SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “capital”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 1,171 records · Page 65

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2026

Development of Novel Combustion Codes for Supercritical CO2 Combustion: Cooperative Research and Development Final Report, CRADA Number CRD-20-17182

The Allam-Fetvedt Cycle, a novel supercritical CO2 (sCO2) power cycle developed by 8 Rivers Capital, LLC, generates low-cost power from fossil fuels while capturing combustion-CO2. This cycle employs high-temperature oxy-combustion using sCO2 as the working fluid, leading to a challenging environment for materials. The most critical component for reliable deployment of this technology is the combustor-turbine interface. In the proposed partnership between NREL and 8 Rivers, we will develop a simulation-based tool to provide key design inputs for defining the materials and geometries required in this critical area.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Analysis of Infrastructures for Processing Plastic Waste using Pyrolysis-Based Chemical Upcycling Pathways

Modern mechanical recycling infrastructure for plastic is capable of processing only a small subset of waste plastics, reinforcing the need for parallel disposal methods such as landfilling and incineration. Emerging pyrolysis-based chemical technologies can "upcycle" plastic waste into high-value polymer and chemical products and process a broader range of waste plastics. In this work, we study the economic and environmental benefits of deploying an upcycling infrastructure in the continental United States for producing low-density polyethylene (LDPE) and polypropylene (PP) from post-consumer mixed plastic waste. Our analysis aims to determine the market size that the infrastructure can create, the degree of circularity that it can achieve, the prices for waste and derived products it can propagate, and the environmental benefits of diverting plastic waste from landfill and incineration facilities it can produce. We apply a computational framework that integrates techno-economic analysis, life cycle assessment, and value chain optimization. Our results demonstrate that the infrastructure generates an economy of nearly 20 billion USD and positive prices for plastic waste, opening opportunities for compensation to residents who provide plastic waste. Our analysis also indicates that the infrastructure can achieve a plastic-to-plastic degree of circularity of 34% and remains viable under various external factors (including technology efficiencies, capital investment budgets, and polymer market values). Finally, we present significant environmental benefits of upcycling over alternative landfill and incineration waste disposal methods, and comment on ongoing work expanding our modeling methodology to other chemical upcycling pathway case studies, including hydroformylation of specific plastics to chemicals.

Interdisciplinary↗

DOE OSTI2021

Long-run Marginal CO2 Emission Rates Workbooks for 2020 Standard Scenarios Cambium Data

This dataset has been superseded by a new set of workbooks that can be found here: https://data.nlr.gov/submissions/183 These workbooks contain modeled estimates of long-run marginal CO2 emission rates (LRMER) for the contiguous United States. The LRMER is an estimate of the rate of emissions that would be either induced or avoided by a long-term (i.e., more than several years) change in electrical demand. It incorporates both the projected changes to the electric grid, as well as the potential for an incremental change in electrical demand to influence the structural evolution of the grid (i.e., the building and retiring of capital assets, such as generators and transmission lines). It is therefore distinct from the more-commonly-known short-run marginal, which treats grid assets as fixed. In addition to year-over-year data, the Levelized LRMER worksheet within each workbook is set up to produce a levelized long-run marginal emission rate based on user-provided inputs. These levelized LRMER values are intended for analysts to use when estimating the emissions induced (or avoided) by a long-term change in end-use electricity demand. Three future scenarios are provided in separate workbooks: A Mid-case (i.e., business-as-usual), and two scenarios with relatively higher or lower renewable energy costs. For more details on these scenarios, see the Standard Scenarios 2020 Report ( https://www.nlr.gov/docs/fy21osti/77442.pdf ). For more data underlying each scenario, see the Standard Scenarios 2020 project (Cambium data) at https://cambium.nlr.gov/ . This data was produced as part of the Cambium project. For more details about the methodology, see the Cambium Documentation: Version 2020 ( https://www.nlr.gov/docs/fy21osti/78239.pdf ). This data is planned to be updated annually. Information on the latest versions can be found at https://www.nlr.gov/analysis/cambium.html .

