SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
This technical brief summarizes approaches to allocating costs of transmission facilities between generators and loads, jurisdictions, and customer classes, and based on project drivers. The brief also discusses planning approaches, stakeholder engagement, considerations for using counterfactuals for cost allocation, and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and court decisions on cost allocation proposals.
Expanding electric transmission can facilitate generator interconnection and improve grid reliability. Assigning costs for new transmission infrastructure is highly contentious because these costs can have a direct impact on energy prices and ratepayer bills. In this report, we evaluate what factors influence successful transmission cost allocation agreements. Through a review of legal disputes, existing cost allocation practices, and regional case studies, we identify potential strategies to minimize cost allocation disputes for future projects. The report also highlights the processes by which regions can update their cost allocation methods. While we do not consider cost allocation methods currently under development for compliance with FERC Order 1920, the trends and lessons learned identified in this report can inform discussions on effective cost allocation methods to reduce barriers for transmission development.
Load growth in the United States is rapidly increasing: load from data centers alone has tripled over the past decade, and this growth is forecasted to continue accelerating. These and other large electric loads (LELs) promise economic benefits at the state and local level, but their deployment has also led to increasing concerns about grid impacts and potential cost shifts onto other ratepayers. Legislators, regulators, and other stakeholders are increasingly proposing and enacting policies in effort to balance these and other considerations. This white paper reviews state-level legislation, selected utility rate cases, and relevant federal orders in an effort to describe and categorize relevant trends in policies related to LEL cost allocation, interconnection, and deployment. Policy categories identified through this review include tax incentives, rate actions, and requirements related to interconnection, permitting, and reporting. By offering a taxonomy of policies, this white paper aims to offer a resource to policymakers and other stakeholders navigating this transformative moment for the grid.
The exponential growth of electronic waste (e-waste) poses critical challenges for sustainable reverse logistics and transportation network optimization. This study develops a dual-channel transportation framework for e-waste logistics that integrates dynamic freight pricing, cost allocation mechanisms, and game-theoretic coordination. The model captures interactions between centralized hubs and distributed processing networks, accounting for freight rate elasticity, volume allocation, and capacity constraints. Using Stackelberg game theory and cost-sharing strategies, the framework optimizes transportation efficiency and profit distribution across logistics channels. Numerical simulations show that the dual-channel structure increases centralized hub profit by 226.8% compared to baseline single-channel operations, while boosting total transported volume by 1.2% and nearly doubling freight collector profit under cost-sharing. Scenario analyses across regional infrastructures reveal that network density, policy incentives, and logistics costs shape routing efficiency and profit allocation. These findings suggest that coordinated strategies combining dynamic pricing, targeted infrastructure investment, and strategic cost allocation are needed to design efficient, resilient, and regionally adaptable e-waste transportation systems.
Contractor performance on cost type contracts evaluated by comparing actual and allocated costs, using NASA PERT facilities
Existing regulatory approaches to DER lack the precision and granularity necessary to ensure that DER can continue to scale in a cost-effective manner that is aligned with the public interest. To address this need, with the support of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Electricity, Berkeley Lab and Current Energy Group developed an illustrative regulatory framework. By adopting a technology-neutral and modular approach, the framework enables flexibility and scalability for DER providers, utilities, and regulators. Clear price signals and incentives encourage the provision of valuable grid services, while equitable cost allocation promotes efficient use of distribution capacity and interconnection resources. This approach mirrors traditional ratemaking principles for importing customers and positions DERs as integral components of a dynamic and cost-effective energy future.
Climate-induced extreme weather conditions make electricity infrastructure more vulnerable. They increase the risk of power-line-ignited wildfires which can, in turn, jeopardize electric power delivery. Here, leveraging machine learning, we show that lower-income communities in California not only have lower fractions of power distribution lines undergrounded, but overhead lines and poles in their neighbourhoods are also more vulnerable to wildfires. Should they bear the cost of undergrounding fire-prone lines themselves, they would have to pay a disproportionately higher cost per household. We propose a cost allocation scheme with an income threshold below which the cost is borne by utility-wide ratepayers and above which the cost is borne locally. This scheme can not only minimize the average of undergrounding costs per household as a share of income, but also homogenize such cost–income ratios across communities. Furthermore, our research demonstrates the opportunity to appropriately integrate existing policies to make electricity infrastructure affordable, equitable and reliable amidst climate change.
