Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “power system security”

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.

1,185 records · Page 66
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Scalable Techniques for Stochastic Power Flow Problems (Final Report)

The proposed research focuses on developing scalable algorithms for two-stage security-constrained OPF problems with AC power flow constraints, a class of problems complicated by (i) scale arising from a scenario representation; and (ii) the presence of nonlinearity, nonconvexity, and possibly second-stage discreteness or complementarity. Unfortunately, most existing solvers cannot contend with both challenges simultaneously; accordingly, the proposed research focuses on developing solution techniques that can both scale with the number of scenarios and contend with nonconvexity and second-stage complementarity. We consider three avenues for addressing such problems: (i) Variable sample-size SQP (VS-SQP) methods that combine sparse Quasi-Newton updates with a scalable variance-reduced stochastic gradient scheme for stochastic QP subproblems, allowing for contending with second-stage complementarity via regularization; (ii) Variable sample-size stochastic Interior-point (VS-sIP) schemes that propose a sampling-based regularized (to allow for contending with complementarity) interior-point schemes in which a Schur-complement technique is employed for decomposing the Newton direction computation step; (iii) Variable sample-size tractable ADMM (VS-tADMM) schemes combine variable sample-sizes with carefully designed techniques for resolving each of the nonconvex updates (by leveraging the QCQP structures). We intend to compare the three schemes using performance profiles in terms of solution quality, scalability, etc. and then select one scheme which will then be developed and further refined in Python for purposes of the GO competition.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Clean Energy Cybersecurity Accelerator: Cohort 2 - Asimily Public Report

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Cybersecurity, Energy Security, and Emergency Response (CESER) sponsors the Clean Energy Cybersecurity Accelerator (TM) (CECA) to expedite the deployment of emerging security technologies that address the most urgent security concerns facing modern and future electric grids. CECA Cohort 2 assessed solutions focused on hidden risks due to incomplete system visibility and device security and configuration. Improving visibility can be achieved through operational technology (OT) asset identification solutions, including capabilities like automatic discovery, vulnerability reporting, and configuration monitoring. Solutions that monitor and identify assets in information technology (IT) networks in other domains are widely used; however, there is far less adoption of monitoring solutions for operational technology environments. Wider adoption may increase with increased confidence in the ability for these solutions to understand and respond to the specific requirements of OT environments. CECA Cohort 2 evaluated the active and passive asset discovery capabilities of market-ready solutions, documented and analyzed results, and identified gaps in functionality or capabilities. This report and describes how these results can help advance the adoption of these and similar solutions in the electric sector.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Comparison of Coupled and Uncoupled Modeling of Floating Wind Farms with Shared Anchors

As design options for floating wind farms continue to be explored, shared (or multiline) anchors that secure mooring lines from multiple turbines remain a promising technology that can potentially reduce the number of anchors and overall mooring costs. This study evaluates two methods for analyzing the loads on shared anchors: one in which floating offshore wind turbines are simulated individually (using the software OpenFAST), and one in which an entire floating wind farm is simulated collectively (using the software FAST.Farm). A three-line shared anchor is evaluated for multiple loading scenarios in deep water, using the International Energy Agency 15 MW turbine on the VolturnUS-S semisubmersible platform. While the two methods produce broadly comparable results, the coupled wave loading on platforms within the farm results in wave force cancellations and amplifications that decrease multiline force directional ranges and increase multiline force extreme values (up to 7%) and standard deviations (up to 11%) for wave-driven load cases. The inclusion of wakes in FAST.Farm also reduces the net load on the shared anchor due to the velocity deficit, leading to larger differences between OpenFAST and FAST.Farm (up to 3% difference in mean loads) for load cases with operational turbines.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Some Aeronautical Communications Experiments

Classically there has existed an asymmetry between the computing and communicating sides of aerospace systems. Over the past few decades, this asymmetry has shifted to favoring communication link technologies, meaning that advancements in available central processing units (CPUs), storage devices, and internal data buses have stagnated. Indeed, the increased emphasis placed on refining subsystem performance such as with antenna bandwidth in phased arrays, amplifier power efficiency, software defined radio (SDR) flexibility and encoding for data compression and error correction has given rise to successful debuts of multi-gigabit-per-second data return from long space-link distances. These accomplishments are easily quantifiable through link budgets and illustrate what is possible, but also reveal the deficiencies in overall communications capabilities. In particular, the ever-accelerating presence of aerospace vehicles gives rise to newer and larger classes of challenges to address the needs of 21st century systems. Furthermore remote sensing and imaging capabilities have far outpaced our ability to transmit their products to the ground, so we are increasingly dependent on pre-processing and downselection to contend with the communications bottleneck. No longer may we depend upon the constrained logistics in delivering end-to-end data delivery through manual reconfigurations, static event scheduling and execution on a per-vehicle basis, for these methods do not scale and therefore must give way to dynamic, networked approaches with an overall systems view in mind. Emerging mission requirements exhibit a trend toward multiple smaller-scale vehicles working together to perform dissimilar observations. Such operations necessitate sensor fusion across a constellation, and where data processing may be distributed throughout a fairly disconnected network whose topology changes over time in non-deterministic manners. Individual communications link performance is still very relevant to deploying an effective communications system, but now must be embedded within a greater architecture of capability to optimally utilize the bandwidth available from each link to generate an ultimate end-to-end quality of service. The deleterious effects of timing uncertainty across the arrangement presents a challenge to measurement synchronization and delivery, so a successful deployed system needs to be tolerant to the delays inherent in time-of-light between elements and digital processing latencies existing at each node. In this presentation we share the flight test results from a high performance Gbps laser communications terminal evaluated with a suite of store and forward capabilities called High-rate Delay Tolerant Networking (HDTN). The communications payload is operated over Lake Erie across a range of configurations including several convergence layers, and is evaluated to determine recovery time after link disruptions, information loss, efficiency and speed. The effectiveness of utilizing a flying laboratory to increase the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of an integrated system in relevant environments is discussed, as well as the value of conducting aeronautics experiments to retire risk for technology infusion into space missions. Upcoming flight campaigns will be presented, including opportunities to demonstrate secure command and control, data intensive hyperspectral imaging, quantum link characterization, 4k High Definition (HD) video streaming and internetworked space-ground-aero relay operations. These experiments will pave the way for future missions which will depend upon interoperability across disparate government and privately owned networks, involve contention with uncertain and dynamic timing, and require agility to autonomously configure optimal parameters across networks of ever-increasing size and complexity to ensure data delivery. https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/space/scan/acs/tech-studies/dtn/

