feedstocks more efficiently; (3) Identify the R&D pathways to thermal process intensification (TPI) with the highest potential for impact and adoption by the industrial sector; (4) Define areas of research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) activities to accelerate development and application of emerging and transformative technologies to intensify thermal processes in industry. The scope and focus of the workshop were defined to meet these goals. Based on the available data for energy use and GHG emissions, the industries that collectively use more than 80% of the total process heating energy consumption were selected as primary focus areas. The chosen industries were combined into the following four groups based on similarities in their thermal processes: high-temperature metal processing (iron and steel industry, alumina-aluminum industry); high-temperature nonmetal and mineral processing (cement and glass industry); medium- to low-temperature thermal processing (food processing and pulp and paper industry as part of forest products sector); and hydrocarbon processing (petroleum refining and chemical industry). Furthermore, all potential TPI technologies associated with the processes defined were considered as part of the workshop. Different types of TPI technologies possible in industrial in the document.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Site Integration and Regulatory Considerations for a Nuclear Power Plant Colocated with Industrial Facilities: Colocation Studies for a Petroleum Refinery, Methanol Plant, and Wood Pulp Plant

This research explores the colocation of nuclear power plants (NPPs) with industrial applications. Three existing industrial sites were considered to demonstrate the siting process and illuminate technological gaps for future work. The three applications demonstrated for colocation here are a petroleum refinery, a methanol production plant, and a pulp and paper plant. This study uses a modified version of the EPRI siting criteria to explore the geological and demographic characteristics of the location of the current industrial site, as well as exploring external hazards from the industrial plant and its surrounding land use. Data was collected from public databases to estimate site characteristics. We then discuss how the site characteristics may impact the ability to colocate an NPP with an industrial application. The application site and 5 additional sites were explored for each application to give a general indication of the siting implications for an NPP in each area. The hazards for each industrial application was also explored to determine how colocation may impact reactor safety. The following gaps have been identified and should be explored in future research on colocation of NPPs with petroleum refineries, methanol plants, and pulp and paper plants: - There is a variety of industrial use, hazards, and pipelines in the surrounding area. A more thorough review of these hazards should be considered for colocation. - In general, the whole region around some applications seems to have softer soil, with implications for large site preparation costs. Further site investigations should prioritize looking into the geotechnical conditions. - Applications along coastlines are susceptible to flooding and hurricanes. The benefits of colocation should be weighed against the potential design implications. - The benefits of natural gas pipeline infrastructure in place should be explored further. If heat supply from the NPP is not required or not feasible due to the distance between the NPP and the application, there may be an opportunity to supply hydrogen to the plant through an existing pipeline. - Because there are several collocated industrial plants in the regions for the refinery and methanol plant, the benefits of sharing resources from the NPP should be explored further. This may open up additional sites for colocation. The following knowledge gaps were identified for the colocation of NPPs with these three industries, and industrial applications in general. These gaps are: - While the STAND tool contains many important characteristics for the reactor siting process, it is not calibrated for the colocation of NPPs with industrial facilities. - There are aspects of both the NPP and industrial application that need to be quantified for a siting analysis. Particularly, we need to understand the water intake requirements for NPPs and each application. - Further work may focus on adapting the STAND site comparison methodology to comparison of sites for co-location. This will involve using the data documented in this report as a starting point and performing a comprehensive and quantitative comparison. - Without spending significant resources, it would be impossible to gather data for each site to evaluate all aspects of siting. One approach to finding data and understanding its implications to siting is looking at FSARs for existing plants. For example, most sites considered in this study have small Vs30 values, indicating soft soil. However, there are NPPs located in the vicinity of most of the sites (e.g., Waterford Steam Electric Station near New Orleans) and reviewing available site characteristics and geotechnical data for these NPPs, might provide further information for siting. - The siting analysis in this study indicates that colocation of the NPP with the industrial site could be difficult based on external hazards, cooling requirements, weather, or population. We need to determine the impact of distance between the two facilities on cost and quality of energy transport. - This study did not touch on socioeconomic impacts for NPP colocation with industrial facilities. The input-output analysis methodology could be applied to the communities referenced in this study to determine the socioeconomic impact of these projects. - Similarly, the impacts of colocation on emergency planning was not explored in this study. The impacts on emergency planning infrastructure are somewhat related to the socioeconomic impacts, and could be explored using a similar methodology. - This study also did not address physical and cybersecurity, which will be important aspects of co-location [ref] . Cybersecurity will be important, regardless of the distance, but physical security will be important if the facilities are located very closely. Physical security might also be important for the steam lines between the plants, unless they are determined to be non-safety significant. - In many site l

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2013

Energy use and CO2 emissions of China’s industrial sector from a global perspective

