SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Subject Matter Expert”

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 163 records · Page 9

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2021

AI-Enhanced Co-Design for Next-Generation Microelectronics: Innovating Innovation (Workshop Report)

On April 6-8, 2021, Sandia National Laboratories hosted a virtual workshop to explore the potential for developing AI-Enhanced Co-Design for Next-Generation Microelectronics (AICoM). The workshop brought together two themes. The first theme was articulated in the 2018 Department of Energy Office of Science (DOE SC) “Basic Research Needs for Microelectronics” (BRN) report, which called for a “fundamental rethinking” of the traditional design approach to microelectronics, in which subject matter experts (SMEs) in each microelectronics discipline (materials, devices, circuits, algorithms, etc.) work near-independently. Instead, the BRN called for a non-hierarchical, egalitarian vision of co-design, wherein “each scientific discipline informs and engages the others” in “parallel but intimately networked efforts to create radically new capabilities.” The second theme was the recognition of the continuing breakthroughs in artificial intelligence (AI) that are currently enhancing and accelerating the solution of traditional design problems in materials science, circuit design, and electronic design automation (EDA).

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2022

NNSA Minority Serving Institute Partnership Program (MSIPP)— Advanced Synergistic Program for Indigenous Research in Engineering (ASPIRE) (FY22 Q1 Progress Report)

In 2016, the National Nuclear Security Agency (NNSA) initiated the Minority Serving Institution Partnership Plan (MSIPP) targeting Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) to offer programs that will prepare students for technical careers in NNSA’s laboratories and production plants. The MSIPP consortium’s approach is as follows: 1) align investments at the college and university level to develop a curriculum and workforce needed to support NNSA’s nuclear weapon enterprise mission, and 2) to enhance research and education at under-represented colleges and universities. The first TCU consortium that MSIPP launched was known as the Advanced Manufacturing Network Initiative (AMNI) whose purpose was to develop additive manufacturing (AM) learning opportunities. The AMNI consortium consisted of Bay Mills Community College, Cankdeska Cikana Community College, Navajo Tech University, Salish Kootenai Community College, Turtle Mountain Community College, and United Tribes Technical College. In 2016, the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), the AMNI consortium and the Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI), in collaboration with Sandia National Labs, using a grant by NNSA hosted the first TCU Advanced Manufacturing Technology Summer Institute (TCU AMTSI). The AMNI consortium will officially end Sept. 2022. However, building on the successes of AMNI, in FY22 NNSA’s MSIPP launched three additional consortiums: (1) the Indigenous Mutual Partnership to Advanced Cybersecurity Technology (IMPACT), which focuses on STEM and cybersecurity, (2) the Advanced Synergistic Program for Indigenous Research in Engineering (ASPIRE), which focuses on STEM and the electrical and mechanical engineering skills set needed for renewable and distributed energy systems, and (3) the Partnership for Advanced Manufacturing Education and Research (PAMER), which focuses on developing and maintaining a sustainable pathway for a highly trained, next-generation additive manufacturing workforce and a corresponding community of subject matter experts for NNSA enterprises. The following report summarizes the status update during this quarter for the ASPIRE program.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Production Agency Quality Assurance Management Execution Strategy [Thesis]

There are multiple federal directives that Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) must follow for the proper implementation of quality assurance, strategic planning, and execution of manufacturing and surveillance operations. Recent assessments identified that manufacturing in all processing areas is dynamic due to influencing scope changes, design modifications, funding adjustments, and staff attrition. In response, this project was started to develop a comprehensive PAQ execution strategy to support the success of LANL’s manufacturing mission. This project’s method for developing an updated architecture was to create an integrated, flexible, reliable, and agile strategic process. The execution plan has five deliverables: 1) an integrated schedule view of PAQ work scope, 2) a resource management plan that aligns with the required scope, 3) a metrics monitoring dashboard, 4) a project management plan for sustaining NAP 401.1A implementation, and 5) a risk management plan. The research design is a mixed-method approach focused on data collection for each deliverable. The methodology entails qualitative and quantitative research, metrics monitoring, data analysis, and the creation of a dashboard. The qualitative methods used include literature reviews and interviews. The quantitative methods include resource, financial, schedule and survey data analysis. Preliminary and final results were peer reviewed by subject matter experts both within the ALDWP organization and deployed support.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Assessing the New Home Market Opportunity: Case Study and Cost Modeling for Solar and Storage in 2030

