Local Supplier Interviews - Summary
Eastern Idaho Local Supplier Interviews presentation.
99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Local Suppliers”
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.
Is Clean Hydrogen Production a Good Fit for Questa? (Final Economic Impact Results) [Slides]
The Village of Questa, New Mexico is aiming to become a regional clean energy hub with robust and diverse employment opportunities for the local community supported by the energy sector and by other businesses inspired or attracted by abundant clean energy, outdoor recreation, and cultural opportunities. A coalition of stakeholders in the Village of Questa, comprising the Village, Kit Carson Electric Cooperative (KCEC), Questa Economic Development Fund, and Chevron, is exploring options to develop hydrogen production facilities as an opportunity to create jobs, provide reliable clean energy, and utilize former mine resources. Questa is home to a molybdenum mine owned by Chevron that closed in 2014. Several residents in Questa and surrounding communities lost their jobs when the mine closed and transitioned from active operations into environmental remediation. Although remediation efforts have been ongoing since 2014 and are expected to continue for at least 16 more years, the number of jobs with Chevron is much smaller now than it was before the closure. Between available workforce, brownfield land, and water rights formerly supporting mine operations but now in a transition period, there are considerable local resources that could be directed toward clean energy generation. Questa's electricity supply is already 100% solar during daylight hours thanks to Kit Carson Electric Cooperative's (KCEC's) strategic decision-making and partnering over the last decade. Now, Questa, KCEC, and Chevron are exploring the potential costs and benefits of siting an electrolytic hydrogen production facility and additional solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity in Questa to further advance the region's clean energy economy. In this report, we estimated the potential economic impacts (i.e., jobs, value added, gross output, tax revenue) of constructing and operating a combined hydrogen (32 MW polymer electrolyte membrane electrolizer + 7.5 MW fuel cell) and solar facility (22.5 MW) in the Village of Questa, as well as the resulting economic spillovers to Taos County and the state of New Mexico. We employ an input-output model that leverages IMPLAN's economic data for the region complemented by construction and operating expenses estimated by NREL and feedback from the local coalition to evaluate the direct, indirect and induced effects of the project construction (transient impacts) and operation (more permanent impacts). Based on the area's average trade profile, feedback from the coalition and current market conditions, these projects are expected to support 487 full-time equivalent jobs during construction, generating $\$24$ million in income for those workers and $\$82$ million in local economic activity in the state. Of those jobs, 106 are expected to be construction sector jobs. These investments are also estimated to add $\$36.5$ million to New Mexico's gross state product (GSP). In the Village of Questa, we estimate 16 jobs will be supported in construction and transportation industries, generating $\$0.9$ million in earnings. In Taos County, the construction phase is expected to support 285 jobs primarily in construction and professional services, while manufacturing jobs dominate the results for the Rest of New Mexico. The Village is also estimated to receive $\$0.9$ million in tax revenue from the construction phase alone. Once in operation, the project continues to impact the state and Questa. Around 20 jobs (full-time equivalent for each year of operation) are supported across New Mexico, with approximately 11 directly employed in Questa by both facilities. The total annual local economic activity supported by ongoing operations is just over $\$1.3$ million/yr, generating $\$1.6$ million/yr in additional income in the state. Annual operations are estimated to add $\$2.1$ million to the state's GSP. The Village is expected to receive around $\$43,000$/yr in tax revenue. Impacts vary significantly depending on which businesses are supplying materials, equipment and services, and where construction workers reside. Choosing local suppliers will most benefit Questa and the New Mexico economy, adding up to 500 jobs during construction and 13 long-term jobs. Local and state governments may consider ways to incentivize local businesses in order to maximize economic benefits.