The industrial sector has accounted for more than 50% of China’s final energy consumption in the past 30 years. Understanding the future emissions and emissions mitigation opportunities depends on proper characterization of the present-day industrial energy use, as well as industrial demand drivers and technological opportunities in the future. Traditionally, however, integrated assessment research has handled the industrial sector of China in a highly aggregate form. In this study, we develop a technologically detailed, service-oriented representation of 11 industrial subsectors in China, and analyze a suite of scenarios of future industrial demand growth. We find that, due to anticipated saturation of China’s per-capita demands of basic industrial goods, industrial energy demand and CO2 emissions approach a plateau between 2030 and 2040, then decrease gradually. Still, without emissions mitigation policies, the industrial sector remains heavily reliant on coal, and therefore emissions-intensive. With carbon prices, we observe some degree of industrial sector electrification, deployment of CCS at large industrial point sources of CO2 emissions at low carbon prices, an increase in the share of CHP systems at industrial facilities. These technological responses amount to reductions of industrial emissions (including indirect emission from electricity) are of 24% in 2050 and 66% in 2095.

China↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nuclear Thermal Energy Storage Configurations for Industrial Combined Heat and Power Supply: Conceptual Study and Engineering Designs

The industries examined in this report primarily rely on moderate-temperature heat provided by gas- or coal-fired boilers and combined heat and power (CHP) plants, delivered through standard process steam systems. High-temperature energy demands are often industry-specific and typically exceed the capabilities of high-temperature gas-cooled reactors (HTGRs). While it is technically feasible to replace process steam from fossil-based heat sources with nuclear energy, certain industries, such as methanol production and pulp and paper, face technoeconomic challenges in integrating nuclear energy without major changes or a technological shift. This is mainly due to the limited external energy demand remaining after the use of internal byproducts, waste heat recovery, and simple efficiency improvements. Achieving full decarbonization of these processes with nuclear energy would require significant technological advancements, involving experimental technology and substantial investments, making widespread adoption in existing industrial plants unlikely in the near term. This study reviews TES options in the context of enabling a flexible CHP supply while maintaining a steady nuclear heat input. Heat storage systems that interface between the reactor primary fluid and the CHP system offer superior performance and flexibility. Specifically, steam extraction downstream of the reheater with a two-tank molten-salt TES appears as the best solution regarding thermodynamic system benefits and system drawbacks. Using selected system configurations, a conceptual design of an industrial energy park was developed for industries with varying energy demands, such as steel production plants utilizing electric arc furnaces (EAFs) and chemical plants, as well as for those with constant energy demands, like petroleum refineries. This design highlights the capabilities of TES and explores its potential business cases. The study also conceptually develops the potential for integrating additional energy sources with nuclear systems through the implementation of TES. The potential of the HTGR-TES-CHP system was also evaluated considering key uncertainties such as industrial demand profiles, external grid access availability, and eligible tax credit levels, using the Holistic Energy Resource Optimization Network. Sensitivity of net present value to these uncertainties was analyzed to determine the optimal number of nuclear reactors (and CHP systems) and the suitable TES capacity. The results were interpreted from a decision-maker’s perspective, focusing on three key areas: deployment strategy (oversized units vs. undersized units with TES support), industrial process characteristics (thermal-intensive single profiles vs. electricity-intensive combined profiles), and operational goals (maximizing profits vs. minimizing natural gas (NG) consumption or external grid dependence). The optimization results indicate that the HTGR-TES-CHP system significantly reduces reliance on NG boilers for individual industrial processes by 9-60% (in NG capacity factor), with an average reduction of 38%, compared to standalone NG boiler operation case (Business As Usual [BAU]). For combined industrial processes, the reduction ranges from 37-77%, with an average of 60%. Additionally, the system greatly reduces dependence on external grids. In meeting industrial electrical demands, a 33-100% self-sufficient internal electricity supply is achieved for single industrial process, with an average of 74%, compared to the BAU scenario, where 100% of electricity is imported. For combined processes, 35-100% of internal electricity demands are met by the reactor, with an average of 73%. At last, the relative NG price levels at which the proposed HTGR-TES-CHP system can cost-effectively enter the market currently dominated by existing NG boilers were estimated. For a moderate HTGR CAPEX level ($\$$2500/kWth, $\$$6329/kWe), the analysis suggests that NG prices must be 2.5 to 7 times higher than HTGR variable operating and maintenance costs for single industrial process, and 5.5 to 9.5 times higher for a combined process scenario. Tax credit modeling shows that the Investment Tax Credit significantly reduces the price threshold needed to break even, making the system competitive with NG boilers in certain cases.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2016

The Evolution of Chemical Waste Treatment in the Nuclear Industry Simple Solutions for Complex Problems - 16694