Daniel Raible↗
DOE OSTI2020

Potential Advantages to Employing an Onsite Laboratory at FUSRAP Sites Contaminated with Radionuclides and Metals - 20353

Various factors that support an evaluation of the relative costs, advantages and disadvantages of utilizing an onsite laboratory or an offsite laboratory for remediation of Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) sites contaminated with radionuclides and metals are presented. In terms of how much more quickly an onsite laboratory provides results versus an offsite laboratory, the results of this study provide tools for calculating the amount of cost savings per day for excavation of contaminated soils for various scenarios including: - State, municipal or local property remediation where the remediation schedule becomes time-critical due to the extra cost and inconvenience to the town or municipality caused by the need for increased security and safety personnel, possible road closures and detours, and the inconvenience to the public due to modified or decreased services of State or municipal facilities; - Residential property where the remediation schedule becomes time-critical due to the inconvenience to the homeowner as well as the importance of maintaining good community relations; - Commercial property where the remediation schedule becomes time-critical due to the hardship and potential loss of revenue endured by the property owner; - Open area where treatment of excavation water is required, and - Open area where treatment of excavation water is not required. For every scenario, the number of matrices, radionuclide and metal contaminants of concern and the project duration are important factors. The costs for the onsite laboratory included the capital costs associated with setting up the lab such as trailer(s) or building(s), power and water hookup, analytical testing equipment, balances, computers, desks and bookcases; support equipment such as hot plates, filtration assemblies, safety equipment, ovens, etc.; and supplies such as glassware, pipettes, filters, etc. and ongoing costs such as labor, chemicals and reagents, standards, cost of the laboratory obtaining certification and maintenance. Offsite laboratory sample testing costs are generally very competitive and typically substantially lower than onsite laboratory costs if only the sample testing costs are considered. The great disadvantage of using an offsite laboratory is that they often cannot guarantee rapid turnaround times for results which creates project delays associated with the remediation process including delays determining the completeness of the characterization and remediation processes, delays in backfilling a property and additional costs for treating wastewater (excavation water, stormwater or both). These costs will vary greatly depending upon the area of the country in which the project is located due to the wide range of labor costs for the onsite laboratory and field workers, as well as the contaminants of interest, matrices and most importantly the size of the impacted area and the number of properties located in that area. This paper provides guidelines for calculating the cost savings that may be realized if an onsite laboratory can generate results more quickly than an offsite laboratory by estimating the costs associated with the remediation process for the various scenarios noted above such as work crew labor costs, excavator and dump truck equipment rentals, wastewater treatment costs (if applicable) and the additional costs incurred by homeowners, commercial property owners and towns/municipalities that are reimbursed by the potentially responsible parties. Key assumptions involve the typical quickest turnaround time provided by the onsite and offsite laboratories. Costs for the operation of a wastewater treatment system and the remediation of a site area or property were provided by personnel who have been involved in the operation of a large FUSRAP site in New Jersey for many years. This study provides valuable information for determining the most cost-effective approach for analysis of project samples and therefore may be used on upcoming FUSRAP projects. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Voluntary Renewable Energy Procurement Programs in Regulated Utility Markets

