Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “building data”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Educational Consortium for Energy-related Data Science & Computation in Building Engineering Programs

The project spearheaded by Pennsylvania State University aims to address the growing need for integrating energy-focused computation and data science into building engineering education. As the demand for energy-efficient building designs and operations increases, the educational sector must adapt to equip future engineers with the necessary skills. This initiative responds to this need by developing a consortium that unites multiple institutions to enhance curriculum development, dataset curation, and resource sharing, thereby ensuring students are well-prepared for the evolving energy sector. The primary goal of the project is to establish a consortium that will develop and disseminate educational materials and training programs focused on energy-related data science and computation. Key accomplishments include the creation of a beta website for resource sharing, the development of training programs and standalone modules, and the curation of datasets accessible to the public. This effort will culminate in a curriculum that incorporates advanced modeling technologies and data science skills into building engineering programs.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS2015

Earth Science Data Fusion with Event Building Approach

Objectives of the NASA Information And Data System (NAIADS) project are to develop a prototype of a conceptually new middleware framework to modernize and significantly improve efficiency of the Earth Science data fusion, big data processing and analytics. The key components of the NAIADS include: Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) multi-lingual framework, multi-sensor coincident data Predictor, fast into-memory data Staging, multi-sensor data-Event Builder, complete data-Event streaming (a work flow with minimized IO), on-line data processing control and analytics services. The NAIADS project is leveraging CLARA framework, developed in Jefferson Lab, and integrated with the ZeroMQ messaging library. The science services are prototyped and incorporated into the system. Merging the SCIAMACHY Level-1 observations and MODIS/Terra Level-2 (Clouds and Aerosols) data products, and ECMWF re- analysis will be used for NAIADS demonstration and performance tests in compute Cloud and Cluster environments.

Lukashin, C.↗
DOE OSTI2026

Calibration of urban building energy model using smart meter data for district peak load prediction

Urban building energy modeling (UBEM) is a powerful approach to assessing baseline building energy performance and retrofits with new technologies across building stocks in cities. However, the accuracy of UBEM is often constrained by the limited availability of reliable data about building characteristics and operations, such as envelope efficiency levels, HVAC system performance, and end-use load patterns. Existing research has performed UBEM calibration using annual or monthly energy consumption data, which falls short when higher-resolution time series applications are needed, such as peak load prediction for utility operation planning. This study presents a new framework for calibrating building energy models at urban scale using smart meter data, targeting the accurate prediction of summer peak electricity loads to support robust grid planning. The framework first integrates various data sources to enhance baseline input assumptions for building models, and then calibrates the baseline models through a pattern-matching approach. A case study using CityBES and two years of AMI data from over 9000 residential customers in Portland, Oregon, demonstrated the workflow and its effectiveness. The calibrated models achieved a daily peak load mean absolute percentage error of 2.6 % during the heatwave in the calibration year, and 2.0 % in the validation year using another year of AMI data. Using the calibrated models, we analyzed the demand flexibility potential of the district building stock as an application of UBEM calibration. The findings affirm the appropriate use of UBEM for peak electric load forecasting and demand side management at the utility distribution system level.

AMI data↗
DOE OSTI2022

Building Analytics Tool Deployment at Scale: Benefits, Costs, and Deployment Practices