08 HYDROGEN↗
Is Clean Hydrogen Production a Good Fit for Questa? Final Economic Impact Results
The Village of Questa, New Mexico is aiming to become a regional clean energy hub with robust and diverse employment opportunities for the local community supported by the energy sector and by other businesses inspired or attracted by abundant clean energy, outdoor recreation, and cultural opportunities. A coalition of stakeholders in the Village of Questa, comprising the Village, Kit Carson Electric Cooperative (KCEC), Questa Economic Development Fund, and Chevron, is exploring options to develop hydrogen production facilities as an opportunity to create jobs, provide reliable clean energy, and utilize former mine resources. Questa is home to a molybdenum mine owned by Chevron that closed in 2014. Several residents in Questa and surrounding communities lost their jobs when the mine closed and transitioned from active operations into environmental remediation. Although remediation efforts have been ongoing since 2014 and are expected to continue for at least 16 more years, the number of jobs with Chevron is much smaller now than it was before the closure. Between available workforce, brownfield land, and water rights formerly supporting mine operations but now in a transition period, there are considerable local resources that could be directed toward clean energy generation. Questa's electricity supply is already 100% solar during daylight hours thanks to Kit Carson Electric Cooperative's (KCEC's) strategic decision-making and partnering over the last decade. Now, Questa, KCEC, and Chevron are exploring the potential costs and benefits of siting an electrolytic hydrogen production facility and additional solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity in Questa to further advance the region's clean energy economy. In this report, we estimated the potential economic impacts (i.e., jobs, value added, gross output, tax revenue) of constructing and operating a combined hydrogen (32 MW polymer electrolyte membrane electrolizer + 7.5 MW fuel cell) and solar facility (22.5 MW) in the Village of Questa, as well as the resulting economic spillovers to Taos County and the state of New Mexico. We employ an input-output model that leverages IMPLAN's economic data for the region complemented by construction and operating expenses estimated by NREL and feedback from the local coalition to evaluate the direct, indirect and induced effects of the project construction (transient impacts) and operation (more permanent impacts). Based on the area's average trade profile, feedback from the coalition and current market conditions, these projects are expected to support 487 full-time equivalent jobs during construction, generating $\$24$ million in income for those workers and $\$82$ million in local economic activity in the state. Of those jobs, 106 are expected to be construction sector jobs. These investments are also estimated to add $\$36.5$ million to New Mexico's gross state product (GSP). In the Village of Questa, we estimate 16 jobs will be supported in construction and transportation industries, generating $\$0.9$ million in earnings. In Taos County, the construction phase is expected to support 285 jobs primarily in construction and professional services, while manufacturing jobs dominate the results for the Rest of New Mexico. The Village is also estimated to receive $\$0.9$ million in tax revenue from the construction phase alone. Once in operation, the project continues to impact the state and Questa. Around 20 jobs (full-time equivalent for each year of operation) are supported across New Mexico, with approximately 11 directly employed in Questa by both facilities. The total annual local economic activity supported by ongoing operations is just over $\$1.3$ million/yr, generating $\$1.6$ million/yr in additional income in the state. Annual operations are estimated to add $\$2.1$ million to the state's GSP. The Village is expected to receive around $\$43,000$/yr in tax revenue. Impacts vary significantly depending on which businesses are supplying materials, equipment and services, and where construction workers reside. Choosing local suppliers will most benefit Questa and the New Mexico economy, adding up to 500 jobs during construction and 13 long-term jobs. Local and state governments may consider ways to incentivize local businesses in order to maximize economic benefits.
08 HYDROGEN↗
Ventilator Testbed
A number of open-source ventilator designs have been published online since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. These ventilator designs have been created and released to help address the limitations in manufacturing and distribution timelines, and to help drive availability of more cost efficient ventilators. Many of these ventilators have been designed to be relatively simple to build and to use components that can be easily-sourced and acquired in large numbers from local suppliers. A test bed for evaluating the performance of these open-source ventilators was developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory as part of the Technology Evaluation and Demonstration program.