Multinational corporations are increasingly purchasing renewable energy (RE) to fulfill international commitments, reduce supply chain emissions, limit environmental impact, and secure stable and affordable electricity. The potential scale of global corporate RE purchasing has been estimated to be nearly 100 GW and growing; however, many markets still lack supportive enabling environments for corporations to access RE through on-site project development or private sector transactions. Even where allowed by law, on-site generation may be insufficient due to space and technical constraints, introducing additional challenges. Utility green pricing and utility green tariff programs backed by renewable energy certificates (RECs), referred to as utility green procurement programs (GPPs) in this report, offer powerful market-based solutions to utilities, regulators, and policymakers to provide corporate and other consumers with RE product options while generating revenue to support RE development. As RE markets expand around the globe, GPPs have proven to be effective mechanisms in market regimes, ranging from fully integrated state-owned utilities to broadly liberalized power markets. GPPs utilize RECs, which are a type of energy attribute certificate and closely resemble guarantees of origin, to track and ultimately monetize RE attributes that corporations and other buyers must procure to demonstrate progress against their RE commitments and make public claims of RE use. Time-tested and transparent REC accounting mechanisms provide market confidence, while at the same time offering flexibility to utilities, regulators, and customers for a range of applications. RECs are used in all types of electricity market structures, as indicated in Figure 1, but REC-based program designs and supporting components differ depending on the type of market. Liberalized markets allow for customers to contract directly with generators for electricity and RECs, while traditionally regulated markets with vertically integrated utility structures may have greater restrictions on generation asset ownership and electricity sales. RE markets can be further defined as being either mandatory or voluntary. Mandatory markets require suppliers to deliver specified amounts of RE to grid customers, such as under a renewable portfolio standard (RPS), while voluntary markets involve no legal mandates, but demand is driven by self-imposed customer goals.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

BWR Spent Nuclear Fuel Acquisition and Testing to Support DOE-NE High Burnup Spent Fuel Data Project

The Office of Spent Fuel and Waste Disposition (SFWD) within the US Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) established the Spent Fuel and Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) campaign to conduct research and development (R&D) activities related to the storage, transportation, and disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste. The SFWST program was created within SFWD to address issues of extended or long-term SNF storage and transportation. Some near-term objectives of SFWST are to use a science-based, engineering-driven approach to: Support the enhancement of the technical bases to support the continued safe and secure dry storage of SNF for extended periods; Support the enhancement of the technical bases for retrieving SNF after extended dry storage; Support the enhancement of the technical bases for transporting high burnup (HBU) fuel and transporting low burnup fuel and HBU fuel after dry storage DOE-NE, in partnership with the Electric Power Research Institute, developed the High Burnup Spent Fuel Data Project to perform a large-scale demonstration and laboratory-scale testing of HBU pressurized water reactor (PWR) fuels (exceeding 45 gigawatt-days per metric ton of uranium [GWd/MTU]). Under this project, 25 sister rods—which are rods that have the same design, power histories, and other characteristics—were removed from assemblies at the North Anna Nuclear Power Station and sent to Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) in January 2016. ORNL performed detailed nondestructive examination (NDE) on all 25 rods. The NDE consisted of visual examinations, gamma and neutron scanning, profilometry and rod length measurements, and eddy current examinations. After completing the NDE, 10 of the sister rods were delivered to Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in a NAC International, Inc. legal-weight truck cask in September 2018 for destructive examination (DE). To date, SFWD work has focused on the PWR fuel that is part of the Sister Rod Test program. No boiling water reactor (BWR) fuel has been tested in the program, and the data needs that were identified for the PWR fuel have not been collected for BWR fuel. The goal to obtain six to nine BWR rods and test them at ORNL will support closing this important data gap. BWR fuel comprises approximately 56% of the total fuel assemblies currently in storage at nuclear power plants in the United States. BWR nuclear fuel and cladding designs and manufacturing are significantly different from PWRs. Differences include the following: BWR fuel pellets are larger than PWR pellets; Variations of Zircaloy-2 (including liners) are used instead of the Zircaloy-4 cladding materials used in PWRs; Clad manufacturing and stress-relief processes are different between PWRs and BWRs; The fuel rod dimensions are different because larger rod diameters and thicker cladding are used in BWRs; BWR fuel typically has lower internal rod pressures and sees vastly different operating conditions than PWR fuel (i.e., two-phase flow); BWR assemblies are “canned,” meaning each assembly is surrounded by a metal fuel channel; BWR cladding is often composed of an inner pure Zr liner that has widely different mechanical properties than the Zircaloy-2 alloy and exhibits a stronger affinity for hydrogen; The BWR SNF generally has more total hydrogen in the cladding/liner than typical PWR fuel; The construction of the PWR and BWR assemblies is vastly different; BWR rods are solidly attached to the assembly nozzles and experience a much different vibration and shock load than PWR rods, which are “floating” within a grid system attached to guide tubes, and the rods sit loosely on the bottom end plates. These numerous differences will affect the way the BWR SNF responds under dry storage preparation processes (e.g., vacuum drying) and during transportation. The results collected in the PWR experimental program must be compared with a subset of similar data collected on BWR SNF to establish a technical basis for whether the larger PWR database is sufficient to bound the BWR SNF end-of-life conditions as is currently assumed for several fuel/clad properties. Changes that occur in both fuel types at HBU could exacerbate any mechanical property differences. As the fuel burnup increases, several changes occur that might affect the performance of the fuel, cladding, and assembly hardware in storage and transportation. These changes include increased cladding corrosion layer thickness, increased cladding hydrogen content, increased cladding creep strains, increased fission gas release, and the formation of the HBU structure at the surface of the fuel pellets. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) limits the current maximum rod-averaged burnup to 62 GWd/MTU due to these changes and the lack of data at higher burnups.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Economic Model for Estimation of GDP Losses in the MACCS Offsite Consequence Analysis Code