Buildings are becoming more data-rich. Building analytics tools, including energy information systems (EIS) and fault detection and diagnostic (FDD) tools, have emerged to enable building operators to translate large amounts of time-series data into actionable findings to achieve energy and non-energy benefits. To expedite data analytics adoption and facilitate technology innovation, building owners, technology developers, and researchers need reliable cost–benefit data and evidence-based guidance on deployment practices. This paper fulfills these needs with the energy use and survey data from a wide-ranging research and industry partnership program that covers thousands of buildings installed with analytics tools. The paper indicates that after two years of implementation, organizations using FDD tools and EIS tools achieved 9% and 3% median annual energy savings, respectively. The median base cost and annual recurring cost for FDD are USD 0.65 per square meter (m2) (USD 0.06 per square foot [ft2]) and USD 0.22 per m2 (USD 0.02 per ft2), and are USD 0.11 per m2 (USD 0.01 per ft2) and USD 0.11 per m2 (USD 0.01 per ft2) for EIS. The common metrics and analyses that are used in the tools to support the discovery of energy efficiency measures are summarized in detail. Two best practice examples identified to maximize the benefits of tool implementation are also presented. Opportunities to advance the state of technology include simplified data integration and management, and more efficient processes for acting on analytics outputs. Compared with previous efforts in the literature, the findings presented in this paper demonstrate the effectiveness of building analytics tools with the largest known dataset.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Artificial Intelligence for Enhancing Multiscale Analysis: Buildings Focus

This project aims to develop multi-scale building energy data, potentially improving the representation of the U.S. buildings sector in GCAM-USA, an U.S.-focused human-energy-Earth systems model. Existing building energy datasets are typically limited to national or regional levels, which constrains the ability of models to capture fine-scale human-energy-Earth systems interactions and reduces their relevance for decision-making on issues such as energy security, resilience, and energy planning. By leveraging AI and advanced data integration methods, this work fuses multiple existing datasets to enhance the physical and geographic representation of both residential and commercial building energy use. So far, progress includes processing residential building data, designing the data structure for commercial buildings, and testing AI approaches for integrating datasets and addressing spatial-temporal gaps. This effort can not only advances GCAM-USA’s capability in modeling the buildings sector but also supports broader DOE missions, such as developing digital testbeds, enhancing grid resilience analysis, and improving building–energy system modeling at decision-relevant scales.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Machine Learning for Automated Extraction of Building Geometry

As data science comes to buildings, the promise of using machine learning and novel sources of data has received much attention. Advances in machine learning and computer vision algorithms, combined with increased access to unstructured data (e.g., images and text), have created an opportunity for automated extraction of building characteristics – cost-effectively, and at scale. Acquisition of features such as footprint are time consuming and costly to acquire with today’s manual methods, but can be streamlined through intelligent software-based solutions applied to satellite images. When combined with aerial RGB and thermal images, full 3D geometries and thermal maps can be constructed to determine additional characteristics such as window to wall ratio, height, number of stories and envelope thermal characteristics. In this paper we present three contributions to accelerate these high potential opportunities: (1) a methodical analysis of how these features can be integrated into today’s simulation and data driven software tools to enhance efficiency measure identification and owner/operator decision making; (2) development and accuracy testing of open source deep neural network methods to extract building footprints from satellite imagery, including the curation and application of openly available GIS datasets for training and continued development by others; and (3) an open framework for drone-based image capture and creation of 3D building geometries. This work represents an important bridge between high-level studies that span diverse application areas and those that detail point solutions yet cannot be easily replicated or extended.

Touzani, Samir↗
DOE OSTI2022

PV Window Building Study

Data associated with the paper “Photovoltaic Windows to Offset the Intensive Energy and Carbon Footprints of Highly Glazed Buildings” by Vincent M. Wheeler, Janghyun Kim, Tom Daligault, Bryan Rosales, Chaiwat Engtrakul, Robert C. Tenent, and Lance M. Wheeler

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2020

City and County Commercial Building Inventories

The Commercial Building Inventories provide modeled data on commercial building type, vintage, and area for each U.S. city and county. Please note this data is modeled and more precise data may be available through county assessors or other sources. Commercial building stock data is estimated using CoStar Realty Information, Inc. building stock data. This data is part of a suite of state and local energy profile data available at the "State and Local Energy Profile Data Suite" link below and builds on Cities-LEAP energy modeling, available at the "EERE Cities-LEAP Page" link below. Examples of how to use the data to inform energy planning can be found at the "Example Uses" link below.