The U.S. nuclear waste treatment industry was born in the 1980s and early 1990s with the end of the Cold War, the peak of commercial nuclear power, and after implementation of federal regulations that drove new disposal requirements for radioactive waste generators. New regulations resulted in soaring costs for radioactive waste disposal, and thus an industry was born that focused on recycling, volume reduction, and waste form improvement. New treatment facilities and technologies were started that primarily dealt with low-level radioactive wastes; however, there was little to no treatment capacity for wastes commingled with hazardous chemicals. Large volumes of 'mixed wastes', of which many became known as 'orphan wastes', were being stored on U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites with no path for disposal and thus posed a risk to workers, the public, and the environment. Perma-fix Environmental Services, Inc. (Perma-Fix), which started in the hazardous waste industry in 1990 and had developed facilities and technologies to treat hazardous wastes, evolved in the late 90's to meet this mixed waste market opportunity. By adapting our technologies and collaborating with waste generators to understand their needs, we successfully developed treatment and disposition solutions for some of the most challenging mixed wastes in the U.S. By establishing a pathway for treatment and disposal of orphan wastes, Perma-Fix played an important role in the safe treatment and disposition of orphan wastes, which facilitated closure of DOE sites such as Rocky Flats, Mound, and Fernald. We found that understanding chemistry and having experience in managing the hazardous constituents of mixed wastes allowed us to apply solutions that were not overly complex and expensive. Further, by adapting proven hazardous waste treatment solutions to wastes commingled with contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mercury, and organics we were able to safely manage even more problematic mixed wastes. During the 1980's, commercial low-level radioactive waste treatment and disposal solutions were being developed. At the same time, the federal government began dealing with increasing stakeholder demands for permanent solutions of more complex radioactive wastes such as high-level waste (HLW) and transuranic (TRU) wastes. HLW and TRU waste disposal became a contentious political issue between the federal government, regulatory agencies, and the public. As a result, DOE was mandated to develop treatment and disposal methodologies to address these wastes. DOE's Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility solved most issues with disposition of TRU wastes; however, for HLW (for example tank wastes at Hanford, Savannah River, and Idaho) the complexity of the wastes and the fact that government entities were developing political solutions for waste treatment resulted in a variety of complex and expensive solutions. Decades later we still do not have a permanent solution for HLW. Whether some simple commercial approaches are possible, what regulatory changes should occur, and what the implications may be if we do not change our current path, will be discussed. After two decades, we see the low-level nuclear waste industry maturing and replicating the path of the hazardous waste industry. When new hazardous waste federal regulations were enacted in the 1970's and 1980's, the hazardous waste industry began to boom with new company start-ups and construction of numerous treatment and disposal facilities. Initially, this was a good business to be in, managing dangerous wastes in an environmentally safe and responsible manner, and it was profitable. However, over-capacity and fierce competition drove down pricing, and companies failed. This ultimately led to a major consolidation within the hazardous waste industry. Similarly and more recently in the nuclear industry, over-capacity and competition has driven down profitability, companies have failed, and there is a major consolidation occurring within sectors of the industry. For consolidation to be successful and healthy for either industry, a leader must emerge to set the direction for the others and establish a sustainable path that is acceptable for waste generators, stakeholders, and investors. This was the case for the hazardous waste industry. This paper will examine the parallels between the hazardous and nuclear waste industries as they have matured and evolved, and what discuss the long term implications of consolidation within the nuclear industry. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2014

Industry Initiated Core Safety Attributes for Human Spaceflight for the 7th IAASS Conference

Now that the NASA Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is beginning its full certification contract for crew transportation to the International Space Station (ISS), is it time for industry to embrace a minimum set of core safety attributes? Those attributes can then be evolved into an industry-led set of basic safety standards and requirements. After 50 years of human space travel sponsored by governments, there are two basic conditions that now exist within the international space industry. The first, there is enough of a space-faring history to encourage the space industry to design, develop and operate human spaceflight systems without government contracts for anything other than services. Second, industry is capable of defining and enforcing a set of industry-based safety attributes and standards for human spaceflight to low-Earth orbit (LEO). This paper will explore both of these basic conditions with a focus on the safety attributes and standards. In the United States, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is now starting to dialogue with industry about the basic safety principles and attributes needed for potential future regulatory oversight. This process is not yet formalized and will take a number of years once approval is given to move forward. Therefore, throughout the next few years, it is an excellent time and opportunity for industry to collaborate together and develop the core set of attributes and standards. As industry engages and embraces a common set of safety attributes, then government agencies, like the FAA and NASA can use that industry-based product to strengthen their efforts on a safe commercial spaceflight foundation for the future. As the commercial space industry takes the lead role in establishing core safety attributes, and then enforcing those attributes, the entire planet can move away from governmental control of design and development and let industry expand safe and successful space operations in LEO. At that point the governmental agencies can focus on oversight of the industries' defined standards and enforcement for common welfare of the space-faring populous and overall public safety.