The MACCS (MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System) code is the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tool used to perform probabilistic health and economic consequence assessments for atmospheric releases of radionuclides. It is also used by international organizations, both reactor owners and regulators. It is intended and most commonly used for hypothetical accidents that could potentially occur in the future rather than to evaluate past accidents or to provide emergency response during an ongoing accident. It is designed to support probabilistic risk and consequence analyses and is used by the NRC, U.S. nuclear licensees, the Department of Energy, and international vendors, licensees, and regulators. This report describes the modeling framework, implementation, verification, and benchmarking of a GDP-based model for economic losses that has recently been developed as an alternative to the original cost-based economic loss model in MACCS. The GDP-based model has its roots in a code developed by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Homeland Security to estimate short-term losses from natural and manmade accidents, called the Regional Economic Accounting analysis tool (REAcct). This model was adapted and modified for MACCS and is now called the Regional Disruption Economic Impact Model (RDEIM). It is based on input-output theory, which is widely used in economic modeling. It accounts for direct losses to a disrupted region affected by an accident, indirect losses to the national economy due to disruption of the supply chain, and induced losses from reduced spending by displaced workers. RDEIM differs from REAcct in its treatment and estimation of indirect loss multipliers, elimination of double counting associated with inter-industry trade in the affected area, and that it is designed to be used to estimate impacts for extended periods that can occur from a major nuclear reactor accident, such as the one that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi site in Japan. Most input-output models do not account for economic adaptation and recovery, and in this regard RDEIM differs from its parent, REAcct, because it allows for a user-definable national recovery period. Implementation of a recovery period was one of several recommendations made by an independent peer review panel to ensure that RDEIM is state-of-practice. For this and several other reasons, RDEIM differs from REAcct. Both the original and the RDEIM economic loss models account for costs from evacuation and relocation, decontamination, depreciation, and condemnation. Where the original model accounts for an expected rate of return, based on the value of property, that is lost during interdiction, the RDEIM model instead accounts for losses of GDP based on the industrial sectors located within a county. The original model includes costs for disposal of crops and milk that the RDEIM model currently does not, but these costs tend to contribute insignificantly to the overall losses. This document discusses three verification exercises to demonstrate that the RDEIM model is implemented correctly in MACCS. It also describes a benchmark study at five nuclear power plants chosen to represent the spectrum of U.S. commercial sites. The benchmarks provide perspective on the expected differences between the RDEIM and the original cost-based economic loss models. The RDEIM model is shown to consistently predict larger losses than the original model, probably in part because it accounts for national losses by including indirect and induced losses; whereas, the original model only accounts for regional losses. Nonetheless, the RDEIM model predicts losses that are remarkably consistent with the original cost-based model, differing by 16% at most for the five sites combined with three source terms considered in this benchmark.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS2014

Robonaut 2 - IVA Experiments On-Board ISS and Development Towards EVA Capability

Robonaut 2 (R2) has completed its fixed base activities on-board the ISS and is scheduled to receive its climbing legs in early 2014. In its continuing line of firsts, the R2 torso finished up its on-orbit activities on its stanchion with the manipulation of space blanket materials and performed multiple tasks under teleoperation control by IVA astronauts. The successful completion of these two IVA experiments is a key step in Robonaut's progression towards an EVA capability. Integration with the legs and climbing inside the ISS will provide another important part of the experience that R2 will need prior to performing tasks on the outside of ISS. In support of these on-orbit activities, R2 has been traversing across handrails in simulated zero-g environments and working with EVA tools and equipment on the ground to determine manipulation strategies for an EVA Robonaut. R2 made significant advances in robotic manipulation of deformable materials in space while working with its softgoods task panel. This panel features quarter turn latches that secure a space blanket to the task panel structure. The space blanket covers two cloth cubes that are attached with Velcro to the structure. R2 was able to open and close the latches, pull back the blanket, and remove the cube underneath. R2 simulated cleaning up an EVA worksite as well, by replacing the cube and reattaching the blanket. In order to interact with the softgoods panel, R2 has both autonomously and with a human in the loop identified and localized these deformable objects. Using stereo color cameras, R2 identified characteristic elements on the softgoods panel then extracted the location and orientation of the object in its field of view using stereo disparity and kinematic transforms. R2 used both vision processing and supervisory control to successfully accomplish this important task. Teleoperation is a key capability for Robonaut's effectiveness as an EVA system. To build proficiency, crewmembers have attempted increasingly difficult tasks using R2 inside the Station. After donning motion capture equipment and a virtual reality visor, Expedition 34/35 flight engineer Tom Marshburn began operations with simple hand movements. Having gained confidence, Marshburn guided R2's arms in a leader-follower exercise with crewmate Chris Cassidy. He was also able to use the hand to grab a tumbling roll of tape, a task only demonstrable in microgravity. Later efforts saw Cassidy handle softgoods through shared control with ground operators, mimicking an activity previously achieved using only autonomy. Robotic climbing through the ISS on handrails requires both precision motion and compliant grasps in order to both position grippers on handrails/seat track and prevent large internal forces. R2 climbs using actively controlled compliance and torque limiting to meet both the precision and softness requirements. During a step, the attached leg is controlled to be strong and stiff in order to maintain precision trajectory tracking. The swing leg is controlled to be stiff but weak to minimize unintentional impact forces while maintaining precision. During a simulated dual limb grasp (as shown in Figure 1), the R2 controller maintains one limb rigid and one limb soft to prevent large internal forces from building up. R2's grippers also use a form of force control to limit grip force while not fully closed on either a handrail or seat track thus limiting unintentional forces on cables/objects that may be present in R2's translational path. The on-board torso R2 safety system relies on a single end-effector velocity limit to prevent potential impact forces from exceeding Station maximum load requirements. R2's mobile configuration required modifications to the velocity limiting safety function due to its large, dynamic inertia. R2's legs maneuver the robot's mass creating configuration dependent, joint-relative inertias. A single all-encompassing velocity limit to cover worst case inertia is prohibitively low. The upgraded R2 control and safety systems solve this problem using momentum limiting, momentum control, and kinetic energy minimization. Momentum and kinetic energy take the robot mass into account relieving low velocity restrictions on low inertia end-effectors while ensuring that the overall mass of R2 is limited from hazardous velocities. The momentum of R2's five safety nodes (each of the four end-effectors and the body) is monitored and compared to a single momentum limit. If any of the five nodes exceeds the safety limit, the motor power is removed and the robot comes to a stop. Momentum control/limiting also provides a simple, reliable method to integrate hand held tools into the safety system by providing the tool mass to the control system thus automatically reducing the allowable velocity of the end-effector with the tool. Work on the ground continues to build the skill set for an EVA Robonaut. Recent experiments (Figure 2) demonstrate how a teleoperator can use R2 to manipulate a tether hook, an important safety precaution on spacewalks. Another task displayed Robonaut's ability to pull back a protective jacket over a hose and search for damage, as well as inspect a quick-disconnect fitting for debris. Demonstrations such as these are indicative of EVA work done on ISS, specifically seen during a series of spacewalks over 2012 and 2013 where astronauts searched for an ammonia leak in one of the external cooling loops. Through experiments both on ISS and on the ground, R2 is evolving and providing the information needed to plan out the upgrades that will make an EVA Robonaut an effective tool. With the addition of legs, R2 will start climbing inside the space station and supply invaluable information on how the climbing strategies and task stabilization techniques must be refined. Ground R2 systems will continue to work with additional EVA tools and equipment in preparation for onboard IVA testing and future EVA applications.

