Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “doe”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Livewire: A Model Platform for Data Quality Assessment and AI Readiness Across DOE Missions

High-quality, well-governed data is essential for accelerating discovery and achieving operational excellence across DOE and national laboratory missions. The Livewire Data Platform is a DOE-supported platform that offers automated assessments of data quality, standardization, provenance, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) readiness. It allows researchers and data practitioners to systematically and easily evaluate datasets against established governance criteria and prepare them for advanced analytics. Livewire addresses critical challenges in DOE's data ecosystem with integrated capabilities for metadata validation, provenance tracking, and schema alignment. This platform's automated workflows assist users in identifying data quality gaps, enhancing interoperability between datasets collected from various stakeholders, and ensuring compliance with DOE data standards, all while reducing manual curation efforts. Additionally, we will discuss its AI readiness framework, which is being developed to prepare datasets for training models, developing advanced analytic tools, and machine learning applications. Using some of the more than one hundred tabular datasets on Livewire, processed with this open-source methodology, we will demonstrate how Livewire can serve as a model for scalable, standards-driven data management. This approach provides a pathway to leverage existing and future datasets within the DOE, boosting innovation and efficiency across national laboratories.

33 - ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Review of Remote Welding and Nondestructive Examination Technologies for the DOE Standard Canister

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) manages a wide variety of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) that poses a unique management challenge. To help address this challenge, the DOE Standard Canister (DOESC), designed to remain sealed during handling, storage, transportation, and disposal, was conceptualized as a standardized containment vessel to accommodate DOE-managed SNF. Since 1999, several welding and examination processes have been independently developed for the DOESC’s closure welds. However, neither the DOESC nor these processes have been realized in an operational capacity. This review paper seeks to present and compare previously developed DOESC closure weld, nondestructive examination, and repair processes and technologies. Specific processes developed for the Idaho Spent Fuel Facility, in preparation for the Yucca Mountain geological repository, and the recent Road-Ready Demonstration Project are discussed. Further, specific focus is given to how different operating constraints and the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC) have driven certain welding and nondestructive examination requirements. Historical DOESC welding and examination strategies are assessed against current regulatory and BPVC requirements. The comparison of welding processes, technologies, and DOESC designs presented in this review paper will inform further construction efforts for other commercial and DOE-managed SNF containments, including the DOESC.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2014

RANS Simulation RRF of Single Lab-Scaled DOE RM1 MHK Turbine

Attached are the .cas and .dat files for the Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) simulation of a single lab-scaled DOE RM1 turbine implemented in ANSYS FLUENT CFD-package. The lab-scaled DOE RM1 is a re-design geometry, based of the full scale DOE RM1 design, producing same power output as the full scale model, while operating at matched Tip Speed Ratio values at reachable laboratory Reynolds number (see attached paper). In this case study taking advantage of the symmetry of lab-scaled DOE RM1 geometry, only half of the geometry is models using (Single) Rotating Reference Frame model [RRF]. In this model RANS equations, coupled with k-\omega turbulence closure model, are solved in the rotating reference frame. The actual geometry of the turbine blade is included and the turbulent boundary layer along the blade span is simulated using wall-function approach. The rotation of the blade is modeled by applying periodic boundary condition to sets of plane of symmetry. This case study simulates the performance and flow field in the near and far wake of the device at the desired operating conditions. The results of these simulations were validated against in-house experimental data. Please see the attached paper.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2016

Transition and Transfer of Remediated FUSRAP Sites from USACE to US DOE for Long-Term Surveillance and Maintenance - 16209