Array↗
DOE OSTI2024

From RNNs to Foundation Models: An Empirical Study on Commercial Building Energy Consumption

Accurate short-term energy consumption forecasting for commercial buildings is crucial for smart grid operations. While smart meters and deep learning models enable forecasting using past data from multiple buildings, data heterogeneity from diverse buildings can reduce model performance. The impact of increasing dataset heterogeneity in time series forecasting, while keeping size and model constant, is understudied. We tackle this issue using the ComStock dataset, which provides synthetic energy consumption data for U.S. commercial buildings. Two curated subsets, identical in size and region but differing in building type diversity, are used to assess the performance of various time series forecasting models, including finetuned open-source foundation models (FMs). The results show that dataset heterogeneity and model architecture have a greater impact on post-training forecasting performance than the parameter count. Moreover, despite the higher computational cost, finetuned FMs demonstrate competitive performance compared to base models trained from scratch.

commercial buildings↗
DOE OSTI2024

Inferring building height from footprint morphology data

As cities continue to grow globally, characterizing the built environment is essential to understanding human populations, projecting energy usage, monitoring urban heat island impacts, preventing environmental degradation, and planning for urban development. Buildings are a key component of the built environment and there is currently a lack of data on building height at the global level. Current methodologies for developing building height models that utilize remote sensing are limited in scale due to the high cost of data acquisition. Other approaches that leverage 2D features are restricted based on the volume of ancillary data necessary to infer height. Here, we find, through a series of experiments covering 74.55 million buildings from the United States, France, and Germany, it is possible, with 95% accuracy, to infer building height within 3 m of the true height using footprint morphology data. Our results show that leveraging individual building footprints can lead to accurate building height predictions while not requiring ancillary data, thus making this method applicable wherever building footprints are available. The finding that it is possible to infer building height from footprint data alone provides researchers a new method to leverage in relation to various applications.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Aggregation and data driven identification of building thermal dynamic model and unmeasured disturbance

An aggregate model is a single-zone equivalent of a multi-zone building, and is useful for many purposes, including model based control of large heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment. This paper deals with the problem of simultaneously identifying an aggregate thermal dynamic model and unknown disturbances from input–output data of multi-zone buildings. The unknown disturbance is a key challenge since it is not measurable but non-negligible. In this paper, we first present a principled method to aggregate a multi-zone building model into a single zone model, and show the aggregation is not as trivial as it has been assumed in the prior art. We then provide a method to identify the parameters of the model and the unknown disturbance for this aggregate (single-zone) model. Finally, we test our proposed identification algorithm to data collected from a multi-zone building testbed in Oak Ridge National Laboratory. A key insight provided by the aggregation method allows us to recognize under what conditions the estimation of the disturbance signal will be necessarily poor and uncertain, even in the case of a specially designed test in which the disturbances affecting each zone are known (as the case of our experimental testbed). This insight is used to provide a heuristic that can be used to assess when the identification results are likely to have high or low accuracy.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
NASA NTRS1991

Data simulation for the Lightning Imaging Sensor (LIS)

This project aims to build a data analysis system that will utilize existing video tape scenes of lightning as viewed from space. The resultant data will be used for the design and development of the Lightning Imaging Sensor (LIS) software and algorithm analysis. The desire for statistically significant metrics implies that a large data set needs to be analyzed. Before 1990 the quality and quantity of video was insufficient to build a usable data set. At this point in time, there is usable data from missions STS-34, STS-32, STS-31, STS-41, STS-37, and STS-39. During the summer of 1990, a manual analysis system was developed to demonstrate that the video analysis is feasible and to identify techniques to deduce information that was not directly available. Because the closed circuit television system used on the space shuttle was intended for documentary TV, the current value of the camera focal length and pointing orientation, which are needed for photoanalysis, are not included in the system data. A large effort was needed to discover ancillary data sources as well as develop indirect methods to estimate the necessary parameters. Any data system coping with full motion video faces an enormous bottleneck produced by the large data production rate and the need to move and store the digitized images. The manual system bypassed the video digitizing bottleneck by using a genlock to superimpose pixel coordinates on full motion video. Because the data set had to be obtained point by point by a human operating a computer mouse, the data output rate was small. The loan and subsequent acquisition of a Abekas digital frame store with a real time digitizer moved the bottleneck from data acquisition to a problem of data transfer and storage. The semi-automated analysis procedure was developed using existing equipment and is described. A fully automated system is described in the hope that the components may come on the market at reasonable prices in the next few years.