Diftler, Myron↗
DOE OSTI2022

Estimation of the time for steam generator trip due to cyber intrusions

The time required to trip a pressurized water reactor (PWR) by inserting malicious signals into its steam generator (SG) control system has been studied using the Generic PWR (GPWR) Simulator. A semi-analytical model is developed to approximately reproduce the simulator response and understand the dynamics of the control unit. A series of two proportional-integral controllers determines control action according to preset constants, the readings from the feedwater level sensor, and those from feedwater and steam flowrate transmitters. It is observed that the most important factor that determines whether a trip will occur is how much additional water is added to or withheld from the SG over time compared to normal operating conditions. In order to determine the effects of control action on the SG, changes in mass inventory are considered. This approach models the SG water level as a function of mass inventory and has a backward temporal memory. A Python interface is developed for the GPWR framework to automatically simulate different spoofing scenarios and post-process the related data. We observe that the trip times predominantly depend on flow mismatch and/or level errors. Controller parameters, including the integral time and gain constants, either speed up or slow down the rate of progression to a trip setpoint but do not cause a trip by themselves. The reactor can trip on a high-level signal when the reading crosses above 78%, increased from its reference level of 57%, or a low-level reading when it is below 25%. The present results show roughly how long the operators would have to respond to an attack, given a specific set of spoofing signals within the issue space analyzed. Furthermore, we have generated a simple surface by fitting a combination of exponential functions to the data obtained from the GPWR Simulator. In general, trips on a low level have been observed to occur faster than those on a high level.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Unified Testing Platform to Mature Blockchain Applications for Grid Emulation Environments

Blockchain technology is a relatively novel technology that can be used to develop more decentralized, autonomous and tamper-evident solutions. A feature that can aid Transactive Energy Systems to reach their goals by enabling individual actors to communicate and reach consensus with other participants in a more decentralized fashion. However, technical barriers to evaluate and adopt this type of technology within the electrical domain still exist. To facilitate this task, BLOSEM Unified Testing Platform (UTP), a DOE-sponsored, multi-lab effort intends to accelerate the development of solutions by offering a common set of reusable services that can be used to interconnect existent grid tools with blockchain services. UTP is intended to serve as development platform that can provide application engineers with the technical means to evaluate potential blockchain solutions, by enabling them to concentrate on the actual application functionalities while at the same time abstracting the connectivity and performance measurement tasks. The use of BLOSEM UTP is further demonstrated by implementing two potential use cases that are intended to validate both the feasibility of implementing these applications as blockchain-based solutions while also demonstrating the features provided by UTP.