The US Department of Energy (DOE) expects to receive the transfer of 10 FUSRAP Sites from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) over the next 10 years; however, the timing of the transfers is highly dependent upon federal funding of the ongoing remedial actions. When remediation for each site is complete and the 2-year operations and maintenance period has concluded, each site will transfer from USACE to DOE for long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). US DOE's Office of Legacy Management (LM) will accept program responsibility for these sites and conduct LTS and M activities required to maintain protectiveness, preserve site-specific knowledge, and retain the cleanup and stewardship records while keeping stakeholders informed. Since the last FUSRAP site transfer occurred in 2007, LM in coordination with USACE intends to establish a transition process to promote the seamless transfer of sites from the time when the first record of decision is signed to the completion of FUSRAP activities. The approach to transfer active FUSRAP sites to completed sites status has been historically outlined in foundational documents such as the 1999 Memorandum of Understanding and supporting letters of agreement between the two agencies. As more complex FUSRAP sites are completed, this transition process will provide a model between the two agencies to communicate future long-term care liabilities. Ultimately, the FUSRAP transition process is structured to acquire and preserve site knowledge and information necessary for protecting the environment and public health. As of 2015, LM has transitioned and accepted programmatic responsibility for over 90 sites. From LM's perspective, successful transition of any site includes understanding the long-term environmental liabilities. LM uses site transition framework requirements from past transitions to develop site-specific transition plans. Site-specific transition plans are developed by LM in coordination with USACE and executed during the 2-year operations and maintenance period. An integrated project team of subject matter experts is assembled to address the conditions of the transitioning site; acquire a site records collection; evaluate site operations and final site conditions and associated risks; identify and contact stakeholders; and document the basis for site LTS and M requirements. While the majority of the transition activities are completed by LM, close coordination between US DOE LM and USACE throughout this process is essential for an effective and seamless transfer to assure that there is no lapse in site protectiveness. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Developing a New Model to Estimate the Costs to Decommission DOE's Active Facilities - 16368

The Active Facilities Data Collection System (AFDCS) is a major means the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or Department) uses to estimate its out-year environmental liability for the active and surplus facilities across the Department. The previous AFDCS cost model was based on cost assumptions that date back to the mid-1990s. The model is being replaced with a model that reflects more recent facility disposition experience and costs. DOE's Office of Environmental Management's (DOE-EM) historical cost collection database provides the basis for the new AFDCS cost model. This paper describes the process that was used to update the AFDCS facility data inputs, analyze this data, and formulate historical costs and parameters. This process created a robust and reliable cost model that will provide DOE with a valid estimate of the facilities' disposition costs. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Future Transition of WIPP from EM to Another DOE Office - 19256

The U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) has a primary mission to assist federal government entities disposition transuranic (TRU) radioactive waste. The main resource for disposition is the deep geologic repository known as the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Other resources include a complete transportation system and a program that assists in the certification and shipment of TRU waste to WIPP known as the National TRU Program (NTP). All of these resources are managed by CBFO, which currently is part of the DOE Environmental Management (EM) program. EM's primary mission for DOE is to clean up the legacy remaining from many years of nuclear weapons research and production. But, CBFO estimates the need for WIPP and NTP will continue beyond the mission of EM and will assist other entities such as the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the Office of Science (OS) and the Navy. As the inventory of legacy TRU waste is reduced, the inventory of new TRU waste will continue from ongoing missions. So, over the life span of WIPP the primary customers of CBFO will shift from legacy EM sites to newly-generated TRU waste sites. And, somewhere along the way CBFO estimates that it will transition, primarily from an EM support (legacy waste) entity to a primarily a NNSA support (newly-generated waste) entity to facilitate ongoing DOE missions. This paper will address the need for that change at a programmatic level and will include some ideas for conceptual planning for such a transition. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 14: US DOE WIPP - Future Plans for the Utilization of a National Asset