Boeck, William L.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Empirical validation of building energy simulation model input parameter for multizone commercial building during the cooling season

This paper presents a critical advancement in Building Energy Modeling (BEM) through an empirical validation approach using a high-quality dataset from a multizone commercial office building in Oak Ridge, TN, USA. BEM is widely utilized in diverse construction applications, but its effectiveness relies on the accuracy of its predictions. The study focuses on empirical validation of input parameters in BEM, including building envelope data, infiltration modeling, and rooftop unit system performance curves. The validation of simulation input parameters leads to substantial improvements in the accuracy of simulation results. Notable both NMBE and cv (RMSE) values are reduced by 0.5 % for indoor air temperature and 17 % for indoor air relative humidity compared to the previous model. At the system level, both NMBE and cv (RMSE) values are reduced by 2 % for fan energy consumption and 4 % for cooling energy consumption, compared to the previous model. A literature review highlights a significant gap in empirical validation studies, which predominantly concentrate on either component-level or whole building validation. Furthermore, many studies employ simplified setups that may not faithfully represent the complexities of multizone commercial buildings. This paper distinguishes itself by emphasizing the critical importance of component-level input parameter validation. It underlines the need to validate data related to building envelope components and HVAC system performance curves, resulting in more accurate simulation outcomes. In conclusion, the utilization of actual multizone commercial building data enhances the study's practical relevance. In summary, this research underscores the pivotal role of input parameter validation in enhancing the accuracy and reliability of BEM.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

BETTER Together

The Standard Energy Efficiency Data (SEED) and Building Efficiency Targeting Tool for Energy Retrofits (BETTER) platforms are both developed by the Department of Energy and work better together. SEED is a database to manage building characteristics and performance data from a variety of sources. BETTER provides simple energy efficiency measure analyses based on high level data about the building or portfolio of buildings. A demonstration of each platform and their integration will be provided. The inputs for BETTER are building type, floor area, location, utility data, and whether PV shall be included in the analysis. The BETTER analysis can be manually set up through the web application or data can be uploaded with a BuildingSync XML file either directly or through the API. SEED can be the source of this data and the data can be sent to BETTER through the SEED application after the BETTER API token has been entered. The benefit of utilizing SEED is that it has connections to many other sources of data such as ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager, Audit Template, and Salesforce. Therefore, it is likely that a user of SEED will already have the required inputs for BETTER in SEED already and can create BETTER analyses across their whole portfolio in a couple mouse clicks. This is a major time savings and enables decision makers an easy path to identify buildings that should undergo more detailed audits or retrofit pathways.

ASHRAE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Considerations for Distributed Edge Data Centers and Use of Building Loads to Support Large Interconnections

The rapid expansion of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning is driving unprecedented electricity demand from data centers. It is predicted that by 2030, 90% of AI workloads will be inference-based, requiring interconnection of multiple low-latency edge data centers (<20 MW) sited closer to end users - often on already constrained distribution feeders. Although individually small, these loads can aggregate to large loads per feeder, straining infrastructure, creating multi-year interconnection delays, and driving up customer costs. This paper proposes a data center-focused grid-integration framework that combines feeder hosting capacity analysis with building energy efficiency, building load flexibility, and waste heat reuse to expand effective feeder and substation headroom. Such approaches can reduce interconnection delays, lower costs for ratepayers, and accelerate AI-ready infrastructure deployment.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