blockchain co-simulation↗
DOE OSTI2024

NORTH DAKOTA CARBONSAFE PHASE III: SITE CHARACTERIZATION AND PERMITTING OF GEOLOGIC STORAGE OF CARBON DIOXIDE

The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), in partnership with Minnkota Power Cooperative Inc. (Minnkota), SLB, and Computer Modelling Group Ltd. (CMG), supported wide-scale deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) as part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory Carbon Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE) Initiative Phase III. This phase included the acquisition, analysis, and development of information to fully characterize two storage complexes to demonstrate viable storage resources for commercial volumes of CO2 (defined by DOE as a minimum of 50 million tonnes [MMt] of CO2 within a 30-year period) (National Energy Technology Laboratory, 2024). Phase III also involved the preparation, submission, and approval of North Dakota underground injection control (UIC) Class VI storage facility permits (SFPs)—required precursors to applications for Class VI injection well permits. The presumed viability of commercial-scale CCS, situated adjacent to Minnkota’s Milton R. Young Station (MRYS), is validated by Minnkota’s continued pursuit of Project Tundra—an initiative to build the world’s largest lignite-based CCS project in central North Dakota (www.projecttundrand.com). Project Tundra comprises two scopes of work, Tundra Capture (installation of postcombustion CO2 capture at MRYS) and Tundra SGS (secure geologic storage). The efforts of North Dakota CarbonSAFE Phase III, Site Characterization and Permitting, supported Tundra SGS. Extensive site-specific characterization activities included a successful multimeasurement geophysical approach and drilling a stratigraphic test well (J-ROC 1, subsequently renamed Liberty-1) adjacent to MRYS. Core collection and analyses, downhole testing and fluid sampling, and geophysical logging were performed on J-ROC 1 and on a nearby stratigraphic test well (known as J-LOC 1), which was drilled, cored, and tested under a complementary project funded by the North Dakota Lignite Research Program. The injection tests performed on J-LOC 1 positively impacted the CarbonSAFE project, resulting in fewer proposed injection wells and significant construction, operations, and monitoring cost savings. The characterization data collected and analyses performed were integrated into geologic models, and successive numerical simulations were run to determine CO2 plume extent and subsurface pressure buildup associated with the planned CO2 injection rate of nearly 4 MMt per year. The latter doubles the CarbonSAFE Initiative goal with an estimated 100 MMt of CO2 stored in 20 years. Application of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) method for estimating the Class VI Rule area of review (AOR) to the overpressurized Broom Creek Formation inspired an alternative method of calculation, called risk-based AOR delineation. This peer-reviewed method was applied for the first time during the storage facility-permitting process. The two SFP applications submitted in 2021 successfully resulted in North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC) orders in 2022 authorizing the creation of the storage facility areas and amalgamation of pore space as well as establishing financial responsibility requirements. After approval of the SFPs, Minnkota filed in 2022 applications for permits to reenter the J-ROC 1 well and to drill two new wells—all with the intended purpose to become Class VI injection wells. To establish eligibility under the Internal Revenue Code for Section 45Q tax incentives, a monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) plan was prepared and submitted by Minnkota to EPA in 2022, resulting in the first such plan approved in North Dakota. Also in 2022, under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Minnkota prepared and submitted an environmental information volume (EIV) describing the proposed CCS project and associated potential environmental impacts. Based on the EIV, DOE determined that the proposed construction project required an environmental assessment, and Minnkota submitted the first draft in 2023 and a revised draft in 2024. Both submissions were followed by a public comment period. Subsequently, DOE issued a finding of no significant impact (FONSI) on September 13, 2024. A successful outreach program, strongly based in the production, presentation, and dissemination of informational material, fostered an environment to aid stakeholders in making informed decisions regarding the planned project. Opportunities for public input were provided at various steps along the way, including at county planning and zoning meetings, before and during the SFP administrative hearing, and during environmental assessment public comment periods. In addition, land/pore space owners and mineral owners had various points of contact, including granting access rights, securing pore space leasing, and mineral owner notifications. Based upon the successful storage facility permitting issued by NDIC, approval of the MRV plan by EPA, and receipt of a FONSI under the NEPA, Minnkota is continuing its pursuit of Project Tundra. In December 2023, the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations under its Carbon Capture Demonstrations Projects Program announced funding for the capture system (Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, 2023) and a proposal for CarbonSAFE Phase IV: Construction funding was submitted in March 2024 for the storage project. A go/no-go decision to proceed with construction and operations in the Broom Creek Formation is anticipated in 2024. References National Energy Technology Laboratory, CarbonSafe Initiative, https://netl.doe.gov/carbon-management/carbon-storage/carbonsafe (accessed August 2024). Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations, 2023, OCED selects three projects in CA, ND, and TX to reduce harmful carbon pollution, create new economic opportunities, and advance carbon reducing technologies, December, www.energy.gov/oced/articles/oced-selects-three-projects-ca-nd-and-tx-reduce-harmful-carbon-pollution-create-new (accessed August 2024).