This panel focused on the next phase of restoring the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP: located in Carlsbad, New Mexico, USA) to full disposal operations. The US DOE Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) is funded for two Capital Asset Projects that will facilitate the restoration of WIPP to full capability and allow for future repository space planning. The panel will include updates on the capital projects, infrastructure improvements to extend WIPP's operational life, regulatory actions in support of capital projects, and improvements in new processes to implement WAC and DSA enhancements. This panel is filled by CBFO and WIPP contractor leaders to provide the big picture leading to WIPP's future. Presentations proposed include: 1 - 2018 WIPP Year in Review (Bruce Covert, Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC (USA)); 2 - TRU Waste Shipments and WIPP Operations (Mark Pearcy, Nuclear Waste Partnership, LLC (USA)); 3 - Projects and Activities at WIPP (Ronald Gill, US DOE (USA)); 4 - The Future of WIPP (J.R. Stroble, US DOE (USA), Todd Shrader, US DOE (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 91: Benefits of Commercial Tools and Practices to DOE Cleanup Nuclear Sites

This panel focused on the benefits of applying commercial tools and best practices to DOE cleanup sites. The panelist presented tools and applications that have been demonstrated on commercial and other government sites that are readily available to address similar challenges found on many DOE cleanup sites. Attendees gained an understanding of a few of the commercial applications that have resulted in innovation and cost savings. Presentations proposed include: 1 - Internet of Things and Humans - IoTH (Javid Kelley, Perma-Fix Environmental Services (USA)); 2 - Commercial Tools and Practices to Cleanup DOE Nuclear Sites (Mark Lesinski, Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (Canada)); 3 - Stakeholder-Engaged Structured Decision Making and GISDT - Guided Interactive Statistical Decision Tools (Paul Black, Neptune and Company, Inc. (USA)); 4 - Benefits of Commercial Tools and Practices to DOE Cleanup of Nuclear Sites - Panel 091 (Kevin Smith, PAE (USA)); 5 - MAECTITE Treatment Process Overview (Daniel Caputo, Sevenson Environmental Services, Inc. (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2019

Panel Session 104: US DOE LLW On-Site Disposal: LLW Disposal Facility Federal Review Group Review Process

The US DOE Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group (LFRG) as the regulatory authority for onsite low-level waste disposal facilities for the complex per DOE Order 435.1. This panel focused on the review process for technical basis documents including the Performance Assessments that are used to issue the disposal authorization statement Presentations proposed include: 1 - Low-Level Waste Disposal Overview (Jhon Carilli, US DOE EM Nevada (USA)); 2 - Factors Influencing Allowable Waste Concentrations and Inventories at Disposal Facilities (Roger Seitz, IEI (USA)); 3 - Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility Federal Review Group - LFRG (Jaffet Ferrer-Torres, US DOE (USA))

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2016

Improved Stability of a Model IgG3 by DoE-Based Evaluation of Buffer Formulations

Formulating appropriate storage conditions for biopharmaceutical proteins is essential for ensuring their stability and thereby their purity, potency, and safety over their shelf-life. Using a model murine IgG3 produced in a bioreactor system, multiple formulation compositions were systematically explored in a DoE design to optimize the stability of a challenging antibody formulation worst case. The stability of the antibody in each buffer formulation was assessed by UV/VIS absorbance at 280 nm and 410 nm and size exclusion high performance liquid chromatography (SEC) to determine overall solubility, opalescence, and aggregate formation, respectively. Upon preliminary testing, acetate was eliminated as a potential storage buffer due to significant visible precipitate formation. An additional 2 4 full factorial DoE was performed that combined the stabilizing effect of arginine with the buffering capacity of histidine. From this final DoE, an optimized formulation of 200 mM arginine, 50 mM histidine, and 100 mM NaCl at a pH of 6.5 was identified to substantially improve stability under long-term storage conditions and after multiple freeze/thaw cycles. Therefore, our data highlights the power of DoE based formulation screening approaches even for challenging monoclonal antibody molecules.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2018

Constant Rate Production: DOE Approach to Meeting NASA Needs for Radioisotope Power Systems for Nuclear-Enabled Launches