42 ENGINEERING↗
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)↗
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)↗
Package Data for CERF-Data Centers
This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300m 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 Developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 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↗
Package Data for CERF-Data Centers
This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. 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 land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 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↗
Distributed Renewables for Arctic Energy: A Case Study
Alaska is a vast state that stretches into the Arctic Circle. Roughly 140,000 people in the state are dependent on isolated electric grids, traditionally burning expensive fossil fuels. This has negative impacts on air quality and climate. As the climate warms, fuel supply chains and traditional ways of life are threatened. Renewable electric sources offer a clean, resilient alternative with less volatile costs, but there are a variety of technical, social, economic, and political challenges to developing renewable energy systems in remote Arctic communities. Examples include harsh operating conditions, lack of local technical and managerial capacity, complex funding mechanisms, and glacial permitting processes. In this study, we interview one group of communities that are interested in adding renewable energy to their systems to understand the needs and challenges they face, and then another group that has successfully installed renewable energy, to understand how they overcame such challenges and the lessons they learned. Notable results include the importance of local buy-in, education, and technical involvement, procuring external funding sources, inter-community collaboration, installing bespoke systems, and working with reliable equipment suppliers. The goal of this report is to orient and inspire Arctic communities that want to begin their renewable transition, by providing helpful examples and points of contact.
17 WIND ENERGY↗
COVID 19 vaccine distribution solution to the last mile challenge: Experimental and simulation studies of ultra-low temperature refrigeration system
Most COVID-19 vaccines require ambient temperature control for transportation and storage. Both Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are based on mRNA and lipid nanoparticles requiring low temperature storage. The Pfizer vaccine requires ultra-low temperature storage (between -80 °C and -60 °C), while the Moderna vaccine requires -30 °C storage. Pfizer has designed a reusable package for transportation and storage that can keep the vaccine at the target temperature for 10 days. However, the last stage of distribution is quite challenging, especially for rural or suburban areas, where local towns, pharmacy chains and hospitals may not have the infrastructure required to store the vaccine. Also, the need for a large amount of ultra-low temperature refrigeration equipment in a short time period creates tremendous pressure on the equipment suppliers. In addition, there is limited data available to address ancillary challenges of the distribution framework for both transportation and storage stages. As such, there is a need for a quick, effective, secure, and safe solution to mitigate the challenges faced by vaccine distribution logistics. The study proposes an effective, secure, and safe ultra-low temperature refrigeration solution to resolve the vaccine distribution last mile challenge. Furthermore, the approach is to utilize commercially available products, such as refrigeration container units, and retrofit them to meet the vaccine storage temperature requirement. Both experimental and simulation studies are conducted to evaluate the technical merits of this solution with the ability to control temperature at -30 °C or -70 °C as part of the last mile supply chain for vaccine candidates.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
The Durability of Piston Seals in Hydraulic Power Take-off Systems in Wave Energy Converters
Hydraulic cylinder seals are a critical component of hydraulic power take-off (PTO) systems in wave energy converters (WECs). Primary hydraulic piston seal wear is a major concern for the longevity of hydraulic PTOs, especially in the context of the effort and expense associated with seal replacement. Piston seals, made from polymeric elastomers, are used to contain and isolate high pressure fluids within PTO systems. A specific challenge for WEC designers is knowing, with confidence, the relative expected lifetimes of commercially available seals and seal materials for the unique long travel and continuous use case of WEC hydraulic systems. This information is critical to accurately determine operating expense (OPEX) and levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). If failures of seals occur earlier than their designed lifetime, the estimated operations, and maintenance (O&M) and LCOE costs may double based on estimation. Unfortunately, information from seal manufacturers on longevity in these applications is not generally available and quantitative performance comparison between different manufacturers is not available, creating significant uncertainty on use of hydraulic PTO system in wave power generation. In this project, PNNL, with advice from different WEC device and seal manufacturers, has created a framework to address the industry need for available, dependable and comparative data for seals and seals materials for WEC hydraulic applications including piston seals, glide rings, and shaft seals. Commonly used and candidate seal materials were identified and available information on the materials such as mechanical and fatigue performance, chemical (fluid) compatibility, and cost has been compiled. Hardware and strategy for bench scale measurement of key materials and seal performance and pathway for publicly available library of hydraulic seal materials, properties, suppliers, and options have also been identified for future implementation. The results of this project were presented at WPTO Seedling Symposium 2023 and OCEANS 2023. The results of the literature review including identified polymer seals and ideal operating conditions were summaried and compiled to a database WEC-SealsDB hosted locally at PNNL.