As electricity markets begin to shift from reliance on large, centralized power plants and towards distributed energy resources (DERs), there is a growing acknowledgement that more efficient planning, operations, and oversight is needed in the distribution system. This paper addresses one step in that direction by proposing an auction mechanism that uses a detailed distribution system planning model that allocates permits to end-used customers who request capacity to install new devices at their location and network upgrade contracts to utilities or 3rd-party companies who offer to upgrade system components. The resulting plan maximizes market surplus, that is, maximizes the total benefit to consumers minus the cost of network upgrades. We apply a marginal pricing scheme to the auction’s results such that the cost of each permits or contracts is differentiated by time and location, based on the Lagrangian multipliers of binding network constraints. These prices are shown to be no greater than the bid price of any awarded contract and no less than the offered cost of any awarded upgrade contract. Furthermore, the nonlinearity of power flows in the planning model result in an additional surplus that would be collected by the entity that hosts the auction, which could then be refunded to market participants or used to cover overhead costs of running the market. We provide four example auction results in a simple three-node distribution feeder to demonstrate the properties of the design. Results suggest that larger or more realistic case studies could be a promising next step.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
A computer method measures the users performance in cost-type contracts utilizing the existing nasa program evaluation review technique without imposing any additional reporting requirements. progress is measured by comparing actual costs with a value of work performed in a specific period.
Across multi-tenant commercial office and multifamily buildings, centrally metered fuel use represents a substantial fraction of whole-building energy use. Energy audit practitioners understand that improving heating distribution efficiency is typically more of an opportunity than combustion efficiency and that differing thermal comfort preferences between tenants are the bane of operators across these building typologies. There is an unmet market need for retrofit technologies that allow for the delivery of the right amount of heat to the right spaces, at the right time. The Energy Management and Information System (EMIS) package fills this gap through enhanced controls and metering, incorporating low-cost sensors and wireless communication infrastructure to provide a platform for ongoing commissioning and tenant feedback, including heat cost allocation. With support from the US DOE Building Technologies Office, Steven Winter Associates, Inc. (SWA) partnered with Sentient Buildings, E Source, building owners, and utility and policy stakeholders, to demonstrate a market viable EMIS that achieves a reduction in space heating energy use by reducing heating load, improving control, and positively impacting behavior while providing an acceptable financial return. In this study, EMIS packages were implemented in two New York City multifamily rental buildings. Both buildings conducted basic mechanical work (e.g., repairing steam traps) to ensure the heating system was operating well before any tenant feedback was layered in. Heating Energy Use Reports (HEUR) were created to provide tenants with social comparisons and energy savings tips to influence their behavior; these were provided monthly to all tenants in both buildings. Additionally, one building allocated heating costs to a portion of the tenants. Heat cost allocation (HCA) has a long history in the European Union (EU), although it is not common in the US or in steam-heated buildings. SWA leveraged existing EU best practices and stakeholder feedback to develop a Heat Cost Allocation algorithm that was considered equitable and intuitive. Energy use and tenant behavior impacts were tracked throughout the study. The basic mechanical repair work saved between 11-20% of heating energy. Those savings rose to 17-24% with the addition of tenant feedback. While it may not be possible to precisely determine the impact of COVID-19 on research studies like this, there may have been additional savings realized had the study taken place in a period of normal occupancy patterns. These types of central heating systems have been a blind spot for utilities, who have traditionally had little visibility into detailed behind-the-meter gas usage. Heating energy savings stayed consistent during the coldest months, indicating the potential for utilities to utilize EMIS packages for peak gas demand reductions or demand response programs. Tenant comfort was also improved. Post installation, room temperatures more closely matched thermostat set points. Perhaps due to this greater level of control, the vast majority of tenants being billed for heating were accepting of the allocation costs. And tenants receiving heat cost allocations were more likely to reduce their thermostat setpoints than tenants receiving behavioral feedback without financial impacts were. Variation in building specifics makes it difficult to provide precise energy and financial savings estimates. But within the range of expected conditions, the study identified a few key variables that can have the greatest impact on financial returns: the cost of fuel, the ability and willingness to allocate heating costs to tenants, and a well-functioning heating system as a starting point. This study focused on two multifamily buildings, but additional use cases, such as commercial buildings and affordable housing, should be explored to better understand the full market potential. While this type of upgrade has the potential for deep energy reductions and cost savings, future projects should take into account the balance of costs and benefits between owners and tenants, especially in the affordable, regulated, or other low-to-moderate income (LMI) segments of the market. Rent credits, utility allowances, or a shared savings program are possible options to accelerate adoption of this strategy in these market segments.