crew transportation↗
DOE OSTI2020

Study of Energy Saving Analysis for Different Industries

This study analyzes the energy consumption and saving performance in the industries in the U.S.A. All energy assessments implemented were for facilities whose annual energy consumptions were less than 9,000,000 kWh (small- and medium-sized industries) that belong to the manufacturing industries with Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes ranging from 2000 to 3999 in addition to SIC codes starting with 49. In this study, assessments are classified based on the SIC codes with recommendations analysis for each classification to get a better idea of what recommendations were suggested in each major industrial sector, knowing that 68 assessments were made, and their SIC ranged from 14 to 49. In addition, this study could be considered as a guide for energy engineers and other personnel involved in the energy assessment process. The information investigated can give a better prediction for composing better energy-demanding industries and minimizing energy consumption. More than 61 energy assessments were conducted for manufacturing facilities and analyzing the data gathered and processed. Through the research, the Fabricated Metal industry achieved the highest average kWh savings and cost savings within the industries studied in this study. According to the average gigajoule (GJ) savings, the fabricated metal industry ranked second within the studied industries. Conversely, Food and Kindred Products achieved the highest GJ energy savings within the studied industries. Overall, lighting, motors, compressors, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) were the most contributing industries in a total of 547 recommendations.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Generation and Use of Thermal Energy in the U.S. Industrial Sector and Opportunities to Reduce its Carbon Emissions

The industrial sector was the third-largest source of direct U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2014 behind electricity generation and transportation and accounted for roughly 20% of total emissions (EPA 2016). The Energy Information Administration (EIA) projects that total U.S. energy consumption will grow to about 108 exajoules (1 EJ = 10 18 J) or 102 quads (1 quad = 10 15 British thermal units) in 2025, with nearly all of the growth coming from the industrial sector (DOE 2015b). Energy consumption in the industrial sector is forecast to increase to 39.5 EJ (37.4 quads)—a 22% increase, exceeding 36% of total energy consumption in the United States. Therefore, it is imperative that industrial GHG emissions be considered in any strategy intent on achieving deep decarbonization of the energy sector as a whole. It is important to note that unlike the transportation sector and electrical grid, energy use by industry often involves direct conversion of primary energy sources to thermal and electrical energy at the point of consumption. About 52% of U.S. industrial direct GHG emissions are the result of fuel combustion (EPA 2016) to produce hot gases and steam for process heating, process reactions, and process evaporation, concentration, and drying. The heterogeneity and variations in scale of U.S. industry and the complexity of modern industrial firms’ global supply chains are among the sector’s unique challenges to minimizing its GHG emissions. A combination of varied strategies—such as energy efficiency, material efficiency, and switching to low-carbon fuels—can help reduce absolute industrial GHG emissions. This report provides a complement to process-efficiency improvement to consider how clean energy delivery and use by industry could reduce GHG emissions. Specifically, it considers the possibility of replacing fossil-fuel combustion in industry with nuclear (specifically small modular reactors [SMRs]), solar thermal (referred to herein as solar industrial process heat [SIPH]), and geothermal energy sources. The possibility of applying electrical heating and greater use of hydrogen is also considered, although these opportunities are not discussed in as much detail.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2016

Trends in Disclosures of Industry Sponsorship

Purpose: To examine trends in the reporting of industry funding of oncology trials by primary therapeutic intervention studied: local, targeted, or nontargeted systemic. Methods and Materials: We reviewed oncologic trials published in 10 journals for the years 1994, 2004, and 2014 to determine the frequency of declarations of industry funding for cancer research. Logistic modeling was used to assess associations between reported industry funding and investigation characteristics, such as type of primary intervention, cancer site, study endpoint, number of participants, geographic location of corresponding author, journal impact factor, trial phase, and year of publication. Results: Reporting of industry funding increased over time (odds ratio [OR] 6.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.82-12.35). Compared with systemic trials, those investigating local therapies were less likely to report industry funding (OR 0.08; 95% CI 0.14-0.15), whereas studies examining targeted interventions were more likely to report industry funding (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.38-3.66). Studies investigating gynecologic (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.15-0.88) and pediatric cancers (OR 0.08; 95% CI 0.02-0.27) were less likely to report funding by industry when compared with hematologic cancers. Phase 2 (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.19-0.52) and phase 3 (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.37) studies were less likely to report industry funding than phase 1 studies. Trials investigating interventions for metastatic disease (OR 2.55; 95% CI 1.73-3.79) were more likely to have reported industry funding compared with studies examining the primary/definitive disease setting. Conclusion: Industry funding was reported in more than one-third of oncology trials examined in this study, and the proportion of trials reporting industry funding increased over time. The potential ramifications for these patterns of funding for the future direction of cancer research should be examined, especially given the disproportionate distribution of industry funding among therapeutic intentions, cancer types, and treatment modalities.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