16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
The Demand for a Domestic Offshore Wind Energy Supply Chain
In March of 2021, the Biden-Harris Administration established a National Offshore Wind Target to install 30 GW by 2030. This ambitious goal was not only intended to help reduce dependencies on fossil fuels, but also represents an opportunity to establish a new and sustainable industry in the United States. The announcement referenced the potential benefits of establishing a domestic supply chain, including the opportunity for existing suppliers to produce thousands of components while creating tens of thousands of jobs over the course of the decade. This vision by the Biden-Harris Administration aligns with the perspective of the offshore wind industry. At a Leadership 100 event hosted by the Business Network for Offshore wind in 2019, offshore wind developers and manufacturers identified the need for a roadmap outlining a pathway to a domestic supply chain as the top priority facing the industry. Building up domestic manufacturing capabilities will not only energize local industries but can potentially de-risk individual project by reducing reliance on importing resources from European or Asian markets. Although establishing a domestic supply chain will require significant investment, it has the potential to create substantial benefits throughout the industry and, by extension, on the decarbonization goals of the United States. This study characterizes the challenges and opportunities facing the growth of a domestic supply chain industry and evaluates the potential benefits that could be achieved through the creation of the supply chain. This report is the first of a two-part series which will describe the full supply chain roadmap and the associated benefits; the current report focuses on the high-level deployment, workforce, and component requirements that need to be met to achieve the National Offshore Wind Target. We will present: 1. A deployment pipeline that demonstrates the pathway to 30 GW, the associated demand for major fixed-bottom and floating offshore wind components (turbines, foundations, cables, substations), and the vessel and port requirements to support these installation activities. 2. A series of sensitivity analyses showing how the demand for components, ports, and vessels changes for different technology pathways and availability of the global supply chain. 3. An estimate of the total number of jobs that would be required to support these deployment scenarios under varying levels of assumed domestic content. 4. A comprehensive list of the Tier 1, 2, and 3 components (finished components, subassemblies, and subcomponents) required to construct fixed-bottom and floating offshore wind projects. 5. A discussion of critical path components that represent a significant challenge, bottleneck, or risk for a future domestic supply chain.
17 WIND ENERGY↗
Floating Offshore Wind US Manufacturing and Commercialization: Cooperative Research and Development (Final Report)
NREL assessed the supply chain and workforce considerations for the OCG-Wind floater technology, a floating semi-submersible offshore wind substructure, as well sharing vessel needs to inform their installation strategy. This technical assistance was in support of the FLoating Offshore Wind ReadINess (FLOWIN) Prize Phase 2 submission. NREL provided an assessment of domestic supplier capabilities for the main components of their floating offshore wind platform design and analyzed US regional and national supply chain constraints and gaps. Thirteen interviews with companies including steel distributors, forges, foundries, ports, large component fabricators, subcomponent fabricators, and secondary suppliers provided key insights such as 1) assembly ports are the key infrastructure barrier standing in the way of unlocking the domestic assembly and component fabrication for steel-based FOW platforms, 2) domestic steel producers can supply the types and quantities of steel necessary for FOW platforms, and 3) coordination between stakeholders will be a vital part of successfully developing the supply chain and infrastructure needed to domestically produce FOW platforms. In the workforce assessment, NREL documented a step-by-step approach to conduct a place-based assessment of the foundational workforce consideration for recruiting, upskilling, and retaining a workforce, such as supportive local and state policy, nearby education and training programs, and existing relevant industry. This approach was applied to Tacoma, Washington. Tacoma was indicated to have the potential be a successful location for fabrication and assembly of floating offshore wind energy in terms of workforce development. To share data on vessel requirements to install the OCG-Wind floater, NREL compiled resources that help answer the questions related to anchor handling tug vessels, shared a database of cable laying vessels, and answered questions on complying with the Jones Act.