The use of radioisotope power systems (RPSs) for nuclear-enabled National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) missions is made possible through a long-standing arrangement between the Department of Energy (DOE) and NASA. The requirements for the power system come from NASA, but DOE performs the procurement, fueling, testing, and delivery. A challenge has been interplay between the schedule for RPS availability from DOE versus the schedule for competitively selected missions. By mutual agreement, the actual operations to procure an RPS and prepare it for fueling have always been delayed until the final selection of a mission. The timeline for a New Frontiers–class mission leaves approximately 5 to 6 years from the time of final mission selection to the actual launch date. The number of RPSs used for a New Frontiers–class mission can be one to three units. If one or two units are needed, the timeline from the decision point to the launch date is a challenge, but it is achievable. The activities taking place include manufacturing the power system, producing the fuel, and performing the assembly/testing and delivery operations. If the mission selected requires three RPSs, the logistics of accomplishing all activities during the 5–6 years is problematic. The challenge involves obtaining the necessary resources for plutonium production, heat source production, and assembly/testing operations. Typically, the time between RPS-enabled missions requires staffing reduction down to 65%–75% of peak staffing levels to reduce costs. Coupling the ~2 year duration needed for hiring, training, and obtaining the appropriate security clearances for the required staff with the requirement for the RPS to arrive at Kennedy Space Center 6 months before the launch erodes much of the 5–6 years available to comfortably support the use of three RPSs. To provide better support for NASA RPS missions, a different approach for the production of heat sources was devised—constant rate production. This involves a higher level of base capability at DOE national laboratories to provide a stabilized workforce. This will enable 10–15 heat sources to be produced annually and placed into a stable intermediate form to enable storage for up to several years leading to quick production of general purpose heat source modules when a mission is selected. The upfront production of 238 Pu is maintained so material is constantly in the pipeline. Production of key specialized components is also maintained using this model.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2014

RANS Simulation VBM of Single Lab Scaled DOE RM1 MHK Turbine

Attached are the .cas and .dat files for the Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) simulation of a single lab-scaled DOE RM1 turbine implemented in ANSYS FLUENT CFD-package. The lab-scaled DOE RM1 is a re-design geometry, based of the full scale DOE RM1 design, producing same power output as the full scale model, while operating at matched Tip Speed Ratio values at reachable laboratory Reynolds number (see attached paper). In this case study the flow field around and in the wake of the lab-scaled DOE RM1 turbine is simulated using Blade Element Model (a.k.a Virtual Blade Model [VBM]) by solving RANS equations coupled with k-\omega turbulence closure model. It should be highlighted that in this simulation the actual geometry of the rotor blade is not modeled. The effect of turbine rotating blades are modeled using the Blade Element Theory. This simulation provides an accurate estimate for the performance of device and structure of it's turbulent far wake. Due to the simplifications implemented for modeling the rotating blades in this model, VBM is limited to capture details of the flow field in near wake region of the device. The required User Defined Functions (UDFs) and look-up table of lift and drag coefficients are included along with the .cas and .dat files.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2016

RANS Simulation VBM of Array of Three Coaxial Lab Scaled DOE RM1 MHK Turbine with 5D Spacing

Attached are the .cas and .dat files along with the required User Defined Functions (UDFs) and look-up table of lift and drag coefficients for the Reynolds Averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) simulation of three coaxially located lab-scaled DOE RM1 turbine implemented in ANSYS FLUENT CFD-package. The lab-scaled DOE RM1 is a re-design geometry, based of the full scale DOE RM1 design, producing same power output as the full scale model, while operating at matched Tip Speed Ratio values at reachable laboratory Reynolds number (see attached paper). In this case study the flow field around and in the wake of the lab-scaled DOE RM1 turbines in a coaxial array is simulated using Blade Element Model (a.k.a Virtual Blade Model [VBM]) by solving RANS equations coupled with k-\omega turbulence closure model. It should be highlighted that in this simulation the actual geometry of the rotor blade is not modeled. The effect of turbine rotating blades are modeled using the Blade Element Theory. This simulation provides an accurate estimate for the performance of each device and structure of their turbulent far wake. The results of these simulations were validated against the developed in-house experimental data. Simulations for other turbine configurations are available upon request.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2014

