Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Projects”

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 1,639 records · Page 91
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) 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.

CERF↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected U.S. Western Interconnection Grid Stress Dataset

This dataset provides projected grid stress and reliability results (including all model inputs and outputs from GO WEST and TEP) for Integrated Multisector, Multiscale Modeling (IM3) Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the U.S. Western Interconnection through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States from a set of Thermodynamic Global Warming (TGW) simulations. These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 GO WEST is an open-source power grid modeling framework for the U.S. Western Interconnection, which allows users to tailor the model depending on their research study and science questions. It covers 28 balancing authorities (BAs) and 12 states in U.S. Western Interconnection. GO WEST allows users to select different number of nodes and come up with a simplified network by utilizing 10,000 nodal topology of the U.S. Western Interconnection (ACTIVSg10k). Users can select different number of nodes, mathematical formulations (linear programming vs. mixed-integer linear programming), transmission line limit scaling factors, and hurdle rate scaling factors. GO WEST offers a unit commitment and economic dispatch (UC/ED) module to simulate grid operations on an hourly scale. In this sense, users can calibrate and validate their model versions by comparing model outputs to historical datasets. TEP is an open-source transmission capacity expansion model, built on the GO WEST framework. It utilizes linear programming to optimize transmission capacity addition investment on existing lines within the GO WEST framework. The TEP model only increases the thermal capacity of existing transmission lines and does not add new lines to the system, which leaves the topology preserved. In order to use TEP model, users need to create scenarios with the GO WEST framework. Please refer to README file for a detailed description of the dataset including individual files and references.

Capacity Expansion Model↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License 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 (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2023

High-resolution (30-m) urban land cover projections for Los Angeles California Urban Area: 2010 to 2100 under SSP3 and SSP5 [Updated simulations based on population-driven urban intensity transitions]

These data (v3) are updated from previous versions (1 and 2) in that they include consider the effects of population on transitions in urban land intensity. This leads to more reasonable differences in urban land projections under variant SSPs. For the present dataset, both SSP3 and SSP5 are provided. These data represent simulations of future land use and land cover (LULCC) for Los Angeles urban area (U.S. Census Bureau defined area) as raster tiff images at a 30-m pixel resolution and at decadal time steps from 2010 to 2100. LULCC classes in this product follow the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) classification. NLCD 21-24 correspond to open developed, low developed, medium developed, and high developed urban land classes, respectively. Only urban land cover classes (NLCD class 21, 22, 23, and 24) are dynamic over time; however, all NLCD classes are included in the final product. Therefore, NLCD classes that do not convert to an urban class will be similar to year 2000. The products were developed using a hybridized statistical and cellular automata approach. Linear mixed models (LMMs) were used to estimate future urban land budgets based on 1-km urban land fraction projections from Gao and Pesaresi (2021), whereas separate generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) were used to estimate shifts in urban land intensities based on retrospective shifts in NLCD urban class intensities over a 20- year period. Based on urban land allocations from the statistical models, a cellular-automata and downscaling routine was used to simulate dynamic urban land expansion at a 30-m resolution based on suitability criteria. Scenarios of future urban landcover change projections include variant solutions for the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5 (SSP5) and SSP 3 based on different population assumptions, different land use intensification assumptions, variable land zoning constraints, and iterative adjustments to correct for over allocation of urban expansion across decadal time periods from 2010 to 2100. This results in 320 raster products.

Land↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License 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 (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

High-Resolution ESM Projections for Energy Applications Over the CONUS

Assessing energy resources under future scenarios requires high-resolution meteorological information that is physically consistent and suitable for regional-scale analysis. While Earth system model (ESM) projections provide valuable large-scale information, their coarse resolution and systematic biases limit direct applicability for energy system modeling and planning. In this study, we develop a high-resolution dynamical downscaling framework based on the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model to translate global-scale ESM data into energy-relevant regional projections over the contiguous United States (CONUS). The framework identifies an optimized WRF configuration through numerical experiments and evaluates raw and bias-corrected ESM initial and boundary conditions, with soil moisture (SM) and soil temperature (ST) bias correction implemented as an integral part of the bias-corrected ESM forcing to improve land-atmosphere coupling prior to WRF dynamical downscaling. Using an optimized WRF configuration at 4-km resolution, we show that raw ESM forcing introduces systematic dry and cold soil biases that propagate into pronounced warm biases in near-surface air temperature and positive biases in solar irradiance, particularly during summer. Applying bias-corrected atmospheric forcing together with bias-corrected SM and ST substantially reduces these downstream biases and improves the surface energy balance and near-surface atmospheric fields. These results demonstrate that bias-aware treatment of initial conditions is critical for producing high-resolution downscaled projections suitable for energy system modeling and planning applications.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

E2C Cohorts: Implementation Funding Projects - Impact Summary [Slides]

From August 2024 to October 2025, 11 Clean Cities and Communities coalitions supported projects to advance transportation goals by gathering input from local stakeholders, and using the resulting insights to develop new plans and programs for local partners. This effort leveraged information and best practices shared during the 2024 E2C Cohort on Integrating Community Priorities into Electric Vehicle Plans and Projects. These coalitions supported partners across the country to develop plans for electric vehicle integration through one-on-one technical assistance and tailored local engagement. This deck summarizes the individual projects completed by coalitions, and the overall reach and impact of all of this program.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Solar Technology Acceleration Center (SolarTAC): Solar Resource & Meteorological Assessment Project (SOLRMAP)