The proliferation of smart meter data allows the application of new analytic methods to inform regulatory deliberations. The bill alignment test (BAT) method, which compares the costs allocated to each residential customer with their electric bill, is introduced to help regulators consider how a proposed rate design balances various regulatory criteria. The BAT requires an explicit statement of preferences by policymakers or stakeholders and choices about allocating residual costs unassociated with customer-level causality. The BAT is applied to more than 35,000 smart-meter customer load profiles to assess the trade-offs associated with proposed rate designs. Here this example demonstrates the impact of residual cost allocation preferences and tariff design choices on proposed tariff evaluation.
The U.S. electricity system is amid a rapidly occurring and widespread energy transition. Regional, Tribal, state, and customer demand for new energy resources, combined with favorable policies, is driving a rapid rise of interconnection requests. Interconnection processes will need to evolve to handle this larger number of requests today and into the future, as policy and economic drivers continue to motivate significant resource development. This roadmap identifies and organizes nearer- and longer-term solutions to enable transmission interconnection processes to meet this expected demand, and it is intended for a diverse audience of stakeholders participating within transmission interconnection processes. The roadmap is a result of the Interconnection Innovation e-Xchange (i2X) program launched by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in June 2022 to convene stakeholders and address interconnection challenges. The roadmap is organized into four primary goal areas, each important to the overall i2X mission to enable a simpler, faster, and fairer interconnection of clean energy resources while enhancing the reliability, resiliency, and security of our electric grid. The first goal aims to improve interconnection data transparency, to aid interconnection customers’ ability to screen and site potential projects, better enable third-party modeling, facilitate more process automation, enhance competition while ensuring equitable outcomes, and enable benchmarking, tracking, and auditing of interconnection processes and reforms. The second goal covers solutions to improve queue management practices, affected system studies, fair processes, and workforce development. The third goal incorporates solutions that aim to improve cost allocation, reduce costs to electricity consumers, enhance the coordination between transmission planning and the interconnection process, and optimize the rightsizing of transmission investment through improvements in interconnection studies. The fourth and final goal aims to reduce the performance issues not identified during interconnection studies by updating technical requirements within interconnection studies, models, and tools while also improving industry interconnection standards.
A two-part pricing policy is investigated as the most feasible method of pricing the transportation services to be provided by NASA's SSTS. Engineering cost estimates and a deterministic operating cost model generate a data base and develop a procedure for pricing the services of the SSTS. It is expected that the SSTS will have a monopoly on space material processing in areas of crystal growth, glass processing, metallurgical space applications, and biomedical processes using electrophoresis which will require efficient pricing. Pricing problems, the SSTS operating costs based on orbit elevation, number of launch sites, and number of flights, capital costs of the SSTS, research and development costs, allocation of joint transportation costs of the SSTS to a particular space processing activity, and rates for the SSTS are discussed. It is concluded that joint costs for commercial cargoes carried in the SSTS can be most usefully handled by making cost allocations based on proportionate capacity utilization.
Rocket engine design follows three phases: systems design, parameter design, and tolerance design. Systems design and parameter design are most effectively conducted in a concurrent engineering (CE) environment that utilize methods such as Quality Function Deployment and Taguchi methods. However, tolerance allocation remains an art driven by experience, handbooks, and rules of thumb. It was desirable to develop and optimization approach to tolerancing. The case study engine was the STME gas generator cycle. The design of the major components had been completed and the functional relationship between the component tolerances and system performance had been computed using the Generic Power Balance model. The system performance nominals (thrust, MR, and Isp) and tolerances were already specified, as were an initial set of component tolerances. However, the question was whether there existed an optimal combination of tolerances that would result in the minimum cost without any degradation in system performance.
The results of an investigation of solar module encapsulation systems applicable to the Low-Cost Solar Array Project 1986 cost and performance goals are presented. Six basic construction elements were identified and their specific uses in module construction defined. A uniform coating basis was established for each element. The survey results were also useful in revealing price ranges for classes of materials and estimating the cost allocation for each element within the encapsulating cost goal. The six construction elements were considered to be substrates, superstrates, pottants, adhesives, outer covers and back covers.
This presentation presents the key topics from FERC Order 1920: Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation. It breaks down and summarizes the main reforms from the regulation including comments from diverse perspectives on how the new rules may be implemented. This presentation can serve as a resource for diverse stakeholders including policymakers, utilities, industry, and researchers who seek to understand how the new ruling may impact regional transmission planning.