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2022

Long-run Marginal Emission Rates for Electricity - Workbooks for 2021 Cambium Data

These workbooks contain modeled estimates of long-run marginal emission rates (LRMER) for the contiguous United States. The LRMER is an estimate of the rate of emissions that would be either induced or avoided by a long-term (i.e., more than several years) change in electrical demand. It incorporates both the projected changes to the electric grid, as well as the potential for an incremental change in electrical demand to influence the structural evolution of the grid (i.e., the building and retiring of capital assets, such as generators and transmission lines). It is therefore distinct from the more-commonly-known short-run marginal, which treats grid assets as fixed. The Levelized LRMER worksheet within each workbook is set up to produce a levelized long-run marginal emission rate based on user-provided inputs. These levelized LRMER values are intended for analysts to use when estimating the emissions induced (or avoided) by a long-term change in end-use electricity demand. There are two workbooks that supply the data at two different geographic resolutions: states and GEA regions (20 regions that are similar to, but not exactly the same as, the US EPA's eGRID regions). For more data underlying these emissions factors, see the Cambium 2021 project at https://cambium.nrel.gov/. For more details on the inputs into the scenarios available in the workbooks, see the Standard Scenarios 2021 Report (https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/80641.pdf). This data was produced as part of the Cambium project. For more details about the methodology, see the Cambium Documentation: Version 2021 (https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/81611.pdf). This data is planned to be updated annually. Information on the latest versions can be found at https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/cambium.html.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Long-run Marginal Emission Rates for Electricity - Workbooks for 2022 Cambium Data

These workbooks contain modeled estimates of long-run marginal emission rates (LRMER) for the contiguous United States. A LRMER is an estimate of the rate of emissions that would be either induced or avoided by a change in electric demand, taking into account how the change could influence both the operation as well as the structure of the grid (i.e., the building and retiring of capital assets, such as generators and transmission lines). It is therefore distinct from the more-commonly-known short-run marginal, which treat grid assets as fixed. Long-run marginal emissions rates are generally appropriate to use when trying to comprehensively estimate the impact of a long-lived (i.e., more than several years) intervention. There are two workbooks that supply the data at two different geographic resolutions: states and GEA regions (20 regions that are similar to, but not exactly the same as, the US EPA's eGRID regions). For more data underlying these emissions factors, see the Cambium 2022 project at https://scenarioviewer.nrel.gov/. For more details on input assumptions and methodology see the associated report (Cambium 2022 Scenario Descriptions and Documentation, https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy23osti/84916.pdf). This data is planned to be updated annually. Information on the latest versions can be found at https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/cambium.html.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2024

Long-run Marginal Emission Rates for Electricity - Workbooks for 2023 Cambium Data

These workbooks contain modeled estimates of long-run marginal emission rates (LRMER) for the contiguous United States' electric sector. A LRMER is an estimate of the rate of emissions that would be either induced or avoided by a change in electric demand, taking into account how the change could influence both the operation as well as the structure of the grid (i.e., the building and retiring of capital assets, such as generators and transmission lines). These workbooks provide data for 18 GEA regions covering the contiguous United States. Mappings of these regions to ZIP codes and counties is given in this workbook in the corresponding tabs. For more data underlying these emissions factors, see the Cambium 2023 project at https://scenarioviewer.nrel.gov/. For more details on input assumptions and methodology see the associated report (Cambium 2023 Scenario Descriptions and Documentation, https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy24osti/88507.pdf). Users are advised to review section 4 of the report, which discusses limitations and caveats of the data. This data is planned to be updated annually. Information on the latest versions can be found at https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/cambium.html.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2025