17 WIND ENERGY↗
Communities Local Energy Action Program: Eastern Kentucky Nuclear Energy Industry Engagement Study
This study documents the work that was done to explore near-term opportunities for Eastern Kentucky to participate in the nuclear energy industry.
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
Low-Cost Preform and Molding Processes
The entry cost for prototyping a composite component for manufacture using automated, high rate processes is prohibitively expensive in many cases, especially for small business, where tooling costs may be several $100k. Discussions with industry also indicate that many small companies, tier 1 and 2 suppliers, have an interest to mold composite parts but do not want to deal with the capital cost, material handling issues, and labor associated with dry fiber preforming operations. While the molders may locate near the end user for logistics reasons, it may be more cost effective for the performer to remain regional and invest in capital equipment to support preform automation, thus keeping costs to a minimum. This project was designed to explore and demonstrate several options to meet these industry needs. Dry fiber preforming approaches were evaluated which allow for low pressure resin infusion, single sided tooling options such a vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM) or low pressure resin transfer molding (RTM-light). Unlike sheet molding compound, SMC compression molding where typical molding pressures of 1000 psi are required to push material into the desired location; positioning of a dry fiber preform into the desired location on the tool allows for low molding pressures of 10-50 psi. Lower molding pressures allow for use of low cost, additive fabrication of polymeric tooling. Polymeric tooling is suitable for rapid part prototyping and limited production. Dry fiber preforming approaches evaluated included use of commercial chopped strand mat, robotic chopper gun deposition, and continuous fiber preform augmentation using tailored fiber placement (TFP). Use of chopped strand mat does not require a robotic deposition method, however a cutting table is generally required and there is typically 20-30% scrap generation. While various fiber areal weights are available, the preform is not readily optimized for minimal fiber use or weight savings. In contrast, a robotic chopper gun approach allows for localized deposition where fiber is required to meet structural requirements. The robotic method is highly automated and minimizes fiber scrap, however the capital cost of the equipment and engineering labor for programming can result in higher preform cost compared to chopped strand mat in certain cases depending on preform complexity. Dry fiber preforming using the robotic chopper gun method allows for creation of three dimensional forms. This approach may be ideal for molding in-house, or if the preforms stack together densely to allow for efficient shipping. Applications evaluated for this program considered trade-off between fabrication of a fully 3D preform versus production of a flat preform which is designed to readily drape into the final desired shape. Such a preform design greatly simplifies robotic programming and requires no specialized tooling. The flat preforms are easily stacked and shipped to the final molding location. Flat preforms are much easier to augment with TFP continuous fiber to provide local reinforcement. The demonstration and evaluation of these preforming and tooling methods were completed on three component applications. The first application was a battery box cover for an electric vehicle which was highly three dimensional. The second demonstrator article was comprised of complex contours and was used to demonstrate the use of TFP and RTM-light molding process. The third demonstration article was the roof of an operator’s cab for large construction equipment. The roof is relatively flat however it is comprised of complex changes in thickness which clearly demonstrate the advantage of robotic chopper gun approach as compared to using numerous preform layers of chopped strand mat. The cost trades for the various preforming methods are summarized to help guide the reader as to preforming method considerations. Finally, these demonstrations all used glass fiber roving. A fourth, exploratory task was added to evaluate the ability to make preforms using Zoltek’s carbon fiber split tow roving. We were able to adapt the chopper gun to make flat preforms for laminate testing, but further development effort would be required to make suitable preforms.