Peck, Wesley↗
DOE OSTI2023

University Coalition for Fossil Fuel Energy Research

Following a nationwide open competition, the University Coalition for Fossil Energy Research (UCFER) was established in October 2015 through a cooperative agreement between Penn State and the Department of Energy (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Penn State lead UCFER with the objective of advancing basic and applied research for clean and low-carbon energy based on fossil fuels in support of the DOE’s mission. UCFER focused on research that improves the efficiency of production and use of fossil energy resources, while minimizing the environmental impacts and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Penn State lead a team of nine universities (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, The Pennsylvania State University, Princeton University, Texas A&M University, University of Kentucky, University of Southern California, The University of Tulsa, University of Wyoming, and Virginia Polytechnic and State University) during the competition stage, adding seven more universities in 2017 (Carnegie Mellon University, Louisiana State University, The Ohio State University, University of North Dakota, University of Pittsburgh, University of Utah, and West Virginia University). This Coalition exhibited a wide geographical distribution across the U.S. bringing a wide variety of fossil energy expertise. This national university alliance was a major collaborative effort with NETL to address specific topics of R&D in NETL’s mission area, which involved one or more of NETL’s five core competencies (Geologic and Environmental Systems, Materials Engineering and Manufacturing, Energy Conversion Engineering, Systems Engineering and Analysis, and Computational Science and Engineering). The first five to six months of the project was the definitization stage. During this period, Penn State worked closely with NETL to finalize the Coalition organizational structure and By- Laws, prepare a statement of substantial involvement and a statement of project objectives, and develop operations and membership plans. A major component of this stage included preparing an execution plan to solicit research, evaluate proposals, recommend selected projects to NETL, and award projects. In addition, a plan was prepared to monitor projects, review projects, disseminate knowledge from research projects and develop an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. This included developing a website and several databases. The first of six rounds of solicitations started in mid-2016. Projects from the sixth solicitation started February 1, 2021, and ended January 31, 2023. Projects that were selected represented twelve technology lines. Approximately $16.6 million in funding was available for the six solicitations. Most of the funding was provided by DOE, Office of Fossil Energy (DOEFE) with the DOE Fuel Cells Technologies Office (DOE-FCTO) providing funding for a few projects. Coalition universities submitted 259 proposals in response to the solicitations, requesting approximately $67.0 million in funding, and forty-three projects were selected. However, one project withdrew after the principal investigator left the university. The management of the Coalition projects was a major activity by Penn State. Managing the Coalition projects consisted of monitoring the projects, reviewing the projects through annual technical review meetings, disseminating knowledge from the research projects, and developing an online system for Coalition research portfolio management. Penn State’s OMT monitored projects to ensure that all milestones (technical, schedule, budget) were met, expenditures were allowable, cost share (when applicable) were reported, and all technical reports were submitted. The OMT also posted the technical reports electronically on a secure members-only website for access and review by the Coalition members. Disseminating knowledge from the research projects was done through a website, newsletters, various meetings, conferences, journal articles, publicity/press releases, and project summaries that were prepared after each project was completed. Penn State kept NETL apprised of UCFER progress through quarterly reports (thirtyone were submitted by Penn State), verbal and written communications, yearly updates at the annual technical review meetings, and cost accrual reports. The UCFER project had a significant impacty. The UCFER program established the first national university alliance in fossil energy research with a major collaboration effort with DOE NETL that addressed specific topics in NETL’s research and development mission areas. It generated inter-university collaborations, which was another program interest. Twenty-two out of 259 proposals contained collaborations (≈8.5%) and three of forty-two funded projects involved inter-university collaborations (≈7.0%). The forty-two funded projects provided support at fourteen universities involving 269 personnel. Research was conducted by 106 faculty, 115 graduate and undergraduate students, forty-six research staff and post-doctoral scholars, and two visiting scholars. Students and post-doctoral scholars were also on-site at NETL through CRADAs. In addition, non-Coalition participants included six universities and sixteen companies and national laboratories. The non-Coalition participants were involved as subcontractors, providers of cost share, performed unpaid consultation and sample analysis, served as advisory board members, or were providers of samples and materials for testing. UCFER also produced visibility in that fifty-six refereed journal articles were published, fifty-seven conference papers and twenty-three posters were prepared, 190 presentations were given, eight patent applications were filed, two books/book chapters were written, and ten software codes were developed. Collaboration between NETL and the individual projects was a major requirement for all funded projects. This included NETL staff time to support collaboration, consultation, technical guidance, sample preparation and analysis, internships at NETL, on-site testing and equipment usage by Coalition participants at NETL, co-mentoring students, and coauthoring journal articles and conference papers. Collaboration was impacted by COVID-19 in that not all on-site activities could be performed. NETL personnel were coauthors on eight of the conference papers (fourteen percent of the conference papers that were prepared) and seventeen of the journal articles (thirty percent of the journal articles that were prepared). A website was developed for an online proposal solicitation and review process and to provide exposure to UCFER. A website analysis highlighted the large amount of member and general public interest in UCFER by interpreting access statistics from March 2016 through June 2023. Visitors to the site originated from many different organizations, businesses, and countries. The website provided a means to disseminate information to both the general public and the UCFER members and was successfully used for outreach activities. In addition, NETL required that RFP release, proposal submission, and proposal reviews all be performed online. Penn State successfully developed these capabilities in a secure section of the website, which were used throughout the UCFER project. It is recognized that each project had its technical successes. In addition, highlighted successes were compiled and summarized from the research projects. Information was requested from the PIs of completed projects. In addition, Penn State’s Operations Management Team reviewed subcontract reports to identify project successes. Examples of information requested from PIs included (not all-inclusive): new projects that have been funded as a result of UCFER funding; new commercial products; establishment of a new center; new patent; new software; best paper awards; highly-cited work; and graduate student successes. A total of forty-eight highlighted successes were reported.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2024