Q1-2024 Solar Cost Benchmarks

Each year, the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Solar Energy Technologies Office (SETO) and its national laboratory partners develop cost benchmarks for U.S. solar photovoltaic (PV) systems. These benchmarks track progress toward reducing solar costs and guide R&D priorities. Unlike typical studies that report only $/W, SETO uses intrinsic units (e.g., $/m² for mounting structures) to better capture how technology improvements such as module efficiency would impact system costs. This allows flexible modeling where inputs can vary significantly to assess cost sensitivity. Costs are reported in two ways: Minimum Sustainable Price (MSP): Long term, financially viable price under stable market conditions. Modeled Market Price (MMP): Actual market price, influenced by short term distortions such as tariffs or subsidies. Three national labs collect cost data from industry stakeholders, ensuring no duplication in outreach to stakeholders. Data reflects real transactions (primarily from Q1) and is weighted based on the number of sources per cost element. The PV System Cost Model (PVSCM) divides total installed system cost into eight categories: 1. Module (PV) 2. Inverter 3. Energy Storage System (ESS) 4. Structural BOS (SBOS) 5. Electrical BOS (EBOS) 6. Fieldwork 7. Office work 8. Other (developer/EPC costs) The first five are hardware costs, while the last three are soft costs. Each category includes fixed and variable cost components, where “size” depends on context (e.g., manufacturing capacity for modules vs. system capacity for installation costs). Variable costs are expressed using appropriate intrinsic units. The model reflects the owner’s upfront overnight capital cost, excluding tax credits. Tariffs and subsidies are treated as temporary market distortions affecting MMP but not MSP. PVSCM is implemented in Excel, where cost elements are aggregated into total system cost. Additional sheets handle unit conversions and operation & maintenance (O&M), with O&M costs levelized over the system’s lifetime.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Electrochemical Deposition of Aluminum-Based Coatings From Aqueous Systems

The electroplating of aluminum has represented a challenge for the coatings industry for decades. The reactivity of aluminum metal leads to a very negative reduction potential. This leads to abundant gas evolution instead of aluminum reduction in water. Current aluminum deposition technology overcomes this limitation by excluding oxygen and water from the process with rigorously dry solvent and airtight plating tanks. These adaptations yield metallic aluminum depositions with significant impurities affecting its properties. In addition, this approach requires a great capital investment and cost of process maintenance. An alternative approach to Al electrodeposition has been developed based on the the use of organic ligands to stabilize the Al3+ ion in water-based solutions. By using a ligation approach, we can create aluminum species that remain stable in water while lowering the reduction potential of the aluminum complex by 0.5V. This improvement in reduction potential gives the possibility for the deposition of aluminum without significant competition from hydrogen evolution. With this platform we can deposit highly adherent aluminum-based layers on metal surfaces. The aluminum/aluminum oxide layers appear as thin, coherent and highly adherent coatings. This aluminum/alumina layer can then be chemically treated to achieve desirable surface properties which were previously inaccessible. For example, the coating can be made hydrophobic, highly adherent to different polymer coatings or even dyed using common anodizing dyes.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2020

ELECTROCHEMICAL DEPOSITION OF ALUMINUM-BASED COATINGS FROM AQUEOUS SYSTEMS

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2020

Process-Based Balance-of-System Cost Modeling for Offshore Wind Power Plants in the United States: Preprint

This work describes the development of a process based and open source balance of system cost model which provides the capability to evaluate both existing and novel offshore wind technologies. Individual design and installation steps are represented with bottom-up engineering models that compute the times and costs associated with the process; furthermore, operational constraints are assigned to each process so that delays due to weather and presence of marine mammals may be accounted for in the overall project timeline. The model structure, assumptions, inputs, and results are vetted with industry partners and compared against actual projects for validation; installation times are shown to agree with real data with relative errors of less than 35\%. Case studies are presented to demonstrate the functionality of the model. First, individual vessel efficiencies are computed for varying numbers of installation vessels and weather time series to show the diminishing returns of more than two feeder barges. Then, array cable capital costs and installation times are determined for a representative project with different turbine sizes. This quantifies the cost benefit tradeoffs of decreasing number of turbines, increased turbine spacing, and fewer turbine terminations and shows a net cost savings. These results demonstrate that the BOS model features the accuracy, functionality, and accessibility to serve as the foundation for a wide range of analyses to identify cost reduction potentials for offshore wind energy in the United States.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Air Pollutant Emissions and Regulatory Implications of Co-Processing Raw Bio-Oil in U.S. Petroleum Refineries