36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
Produced Water and Waste Heat-aided Blowdown Water Treatment: Using Chemical and Energy Synergisms for Value Creation
The project objective was to develop a cooling blowdown water (BDW) treatment process utilizing produced water (PW) and low-grade heat to maximize water reuse and saleable by-product generation while reducing chemical and energy footprints of the treatment. The proposed treatment process consists of mixing, softening, organics and suspended solids removal, reverse osmosis (RO), thermal desalination, and brine electrolysis. BDW samples collected from a local coal-fired power plant and PW samples from two shale gas production wells were used in this study. Each treatment unit was first designed and tested to quantify its treatment efficiency, and its chemical and energy requirements. In addition, a process model was developed and model simulations were conducted based on the experimental results and literature data to optimize the treatment process. A techno-economic analysis was conducted to quantify chemical and energy savings as well as production of 10-lb brine as a saleable product. With the field-collected BDW and PW samples, mixing experiments determined a volumetric mixing ratio 10:1 (BDW:PW) resulted in the best performance of multivalent ions removal and largest chemical savings for softening. Softening of the BDW/PW mixtures using alkaline chemicals (Na 2 CO 3 and NaOH) achieved 95%-100% removal of scaling-forming cations (Ca, Mg, Fe, Ba, Sr) and 60% of silicon, and 10% of total organic carbon (TOC). The mixing and softening treatments yielded an effluent with total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration of 23 g/L. Activated carbon (AC) filtration removed TOC to a low level (< 3 mg/L) and further removed remaining scale-forming divalent metals and silica from the softened water. The AC filtration resulted in a slight reduction of TDS from 23 g/L to 20 g/L, leaving behind only mostly monovalent ions (i.e., sodium and chloride) in the filtered water. These pretreatments yielded a feed water that met the criteria of the downstream reverse osmosis (RO) to prevent membrane fouling. A cross-flow RO system was used to further concentrate the TDS of the AC effluent. Various factors including TDS, pH, and applied pressure were examined and optimal conditions were determined for the co-treatment process. An integrated process consisting of mixing, softening, AC filtration and RO was used to treat a continuous flow (0.25 – 1.2 L/min, or 0.07 – 0.32 gpm) and successfully generated RO permeate as product water (TDS < 0.5 g/L) for reuse in cooling operation, and a concentrate (TDS ~ 45 g/L) to be further treated in a thermal desalination unit. These flow rates meet the FOA’s criterion of 0.01 – 1 gpm. Overall, the co-treatment of BDW/PW allowed shorter ramp-up time compared to treatment of BDW alone. It resulted in 40% and 55% savings of Na 2 CO 3(s) and NaOH, respectively, compared to treating the BDW and PW individually for the same level of softening. The co-treatment also resulted in a 29% energy saving compared to treatment of BDW only for the level of TDS concentration. A thermal desalination system was designed using CFD simulations and manufactured in the WVU Innovation Hub for further treatment of the RO concentrate to generate 10-lb brine. The system has a design flow rate of 2 gpm and has been successfully tested. A bench-scale brine electrolysis system was developed for on-site generation of chlorine/hypochlorite (Cl 2 /OCl - ) and caustic soda (NaOH) as useful chemicals for the co-treatment process. Using salt solutions (0.5 M and 1 M), the system achieved faradaic efficiencies of 93%-97% and 70%-77% for caustic soda and chlorine/hypochlorite generation, respectively. An economic analysis showed that the electricity costs for on-site generation of these chemicals were significantly lower than the chemical prices offered by suppliers. An industrial-scale process model consisting of mixing, softening, AC filtration, RO, thermal desalination, and brine electrolysis was developed using the Aspen Plus V9 in conjunction with Aspen Custom Modeler V9. The model serves as a solvable Aspen Plus model and as basis to form the costing infrastructure. In addition, techno-economic analysis considering capital, operating, and transportation costs was conducted. An optimization solution showed that produced water for mixing is still advantageous in low quantities. The optimum solution approaches a leveled cost of water (LCW) of 2 $/m 3 which becomes cost competitive with nominal water treatment prices.
20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