Residential solar and storage markets are growing in the United States. With approximately 1 million new homes constructed every year, this represents a significant opportunity for solar and storage installations. Some homebuilders have begun to build new homes with solar and storage included as a standard offering. It is not clear how solar and storage is incorporated into the new construction process and at what cost. Further, it is unclear what barriers or opportunities exist to scale this model nationwide. To fill this gap in the literature, this research conducts a case study of Mandalay Homes' new solar and storage community in Arizona to gather lessons learned. From this foundation, we further generate a set of pathways to reduce install costs and expand solar and storage market penetration in this sector. To model existing and 2030 solar and storage costs, we use the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) bottom-up cost model. This modeling is further informed by 12 interviews conducted with new home builders, solar contractors, and other subject matter expert organizations. Our case study analysis generated three key considerations for other homebuilders including: 1. Educating local permitting, inspection, and in some cases utility officials on solar and storage products, designs, and code compliant building practices may be required. The need for education may decline as more local governments and utilities review and approve solar and storage projects. 2. Incorporating solar and storage systems into the homebuilding process can add complexity and related coordination challenges. This does not need to result in home construction delays, but can result in costly contractor "dry runs" to construction sites. 3. Deploying solar and storage at the time of new construction has significant economies of scale, which can improve the value proposition of the systems. The case study, extant literature, and interviews were used to model both existing and future solar and storage installation costs at time of new construction. Here, we find three key cost reduction opportunities relating to solar and battery storage hardware, customer acquisition, and overhead. If future contractors can maximize the cost reduction opportunities outlined here, residential new construction costs could decline by 8 - 25% by 2030, depending on the modeled scenario. Though we expect costs to decline through 2030, it is unclear which of these scenarios may ultimately appear. Interviewees further identified a variety of barriers across each cost category that could temper the savings shown here. At the same time, interviewees described several pathways to scale the new construction solar and storage market, beyond installation cost savings. Interviewees confirmed that changes in finance, rate design, resilience policies, deployment mandates, and DER aggregation could all support more market adoption than seen today. These findings suggest that there are significant opportunities to expand new construction markets and this research can serve as a baseline to assess progress in this segment through 2030.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Thermal Process Intensification: Transforming the Way Industry Uses Thermal Process Energy

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2022

Wind Energy: Supply Chain Deep Dive Assessment

The report “America’s Strategy to Secure the Supply Chain for a Robust Clean Energy Transition” lays out the challenges and opportunities faced by the United States in the energy supply chain as well as the federal government plans to address these challenges and opportunities. It is accompanied by several issue-specific deep dive assessments, including this one, in response to Executive Order 14017 “America’s Supply Chains,” which directs the Secretary of Energy to submit a report on supply chains for the energy sector industrial base. The Executive Order is helping the federal government to build more secure and diverse U.S. supply chains, including energy supply chains. To inform the DOE team’s supply chain review, researchers at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted research and analyses that characterize supply chain strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats within the wind industry, including both land-based and offshore wind. The team also conducted interviews with industry stakeholders and subject matter experts. This report documents these findings and provides a foundation for addressing the observed vulnerabilities and enhancing U.S. wind supply chain competitiveness.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Recommendations for Radiological Data Assessment Implementation

Since thorough verification, validation, and data quality assessment (DQA) processes may delay incident commanders and elected and appointed officials from making key decisions, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) National Urban Security Technology Laboratory (NUSTL) tasked Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop tools and guidance for the federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial (FSLTT) responders using research, discussions with select FSLTT responders, and the experiences of subject matter experts in incident response. This report provides NUSTL with recommendations on best practices for verification, validation, and data quality assessment for the data collected by responders during a radiological or nuclear event. The purpose of this report is to inform the development of a DQA toolkit aimed at the needs of data assessors during the response to a radiological incident.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2022

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

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

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2021

2021 GeoAI Workshop Report: The Trillion Pixel Challenge

The convergence of geospatial big data with advancements from artificial intelligence, cloud infrastructure, and high-performance computing continues to revolutionize mapping and analysis of Earth's surface in unprecedented detail. Rapid innovations in sensing technologies will soon collect geospatial data in even higher resolution and throughput. These developments offer the potential for breakthroughs in science, policy, and national security via end-to-end GeoAI systems that can provide fresh insights into how humans occupy and alter their environment over time. At the 2021 GeoAI Trillion Pixel workshop, international subject matter experts from government, academia, industry, and nonprofit organizations gathered virtually to discuss the Trillion Pixel GeoAI Challenge. The event focused on six major themes currently influencing scientific innovation and breakthroughs. Particular focus was paid to societal impacts. As an additional takeaway message, the gathering identified remaining application gaps and challenges that are in need of stronger community partnerships and collaborations.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Application Results on Early Exascale Hardware