Pyrolysis oil, often referred as bio-oil or biocrude, has attracted considerable attention because it has higher energy density and carbon content compared to the raw biomass. Using pyrolysis oil derived from low cost and underutilized biomass to produce renewable hydrocarbon fuels provides a viable link between the agriculture/forestry and (petro-) chemical industry. Co-processing bio-oil with vacuum gas oil (VGO) in petroleum refinery is appealing due to the relatively low capital requirement to retrofit refinery and the compatibility of fuel products with existing infrastructure. In order to implement co-processing, a petroleum refinery would need to consider several process modifications and therefore could be subject to varying levels of air permitting requirements based on bio-oil co-processing ratio, co-processing capacity in existing units, the amount of regulated pollutants expected to be emitted, among other factors. This analysis considers co-processing 5% (by weight) of raw bio-oil with VGO in the fluidized catalytic cracking (FCC) unit(s) in a petroleum refinery. We estimate the potential increase in emissions of regulated air pollutants resulting from the modifications required to implement bio-oil co-processing and evaluate the regulatory and permitting implications for three FCC size categories in the U.S. refineries, which could co-processes raw bio-oil to produce partially renewable transportation fuels. We also assess technically feasible emission control options petroleum refineries could adopt to avoid being subject to major source permitting requirements if the estimated increase in regulated air pollutant emission exceeds the applicable threshold for major modifications. Insights from our analysis can help overcome challenges and risks associated with timely obtaining air permits required to implement bio-oil co-processing in existing refineries. Our analysis also provides needed information for decision makers (e.g., local air quality agencies) to understand the potential air quality implications for retrofitting refineries to co-process bio-oil, particularly in areas with high concentration of petroleum refineries.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2020

California Time-of-Use (TOU) Transition: Effects on Distributed Wind and Solar Economic Potential

Time-of-use (TOU) retail energy rates price electricity differently by the time of day, communicating to consumers the costs of supplying electricity diurnally. This study evaluates the impact of Decision D.15.07-001, which mandates a transition in 2020 to default TOU rates for residential ratepayers in California, on the economic viability of behind-the-meter distributed wind and solar systems. Previous studies have demonstrated that increasing wind and solar generation will materially affect the diurnal cost of wholesale electricity. As retail and wholesale prices become more aligned, this could affect the inter-technology economic viability of distributed generation. We assess economic viability through 'economic potential,' or the amount of generation capacity that exceeds a rate of return of 5.4%. In addition, we identify sensitivities of economic potential to capital costs and other techno-economic factors as well as the specific counties and sectors with substantial economic potential. We find that TOU implementation is projected to moderately increase economic potential of distributed wind and marginally decrease that of distributed solar. Over the long-term as variable renewable energy penetration increases in California, particularly utility-scale solar, net peak load and thus peak prices will shift later in the evening. To the extent that retail rates continue to evolve with wholesale prices, we find the changes could positively affect the value of wind generation more than that of solar generation. Over the scenarios considered, model results indicate realistic pathways to reaching a robust distributed wind market in California though solar economic potential was found to be substantially larger than that of wind.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

FINAL TECHNICAL AND ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY ON THE APPLICATION OF A HEAT INTEGRATED POST-COMBUSTION CO2 CAPTURE SYSTEM WITH HITACHI ADVANCED SOLVENT INTO EXISTING COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT

This report contains the results of a techno-economic assessment (TEA) conducted of a heat integrated post-combustion CO2 capture process with Hitachi advanced solvent for retrofit into an existing coal-fired power plant (but treated as greenfield plant on cost analysis). The process has been developed by the University of Kentucky Center for Applied Energy (UK CAER). EPRI was chiefly responsible for this analysis, with significant input from WorleyParsons, Hitachi Power Systems America (Hitachi) and UK CAER. The project also involves the design, fabrication, installation, testing, and analyses of a slipstream facility located at L&GE-KU’s E.W. Brown Generating Station to demonstrate the UK CAER carbon capture system that could utilize heat integration with the main power plant. The design, start-up, and baseline of the pilot system was performed with a generic 30 wt% MEA solvent to obtain data for direct comparison with the DOE/NETL Reference Case followed by testing Hitachi’s proprietary solvent H3-1. In this techno-economic analysis, two cases utilizing the UK CAER process are compared, using different approach temperatures and solvent, against the DOE/NETL Reference Case (Case 10). The results are shown comparing the energy demand for post-combustion CO2 capture and the net higher heating value (HHV) efficiency of the power plant integrated with the post-combustion capture (PCC) plant. A levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) assessment was performed showing the costs of the options presented in the study. The key factors contributing to the reduction of LCOE were identified as CO2 partial pressure increase at the flue gas inlet, thermal integration of the process, and performance of the Hitachi H3-1 solvent. Recent UK CAER process pilot-scale testing data and process simualtion data showed that the packing heights of absorber and stripper columns were significantly oversized in the prelimanary TEA (Task 2 of this project) and thus updated in this final TEA for the H3-1 case only. In addition, the solvent make-up cost for H3-1 was updated based on lattest test results. Finally, a heat integration with the main power plant was applied in this final TEA to increase overall energy effciency for both the MEA and H3-1 cases. Additonal reductions in capital and operational costs are expected but not taken into account here. Shorter columns result in reduced pressure drops, smaller blower head and pump hydraulic head requirements. An increase in overall energy efficiency resuls in a decreased size of the power plant, the CCS and a reduced parasitic steam requirement to the CCS. The net efficiency of the UK CAER integrated PC power plant with CO2 capture changes from 26.2% for the Reference Case 10 plant in 2010 revised DOE/NETL baseline report to 27.6% for the MEA options considered, and 29.1% for the options utilizing the Hitachi advanced solvent. The UK CAER Process + Hitachi case also produces an extra 30.9 MW of generation compared to the UK CAER Process + MEA case and total 60.9 MW more than DOE Case 10. LCOE ($/MWh) values are $172.08/MWh for the MEA option and $157.65/MWh for the Hitachi H3-1 solvent cases considered in comparison to $189.59/MWh in January 2012 dollar for the Reference Case 10. The UK CAER CCS process with MEA case lowers energy consumption for CO2 capture to 1340 Btu/lb-CO2 captured as compared to 1540 Btu/lb-CO2 in the Reference Case 10. The UK CAER CCS process with H3-1 case further lowers energy consumption for CO2 capture to 973 Btu/lb-CO2 captured, for an advantage of 36.8% less energy consumption than Case 10. The study also shows 38.1% less heat rejection associated with the carbon capture system from 3398 MBtu/hr (Case 10) to 2104 MBtu/hr for the UK CAER + MEA system. Heat rejection is reduced to 2464 MBtu/hr in the UK CAER + H3-1 case, for a 27.5 % decrease compared to Case 10. Modeling outputs show that in the UK CAER process, the cooling water that is 2-5°C cooler than conventional cooling tower water can be achieved for ambient conditions common to the midwest and other regions. The results from the techno-economic assessment show that the proposed technology can be investigated further as a viable alternative to conventional CO2 capture technology. The evaluation also shows the effect of the critical parameters on the LCOE, with the main variables being the approach temperature and CO2 partial pressure increase at the flue gas inlet. A summary of the key advantages of the UK CAER Process + H3-1 case for LCOE and other economic factors compared to the DOE Case 10 is as follows: • A lower variable operating cost by $1.56/MWh ($1.08MWh less than the UK CAER Process + MEA Case), a 11.7% reduction compared to the DOE Case 10 • A lower COE by $25.32MWh ($13.94/MWh lower than the UK CAER Process + MEA Case), a 16.9% reduction compared to the DOE Case 10 • A lower LCOE by $31.94/MWh ($17.51/MWh lower than the UK CAER Process + MEA Case), a 16.9% reduction compared to the DOE Case 10 • A lower cost of CO2 captured by $18.65/tonne CO2 ($9.44/tonne CO2 lower than the UK CAER Process + MEA Case), a 30.4% reduction compared to the DOE Case 10 • A lower cost of CO2 avoided by $34.95/tonne CO2 ($18.53 tonne CO2 lower than the UK CAER Process + MEA Case), a 38.7% reduction compared to the DOE Case 10