DOE High Performance Computing Operational Review (HPCOR): Enabling Data-Driven Scientific Discovery at HPC Facilities

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) High Performance Computing (HPC) facilities are on the verge of a paradigm shift in the way they deliver systems and services to science and engineering teams. Research projects are producing a wide variety of data at unprecedented scale and level of complexity, with community-specific services that are part of the data collection and analysis workflow. On June 18-19, 2014 representatives from six DOE HPC centers met in Oakland, CA at the DOE High Performance Operational Review (HPCOR) to discuss how they can best provide facilities and services to enable large-scale data-driven scientific discovery at the DOE national laboratories. The report contains findings from that review.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2014

Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2013: DOE Operations at The Boeing Company, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, Area IV

This Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for 2013 describes the environmental conditions related to work performed for the Department of Energy (DOE) at Area IV of the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (SSFL). The Energy Technology Engineering Center (ETEC), a government-owned, company-operated test facility, was located in Area IV. The operations in Area IV included development, fabrication, operation and disassembly of nuclear reactors, reactor fuel, and other radioactive materials. Other activities in the area involved the operation of large-scale liquid metal facilities that were used for testing non-nuclear liquid metal fast breeder reactor components. All nuclear work was terminated in 1988, and all subsequent radiological work has been directed toward environmental restoration and decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) of the former nuclear facilities and their associated sites. Liquid metal research and development ended in 2002. Since May 2007, the D&D operations in Area IV have been suspended by the DOE, but the environmental monitoring and characterization programs have continued. Results of the radiological monitoring program for the calendar year 2013 continue to indicate that there are no significant releases of radioactive material from Area IV of SSFL. All potential exposure pathways are sampled and/or monitored, including air, soil, surface water, groundwater, direct radiation, transfer of property (land, structures, waste), and recycling. Due to the suspension of D&D activities in Area IV, no effluents were released into the atmosphere during 2013. Therefore, the potential radiation dose to the general public through airborne release was zero. Similarly, the radiation dose to an offsite member of the public (maximally exposed individual) due to direct radiation from SSFL is indistinguishable from background. All radioactive wastes are processed for disposal at DOE disposal sites and/or other licensed sites approved by DOE for radioactive waste disposal. No liquid radioactive wastes were released into the environment in 2013.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Using the H Index to Assess Impact of DOE National Laboratories

The most readily accessible elements of the Emerald Matrix by quantitative measures are the knowledge and economy related measures. In this paper, the H Index for an institution will be used to assess STE impact, which is in the knowledge generation element. The H Index was developed by Hirsch (2005) as a measure of an individual’s scientific impact. The H Index is defined as the number of publications that have been cited h or more times for a given author. It has been generalized to organizations. Doing so leads to a complication in that H index scales with the number of publications. Although this may not be problematic when comparing individual researchers, it systematically favors larger institutions. Molinari and Molinari (2008) proposed an alternative index (hm) designed to assess organizational impact. It transforms the H Index for an organization into an impact index by removing a factor dependent on the number of publications. The hm provides another approach to compare institutions provided that differences in the citation patterns associated with fields of study are addressed. Kinney (2007) used the Molinari and Molinari (2008) approach to compare various scientific institutions in nonbiomedical research areas. Kinney (2007) used the Thomson Reuters Web of Science (WoS) as the source and used publications in nonbiomedical research areas, which is very important because the research areas of universities are much broader than say a DOE national laboratory. Also there are differences in citation rates for the various research fields that make comparisons between individuals or organizations difficult. The results from Kinney (2007) are given in Table 1 and indicate that the DOE national laboratories compare favorably with the selected universities in terms of impact (hm) in the research areas used in Kinney’s analysis. This report will compare hm for DOE national laboratories using an approach similar to Kinney (2007) providing a measure of impact of the DOE national laboratories.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2016