This Exascale Computing Project (ECP) milestone report summarizes the status of 27 of the 31 ECP Applications Development (AD) subprojects at the end of FY21. In November and December of 2021, a comprehensive assessment of AD projects was conducted by the ECP leadership along with external subject matter experts (SMEs). (NNSA application projects are reviewed separately using the ASC milestone process.) The AD review committee—consisting of the AD lead, AD deputy, Level 3 (L3), and at least one external project SME—was tasked with evaluating each project’s progress relative to ECP project goals specified in the FY21 timeline. Key areas of focus were code maturity and performance on pre-exascale systems, an in-depth analysis of final key performance parameter (KPP) verification contracts, and future R&D priorities in the final year of ECP and beyond. As such, this report contains not only an accurate snapshot of each subproject’s current status but also represents a broad account of successes and challenges in porting large scientific applications to DOE’s next-generation high-performance computing architectures – the Frontier and Aurora systems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Advancing Vision-based Feedback and Convolutional Neural Networks for Visual Outlier Detection

Machine learning has matured into a technology that has immediate applicability to the surveillance needs of nuclear material storage containers. These containers at LANL are the barrier preventing release of radioactive material to the workers, public, and environment during the storage period of the material. Annual surveillance activities can only provide coverage on a handful of containers. There is a significant need for surveillance tools to identify potential issues and precursors to containment failure that can be used during opportunistic inspections and, more generally, outside of annual surveillance activities. In this report we provide details on the advancement of our proposed embodiment that combines an automation system for taking pictures and a high-accuracy machine learning-driven object detection software. We further showcase the improvements on the software side with progress on extracting unique identification features and advances in detecting damage. The current state of the system captures subject matter expert training and a space-conscious design whose implementation is envisioned in the near future.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

DOE OSTI2022

Research and Test Reactor Fuels

PRO-RR is the research reactor focused program element of the broader Proliferation Resistance Optimization program (PRO-X) under the National Nuclear Safety Administration (NNSA) in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). PRO-X provides a framework for integrating proliferation resistance in nuclear system designs to minimize weapons usable nuclear materials (WUNM) production and diversion pathways while optimizing systems performance for peaceful use missions. PRO-RR applies the PRO-X mission objectives to research reactor system design. This document serves as one of the foundational documents for the PRO-RR-Fuel System Design technical team by documenting current research reactor fuels usage. The PRO-RR-Fuel System Design technical team consists of subject matter experts from Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) and Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL). In order to determine the preferred fuel of use in upcoming research and test reactors to optimize proliferation resistance, performance, and safety, it is useful to assess the fuels that have been used in the past, or are currently in use. This report reviews the historical and current fuels used in research and test reactors to inform future fuel selection. Chapter 2 discusses the low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuels currently in use in terms of thermal power level and utilization of the reactor. Chapter 3 summarizes the fabrication processes for common fuel types. Chapter 4 discusses in detail the fuel types in use in research and test reactors. A review of the cladding types in use is presented in Chapter 5, and a historical review of research and test reactor fuel fabricators is presented in Chapter 6. The data collection strategy used the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) research reactor database [1] as a starting point. Information on the fuel used was gathered on research reactors (other than critical assemblies) that were listed as operational, planned, or in temporary shutdown in the IAEA database. Data on the fuel type, geometry, enrichment, uranium loading, cladding type, and fabricator were collected for each of the reactors available in the public domain. Sources of data included conference papers, journal articles, and facility and fabricator websites. Data on research reactors operating on LEU fuels are presented in Appendix A, while Appendix B presents data collected on all reactors at the time of publication of this report. Appendix C presents data collected on reactors that were part of the M3 research and test reactor conversion program.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Radiological Considerations Supporting the American Medical Isotope Producer Niowave