Bhown, Abhoyjit S.↗

DOE OSTI2020

Innovative Utility Offerings

As electricity became a critical commodity in modern economies, most countries organized the electric power industry along a similar paradigm, establishing vertically-integrated and regulated utility monopolies with that received regulated returns on capital invested in centralized electrical infrastructure. In today’s rapidly evolving power sector, this business model is being actively redefined as innovative utilities all over the world begin offering more customer-centric products and services at the edge of the distribution system.

case studies↗

DOE OSTI2020

Deep Retrofits for Multifamily: Experiences in Scaling to Zero Energy: Preprint

Zero net energy (ZNE) buildings are needed to reverse the growing trend of increasing energy consumption. But to make dramatic changes, existing buildings must be renovated at scale. In addition, the building stock must be electrified so that its energy needs could be met by renewable generation. Such aggressive goals often mean very high custom design and capital construction costs. Suitable options for comprehensive envelope retrofits can be too expensive to be practical, and electrification requires upgrades to building-level electrical infrastructure. This paper is a case study of eight projects—primarily multifamily residential—that strived for zero-energy, all-electric retrofits. The design teams were challenged to create solutions that could be replicated at scale, showing decreasing costs with broader adoption. Key technologies considered in designing cost-effective, scalable solutions include industrialized prefabricated retrofit components, modular HVAC solutions, and innovative domestic hot water systems. We trace the progress toward the goals set and examine the choices made by the teams as they encountered technical, logistical, and cost barriers. We also discuss financial challenges for multifamily retrofits, provide guidance for incentives, and examine procurement processes for design services and technologies.

ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Plowing Through the Cost Barrier: Zero Energy K-12 Schools for Less: Preprint

There is a perception that zero energy K–12 schools cost more than conventional schools. Zero energy schools provide a number of unique benefits to school districts, students and staff, and communities. Among other things, a zero energy school requires far less energy to operate than a conventional school and uses on-site renewable energy systems to offset that reduced energy load. The money saved on energy can often be used to enhance educational programs. But does the extra value come at a premium? Research findings indicate that not only can zero energy schools be designed and built on conventional school budgets, they can cost less. In an integrated design and construction process, the cost of zero energy measures can be offset by, for example, downsizing heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning systems, reducing both life cycle and first costs. These findings are based on an examination of 88 zero energy or zero energy ready schools across the United States built during the last 15 years. The data collected on these schools include capital costs and the experiences of owners and design teams. The goal was to understand the perceived cost barrier, given that each building was built with a predetermined budget. The results will help future school stakeholders, program administrators, and design teams counter the perceived cost barriers. Successful strategies for achieving zero energy at no initial cost are presented. The lessons learned from existing zero energy schools can help transform the market such that all new schools can be zero energy.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Where and When Does Solar Plus Storage Make Sense for Commercial Buildings?

As the capital cost of battery energy storage systems (BESS) declines, opportunities for commercial buildings to achieve net savings through peak demand management and energy arbitrage are emerging. National Renewable Energy Laboratory researchers modeled energy storage project economics - with and without accompanying solar photovoltaic systems - using local utility rates, ASHRAE climate zones, and solar intensity data to identify regions where these systems deliver life cycle savings now and in future cost scenarios.

battery energy storage systems↗

DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of RF high power sources for 1MW – range, 10 MeV CW industrial accelerator.

Cobalt-60 is the dominant source of ionizing radiation for sterilizing products in the $200B/year medical device industry. Security and accessibility concerns around this radioactive material - sourced from countries including Russia and China - present national security and economic risks. There is a continued national urgency to replace such high-risk sources with low-risk alternatives such as electron or x-ray beams driven by accelerators. While e-beam sources have been in use for many years, they still represent a small portion of the market. X-ray sources are becoming economical alternatives. Meeting the processing capacity required to replace Co-60 requires a step-change in the capability, efficiency, and overall operating cost of electron accelerators to make adoption feasible. The radiofrequency (RF) power that drives accelerating cavities represents significant capital and operating costs for these accelerators. For accelerator-based systems to be a viable alternative for these applications, RF systems must be economical to manufacture, deploy, and operate.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