Innovating the next generation of commercial smart building software

Nearly 30% of commercial building energy use is wasted due to equipment faults and HVAC controls problems. The result is increased emissions, compromised comfort and productivity, and less reliable coordination of building power needs with a clean grid. The energy impact alone represents $17 billion in potential savings. Today’s smart building software provides a robust solution to address these operational deficiencies. Energy management and information systems (EMIS) are saving up to 9% on average, with two-year paybacks. They are being incorporated into energy management processes, commissioning services, and utility programs. As effective as they are, two barriers prevent even deeper benefits; limited personnel to fix problems once they are identified, and the expense and time to manually implement changes in control systems. In partnership with the research community, the EMIS industry is developing new capabilities to overcome these barriers. Moving beyond siloed products for either fault detection and diagnostics, or optimal control, these new capabilities empower users to not only automatically identify faults, but also to push corrective action, and control improvements to their buildings. In this paper, several areas for enhancements are documented: ‘one-time’ correction of faults such as setpoints, schedules, and economizer lockouts; short-term active testing for automated proportional integral derivative (PID) loop tuning and functional testing; and continuous supervisory control for demand flexibility and year-round efficiency. Results are presented from a pair of partner implementations out of a dozen providers integrating these enhancements into their products, including field tests from across the country, and insights into operator acceptance and integration into operations and maintenance practices.

Casillas, Armando↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Mid-Century Net-Zero Scenario for the State of Wyoming and its Economic Impacts

Clean hydrogen has the potential to help achieve 10% economy-wide emissions reductions by 2050 relative to 2005, promote energy security and resilience, and develop a new economy in the United States. In 2030, the hydrogen economy could create about 100,000 new jobs to build new capital projects and clean hydrogen infrastructure. The Wyoming Energy Authority recently announced the state’s energy strategy, which establishes a goal of net-zero emissions by 2050. Under all likely scenarios, achieving a mid-century net-zero target will pose challenges and create opportunities for Wyoming’s energy sector. If executed properly, the transition could favorably affect the state’s economy overall in the long term. This research program examines the economic impact of fossil energy production in Wyoming and provides various predictions for future energy mixes to achieve net-zero emissions. Preliminary work suggests that Wyoming-based hydrogen production could have significant economic benefits and job creation implications for Wyoming. This study further assesses Wyoming’s opportunities to create hydrogen-based industries, assess economic impacts, identify knowledge gaps and research needs, and create a Hydrogen Center of Excellence to accelerate commercialization and deployment. This project helped to understand Wyoming's areas of focus for research and development and identified its areas of strength and potential challenges in creating a hydrogen ecosystem. As a result of this study, we estimate that for blue hydrogen produced from coal and gas resources, the overall cost reduction will be driven mainly by the carbon-sequestration tax credit and the improvement in carbon capture. Mature technologies, like SMR and PSA, will make limited contributions. They have no or limited reductions from an additional capacity deployment in future costs. We also understand the importance of continued support from public and private sectors for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS)-related research, development, and demonstration programs at federal and state levels. The successful and efficient production of blue hydrogen requires a unique blend of energy resources, geology, regulation, law, and infrastructure. Wyoming has the distinction of meeting all these demands. The team also estimates that the availability and command of water resources accessible for hydrogen production are crucial for developing new projects. Water treatment, use, and disposal after treatment will also make projects possible. Primarily, this is relevant for hydrogen made using renewable energy. Wyoming has one of the best wind resource capacity in the nation. Harnessing this resource is challenging due to limited transmission line availability. Hydrogen could become one of the solutions to the stranded resource problem, primarily if the water availability challenge is addressed. Using produced oil & gas water could help to solve the problem. A commonly cited barrier to the expansion of hydrogen markets is the cost associated with constructing new pipelines, which typically require large amounts of capital to develop. Wyoming already possesses much of the export infrastructure needed to connect Wyoming’s hydrogen production with major markets across the West Coast, Pacific Northwest, Midwest, and Front Range regions of the United States, where a large portion of Wyoming’s natural gas is already transported. In addition to transportation by pipeline, rail transportation of hydrogen has also proven feasible. Wyoming uses its extensive railway system to transport large amounts of coal to its export partners across the United States. By using cryogenic or compressed-gas cars, Wyoming has the potential to add hydrogen to its existing network of railroad energy exports. The same technology may also be applied to hydrogen transport via trucks traveling interstate highways. Wyoming’s workforce is ready to meet the demands of clean hydrogen development. Many of the skills and training needed for hydrogen production are the same skills already possessed by Wyoming’s oil & gas and coal workforce. Many government and industry leaders expect clean hydrogen and other low-carbon energy projects to generate significant job growth and to recruit many already-trained oil & gas and coal workers whose jobs may be displaced. As energy companies seek to penetrate the markets for Wyoming hydrogen production, there is a natural mutual benefit to Wyoming’s workers and companies seeking to launch projects with the assistance of a trained workforce. Wyoming’s university and community college system have adopted several programs to ensure that highly qualified engineers and other technically skilled employees continue to graduate with skills to support the development of hydrogen and other innovative energy projects moving forward. Throughout the project, stakeholder outreach and education took many forms, including meetings with several major companies in the industry, collaborating with local government organizations, educational organizations, and national laboratories, tribal outreach and engagement, the sponsoring of several hydrogen-focused projects in many departments throughout the University of Wyoming, and developing a collaboration with international universities. The products of these collaborations consist of working relationships with several companies in the industry, educational institutions, national labs, and local government, as well as strong connections with individuals who will play an essential role in the success of the Hydrogen Energy Research Center.

08 HYDROGEN↗