Located in Colorado, near Denver International Airport, Solar Technology Acceleration Center (SolarTAC) is a private, member-based, 74-acre outdoor facility where the solar industry tests, validates, and demonstrates advanced solar technologies. SolarTAC was launched in 2008 by a public-private consortium, including Midwest Research Institute (MRI). As a supporting member of SolarTAC, the U.S. Department of Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has established a high quality solar and meteorological measurement station at this location. This Solar Resource and Meteorological Assessment Project (SOLRMAP) provides high quality measurements to support deployment of power projects in the United States. The no-funds-exchanged collaboration brings NREL solar resource assessment expertise together with industry needs for measurements. The end result is high quality data sets to support the financing, design, and monitoring of large scale solar powered projects for industry in addition to research-quality data for NREL model development. NREL provides consultation for instrumentation and station deployment, along with instrument calibrations, data acquisition, quality assessment, data distribution, and summary reports. Industry participants provide equipment, infrastructure, and station maintenance.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2018

Community Solar Project Database

This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of Spring 2018. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the souces e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to Eric O'Shaughnessy at eric.oshaughnessy@nlr.gov.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2019

DEPRECATED - Sharing the Sun Community Solar Project Data (June 2019)

This data set is no longer current – The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/244 This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of June 2019. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the souces e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to the contact(s) located on the current data set page linked at the top.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

DEPRECATED - Sharing the Sun Community Solar Project Data (May 2020)

This data set is no longer current - The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/244 This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of May 2020. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to the contact(s) located on the current data set page linked at the top.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

DEPRECATED - Sharing the Sun Community Solar Project Data (June 2020)

This data set is no longer current – The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/244 This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of June 2020. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to the contact(s) located on the current data set page linked at the top.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

DEPRECATED - Sharing the Sun Community Solar Project Data (December 2021)

This data set is no longer current – The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/244 This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of Dec 2021. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to the contact(s) located on the current data set page linked at the top.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

DEPRECATED - Sharing the Sun Community Solar Project Data (June 2022)

This data set is no longer current – The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/244 This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of June 2022. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to the contact(s) located on the current data set page linked at the top.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Searching for Clues for a Matter Dominated Universe in Liquid Argon Time Projection Chambers

Liquid Argon Time Projection Chambers (LArTPCs) represent one of the most widely utilized neutrino detection techniques in neutrino experiments, for instance, in the Short Baseline Neutrino (SBN) program and the future large-scale LArTPC: Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE). The high-end technique, facilitating excellent spatial and calorimetric reconstruction resolution, also enables testing exotic Beyond Standard Model (BSM) theories, such as baryon number violation (BNV) processes (e.g., proton-decay, neutron-antineutron oscillation). At the same time, Machine Learning (ML) techniques have demonstrated their ubiquitous use in recent decades; ML techniques have also become some of the most powerful tools in high-energy physics (HEP) analyses. Furthermore, the development of algorithms to cater to the needs of problems in HEP (i.e., triggering, reconstruction, improving sensitivity, etc.) has also become an active area of research. By developing a combined approach using Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and Boosted Decision Tree (BDT) techniques, the sensitivity of neutron-antineutron oscillation in DUNE is evaluated for a projected exposure of 400kton·years. Additionally, to meet the triggering requirement to select such rare events in DUNE, such a search is only supported with highly efficient self-triggering algorithms. An ML-based self-triggering scheme for large-scale LArTPCs, such as DUNE, is also developed with the intention of implementation on field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs). The ML-based approach for searching for neutron-antineutron oscillation can be demonstrated and validated on the current LArTPC MicroBooNE. The analysis in MicroBooNE represents the first-ever search for neutron-antineutron oscillation in a LArTPC. DUNE's projected 90% C.L. sensitivity to the neutron antineutron oscillation lifetime is 6.45×10³² years, assuming 1.327×10³⁵ neutron·years, equivalent to 10 years of DUNE far detector exposure (400kton·years). For MicroBooNE, assuming 372 seconds of exposure (equivalent to 3.13×10³⁶ neutron·years), the 90% C.L. lifetime sensitivity is found at 3.07×10²⁵ yrs, after accounting for Monte-Carlo statistical uncertainty and systematic uncertainty from detector effects.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
NASA NTRS1962

NASA PROJECT NAMES- A LISTING OF NAMES AND CODE WORDS ASSOCIATED WITH NASA PROGRAMS

This pamphlet lists those principal NASA projects that have been assigned special names or code designations. It includes rockets, launch vehicles, and rocket engines used in the past as well as those currently under development. Joint undertakings with other agencies are included, as are major rockets and launch vehicles used by NASA but developed by the Department of Defense. Projects are listed alphabetically by their code names with a short description which includes the applicable rocket engine or launch vehicle. The NASA facility having a prime responsibility for a project is listed as a Cognizant Center

NASA↗