DOE Centers of Excellence Performance Portability Meeting

Performance portability is a phrase often used, but not well understood. The DOE is deploying systems at all of the major facilities across ASCR and ASC that are forcing application developers to confront head-on the challenges of running applications across these diverse systems. With GPU-based systems at the OLCF and LLNL, and Phi-based systems landing at NERSC, ACES (LANL/SNL), and the ALCF – the issue of performance portability is confronting the DOE mission like never before. A new best practice in the DOE is to include “Centers of Excellence” with each major procurement, with a goal of focusing efforts on preparing key applications to be ready for the systems coming to each site, and engaging the vendors directly in a “shared fate” approach to ensuring success. While each COE is necessarily focused on a particular deployment, applications almost invariably must be able to run effectively across the entire DOE HPC ecosystem. This tension between optimizing performance for a particular platform, while still being able to run with acceptable performance wherever the resources are available, is the crux of the challenge we call “performance portability”. This meeting was an opportunity to bring application developers, software providers, and vendors together to discuss this challenge and begin to chart a path forward.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2018

Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC)–U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Joint Program on Research and Development for Fossil Energy-Related Resources

The EERC teamed with the DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory to conduct complementary research and development under the Joint Program on Research and Development for Fossil Energy-Related Resources (Cooperative Agreement No. DE-FC26-08NT43291). This 10-year program merged two previous 10-year agreements—DE-FC26-98FT40320 and DE-FC26-98FT40321—into a single follow-on agreement. The Fossil Energy cooperative agreement between DOE and the EERC was initiated in 1983 when the EERC was defederalized. This dynamic 35-year partnership has evolved to further research in areas that address DOE Office of Fossil Energy program goals while serving the missions and exploiting the strengths of both organizations through this agreement and a new 5-year Fossil Energy-Related Resources cooperative agreement established in 2015. As the 10-year program has ended, the purpose of this report is to summarize the activity and significant outcomes that were accomplished by the EERC. This program is an excellent model for research, development, demonstration, and commercialization partnerships between government, industry, and the applied science and engineering communities to bring cutting-edge science closer to commercial application. The overarching goal was to support DOE Fossil Energy goals by advancing the scientific knowledge and technical development essential to ensuring future sustainable supplies of affordable energy and clean water, protecting and restoring the environment, and reducing dependence on foreign energy sources, thereby increasing U.S. energy security. The strategic objective was to advance continued use of domestic fossil fuels as a mainstay of U.S. energy production by making fossil energy systems nonpolluting and more efficient, capturing and sequestering greenhouse gases, and integrating the use of fossil and renewable energy sources into the energy mix. The research achievements from this partnership have exceeded the goals and objectives by contributing substantially to the development of science-based energy and environmental policy, educational foundations for science and technology, and commercialization and international marketing of energy technologies. The program comprised 75 individual projects, which included basic/applied fossil energy research projects involving no cost share and development, demonstration, and commercialization projects (many derived from applied research projects) that included nonfederal cost share of approximately 40% (the contractually required minimum level of cumulative nonfederal cost share was 29%). In all, 32,798,698 of federal funding was leveraged with industry cash and in-kind cost share of 21,697,129 from 80 nonfederal partners for a total of 54,495,827 of funded research that 1) advanced the development of unconventional tight oil resources in the Bakken Formation; 2) demonstrated the application of CO 2 Storage and EOR in tight oil formations; 3) developed advanced carbon capture technology; 4) addressed key application and infrastructure concerns for commercial deployment of CO 2 ; 5) demonstrated innovative, integrated water management strategies for energy development projects; 6) developed novel pollution control technologies for mercury and hazardous air pollutants; and 7) performed world-class outreach and dissemination of research results to industry partners and other stakeholders. These outcomes speak to the valuable return on the substantial investment in this program.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