This report provides a summary of work performed by Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) during FY22 in support of Niowave, an American Medical Isotope Production (AMIP) facility. SRNL served in a technical support role, funded by NA-231, supporting Niowave in the beginning of non radiological functional testing of their airport facility in FY22. Through this agreement, SRNL provides Niowave access to subject matter experts (SMEs) for questions that may arise during the drafting of engineering plans, facility policies, and/or response procedures. This report summarizes discussions between SRNL and Niowave about guidance concerning issues with the floor of the hot cells, dispersible removable contamination (beta emitting fission product), hot cell operation specifically utilization of cameras or mirrors, and the process for removing contaminated waste from the hot cell. Lessons learned and other various resources provided to Niowave by SRNL during FY22 are referenced in this report. This work was funded through NNSA’s Office of Material Management and Minimization, Conversion Office (NA-231).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Oak Ridge National Laboratory FY 2023 Site Sustainability Plan With FY 2022 Performance Data

At the close of each fiscal year, the US Department of Energy (DOE) Sustainability Performance Division (SPD) issues guidance documents and technical resource aids/tools necessary for DOE sites and national laboratories to complete sustainability reporting requirements. SPD is part of the DOE Office of Asset Management. As required by DOE Order 436.1, Departmental Sustainability, “each site will develop and commit to an annual Site Sustainability Plan (SSP) that identifies its respective contribution toward meeting the DOE’s sustainability goals.” SPD collects and compiles information reported by each site to develop an agency-wide Sustainability Report and Implementation Plan, which is used to report DOE sustainability progress to the federal government as required by all major federal agencies. DOE launched a formal Sustainability Office and annual SSP process in 2011. Each year, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), in concert with the Office of Science (SC), provides the resources essential to fulfill its commitment to deliver a complete and accurate SSP report and quality performance data for entry into the DOE Sustainability Dashboard as managed by SPD. The performance data entered by each DOE site are then combined to disclose the progress of each DOE Program Office and are further combined to show comprehensive progress for the agency. The Office of Asset Management provides assistance to program offices in sustaining their missions, freeing up resources by reducing waste, avoiding excess expenditure on utilities, maximizing productivity, and improving the efficiency of facilities and processes. By focusing on mission needs, programs and associated DOE sites can help the agency meet its sustainability goals, as outlined in federal statutory and regulatory requirements. In FY 2022, the SSP guidance was updated to capture requirements from Executive Order (EO) 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, the Energy Act of 2020 (EAct 20), actions outlined in DOE’s Climate Adaptation & Resilience Plan and Sustainability Plan, and EO 14057, Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability. Updates in SSP guidance help to minimize and streamline reporting while simultaneously addressing updated federal requirements. Per DOE, each SSP report should provide an overview of the site’s planned actions, as well as an overview of efforts and accomplishments during the reporting period. SPD collects and compiles information reported by each site to develop DOE’s Annual Sustainability Report, Climate Adaptation & Resilience Plan, and Annual Energy Management Report to Congress. The agency goal has been to lower the reporting burden for sites and increase and improve the consistency of information available to decision makers, allowing them to better identify projects and potential for increased efficiency, as well as to reduce waste, lower emissions, and enhance operational resilience. Sites may elect to produce a more polished publication for their leadership and stakeholders, but this step is no longer required. The ORNL SSP narrative report (this document) and the reporting of DOE SPD Sustainability Dashboard performance data is a collaborative effort of approximately 30 subject matter experts (SMEs) from ORNL facility management and research divisions. Annually, these associates come together to provide a report that can be used by DOE to demonstrate continued agency progress in energy efficiency and sustainable federal operations.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Observations and Lessons Learned From Installing Residential Roofing-Integrated Photovoltaics

Building-sited solar photovoltaics (PV) could play a key role in decarbonizing the building sector either through racked and mounted PV or through Building-integrated PV (BIPV). BIPV is installed into the building envelope itself, with solar cells and/or modules forming the outer layer of a building structure, thus transforming a single-purpose structure into one that serves the dual purposes of the building envelope and electricity. BIPV can be applied to building roofs, facades, awnings, pergolas, windows, skylights, balustrades, and other external surfaces. Given BIPV products vary widely, the focus of this research is residential roofing integrated PV (RIPV), where solar is incorporated into or otherwise replaces the roofing material. Previous research suggests that residential RIPV could reduce customer acquisition, labor, supply chain, and equipment costs. These products have yet to realize these cost savings and deployment remains significantly less than conventional rooftop PV as a relative share of the addressable market in the US. One potential barrier to broader residential roofing integrated PV deployment may be higher costs relative to conventional rooftop PV, primarily because the design and installation of these products is still evolving. Here, we explore residential RIPV cost-reduction opportunities by analyzing installation processes. Our study documents residential RIPV installations at 2 reroofing sites and the equivalent of 9 new construction sites in California through a methodology known as time and motion study. We also conducted interviews with subject-matter experts to identify barriers and solutions to maximize these products' market penetration. Our time and motion study breaks the RIPV installation process into four steps: 1) staging, unloading, and roof preparation; 2) fire resistant underlayment(s) (synthetic material laid between roof shingles and roof deck); 3) flashings and PV installation; and 4) wiring and monitoring. We measure the time required for each step in terms of worker-hours, representing an hour of labor from a single worker. We further normalize process time by dividing worker-hours by kilowatt (kW) of system capacity. The most time-intensive step was flashings and PV installation, taking around 2.4 worker-hours per kW on average and accounting for around 60% of the process time for an average installation. The total installation process took on average about 6.4 and 3.5 worker-hours per kW at the reroofing sites and new construction sites, respectively. For comparison, a previous time and motion study documented a time of 6.9 worker-hours per kW for conventional rooftop PV. The shorter RIPV installation times are consistent with previous studies suggesting that RIPV could be installed faster than conventional rooftop PV. The time and motion results and feedback from interviewees provide insights into potential residential RIPV cost reduction opportunities. Several interviewees suggested that these products would be more efficient if PV installation was more fully integrated into the roofing/construction industries, which currently use separate supply chains and skillsets. Further integration could reduce supply chain delays and labor force redundancies. Future research could explore specific ways to integrate these industries to help realize the cost savings potential of RIPV.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

Baseline Fuel Fabrication Facility

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Volume 6: Experiment Facility Spectrum Tailoring (HFIR Futures – Enhanced Capabilities Series)

In-core irradiation experiment research, such as materials and fuels irradiation research and radioisotope production, is one of the primary missions of Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL) versatile High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR). In support of the HFIR-Sustaining and Enhancing Neutron Science (SENSe) Initiative, a technically diverse group of ORNL irradiation research subject matter experts formed the Spectrum Tailoring Working Group, with the goal of developing a compendium of experiment facility concepts to enhance irradiation experiment conditions via neutron spectrum tailoring capabilities. The purpose of this report is to document the concepts developed in FY22 and the associated scientific justifications, identify potential facility sponsors, and estimate costs and schedules for each concept. This report documents the efforts performed in FY22, which may continue in FY23 or later pending the direction of the HFIR-SENSe Initiative and the interested sponsors.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Next Generation Integrated PV Products Cost and Workflow Analysis (Final Report)

Residential photovoltaic (PV) costs have fallen consistently for over a decade (Ardani et al. 2018). DOE has subsequently developed a new residential PV cost target for 2030 of $0.05/kilowatt hour (SETO 2023). Ardani et al. (2018) conclude that integrated roofing and PV (RIPV) products may be key to achieving the residential target for both new construction and retrofit residential PV. In RIPV, the PV product is incorporated into or replaces the roofing material. RIPV systems can use conventional crystalline or thin-film technologies, may be aesthetically attractive alternatives to traditional racked and mounted PV systems, and may increase building property values (Cook et al. 2023). These products also have the potential to provide customer acquisition, labor, and equipment cost savings over traditional, racked and mounted residential rooftop PV and several companies have recently introduced integrated roofing and PV (RIPV) products (Cook et al. 2023). In 2022, Tesla was the market leader, representing 94% of RIPV capacity installed in 2022 through its Solar Roof offering, while GAF Energy and its Timberline Solar product was second capturing 3% (Feldman et al. 2023). In this project, NREL analyzed three research questions: (1) How do current RIPV products compare to racked and mounted PV in terms of costs, install times and processes? (2) How are RIPV products installed and are there opportunities for cost savings? (3) What are the key barriers to expanding market opportunities for integrating solar and roofing products? In this project, we explored residential RIPV cost reduction opportunities by analyzing installation processes. Our study documented residential RIPV installations at two reroofing sites (20.52 kilowatts) and the equivalent of nine new construction sites (71.75 kW) in California through a methodology known as time and motion study. We also conducted 15 interviews with subject-matter experts to identify barriers and solutions to maximize these products' market penetration.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