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 presentation focuses on several community engagement strategies related to the planning and implementation of clean energy projects, with a focus on collaboration and participatory methods.
The purpose of the research project was to reveal the perceptions of residents and communities of the City and County of Honolulu concerning bioenergy projects, feedstock, and sustainable aviation fuel. The perception study was conducted via community-scale surveys, interviews, and town meetings to gather feedback on the preliminary design of a proposed bioenergy project, including feedstock choice and the need for sustainable aviation fuel in Hawaii. Residents on the west side of Oahu were targeted due to their proximity to the proposed plant site location. Findings from this study aim to identify resident perceptions, understanding, and desire for bioenergy projects and new infrastructure to, improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of Hawaiian islands. While Hawaii has created policies and mandates to move toward 100% renewable energy sources by 2045, the focus has been predominately on renewable electricity, largely overlooking other sustainable energy options such as sustainable aviation fuel. There is a lack of research on the community engagement and perceptions of Hawaiian residents on bioenergy projects and sustainable aviation fuel, contributing to the low adoption of bioenergy projects on the islands. Insights from this study aim to add literature on the need for community engagement in the design process, the importance of accepting new sustainable infrastructure, and the production and use of sustainable aviation fuels.
Climate change is intensifying the hydrologic cycle, leading to more frequent and severe rainfall-driven (pluvial) flooding in urban areas. In the mid-Atlantic US cities, aging and under-designed stormwater infrastructure is increasingly strained by these events, resulting in recurring damage to property and disruptions to transportation networks. In this study, we combine community engagement with hydrologic modeling to develop and evaluate potential urban flood adaptation strategies. Over a three-year period, local technical experts and community representatives met regularly to discuss flooding concerns, identify priorities, and co-develop adaptation strategies. These discussions informed the development of an urban flooding model (EPA Storm Water Management Model) for the Baltimore Harbor watershed, the focus location of this study. The flooding model integrates complex surface and subsurface stormwater infrastructure data, local expert knowledge, and community insights. We simulate stakeholder-prioritized adaptations, such as green and gray infrastructure strategies. Model results demonstrate that enhanced infrastructure maintenance is the most effective adaptation for reducing flood depths, but has varied effects across the watershed, and can increase flooding in some locations. Spatially concentrated greening provides limited benefit to the watershed as a whole, but moderate benefit in community priority areas. Together, these adaptations have the potential to reduce flood depths by as much as 58% in some locations, greatly reducing property damage and mobility impacts, primary concerns of stakeholders. Future work will implement robust optimization tools to search for adaptations which meet stakeholder objectives and perform highly under varied future climate conditions. This work contributes to the expanding literature on collaborative modeling and demonstrates that community-engaged approaches can enhance model credibility and generate more actionable insights for communities seeking to strengthen climate resilience.
The overarching motivation of this project is to provide stakeholder-engaged research and education to enable a clean, equitable, and resilient energy transition. Presently, low-income communities and people of color are disproportionately burdened by environmental harm, while also being routinely left out of planning processes and benefits from infrastructure improvements. The Energy Transition Institute (ETI) addresses these issues in three ways: community engagement, educating diverse future leaders, and cutting-edge research. As municipalities across the Commonwealth plan their transition to a climate-friendly energy system, research from ETI will advance technical and social understanding of heating electrification, energy storage, demand flexibility, reliability and resiliency of power distribution infrastructure, with attention to equity. This will benefit surrounding communities, cities and towns across Massachusetts, and the global research community
Not Available
The Biden Administration has called for 30 GW of offshore wind (OSW) to be implemented by 2030 and 15 GW of floating OSW by 2035. Because floating OSW is a novel technology for the West Coast, the United States, and the world, there is limited information about the implications of floating OSW for coastal communities. Floating OSW faces a complex regulatory landscape and a wide set of interested parties that stand to gain or lose based on the development process and outcomes. Key agencies are often siloed in their mission space, with little attention or resources for innovation in planning. Furthermore, many communities along the West Coast of the U.S. have experienced the boom-and-bust cycles of large, extractive industries that use coastal resources to benefit consumers in other locations, while leaving behind few long-lasting benefits at the local level. These siloes in government and civic society, and the lack of trust born out of past failures, make it difficult for communities, government agencies, scientists, and industry to plan for OSW based on community values and concerns. There is a need to develop projects that more equitably distribute benefits while safeguarding the ocean ecosystems upon which coastal populations depend.
Urban pluvial flooding poses a growing threat to the city of Baltimore, driven by heavy rainfall, increased impervious area, and aging infrastructure. Adapting to the risks posed by pluvial flooding is critical for building greater climate resiliency in Baltimore's Inner Harbor Watershed. This study addresses these challenges through community-informed decision analysis, which uses hydrologic modeling and optimization tools to identify robust flooding adaptation pathways. We will collaborate with community partners to identify key concerns and objectives regarding flooding. These concerns have been purposefully built in to a combined surface-subsurface dynamic flow simulation model. Model outputs are used to identify flooding locations within the Inner Harbor, and to test adaptation methods. Machine learning will be used search for solutions which meet diverse environmental, financial, and social goals, and solution performance will be examined under a wide range of potential future climatic conditions and integrated with an adaptive planning approach. This novel set of adaptation pathways will enhance the City's capacity to respond to evolving pluvial flood risk.
The focus on electric grid resilience has gained significant momentum in recent years. The imperatives behind this focus are multifaceted, including the escalating threats of climate change, extreme weather events, and cyber and physical attacks. These challenges expose the vulnerabilities of the country’s aging grid infrastructure and underscore the important
We examine the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s collaborative process to locate, build, and operate one or more federal consolidated interim storage facilities (FCISFs) for commercial U.S. spent nuclear fuel—instead of continuing to store the material at over 70 nuclear reactor sites. Technocratic siting of nuclear facilities in the U.S., most of which did not involve meaningful public participation, was not successful. We consider increasing pressure to find at least one FCISF site, as well as the critical role of trust in engaging communities and reaching agreement—leading some observers to assert that DOE is in the “trust building business”, not the siting business. We present case studies with the following: (1) illustrating community engagement that led to a more satisfactory outcome than had been anticipated (Fernald); (2) a planned voluntary process that failed to produce an operating CISF (Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator); and (3) a site that demonstrates the ongoing need for negotiations to keep a site open and operational (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant). The essay concludes with the observation that a collaboration-based siting effort can succeed in the U.S., but that five main challenges—related to trust and requiring patience—will need to be addressed.
Community engagement in the planning process to build large-scale solar (LSS) projects can win local support and advance procedural justice. However, an understanding of community engagement in current LSS development is lacking. Using responses from a U.S. nationwide survey (n = 979) of residential neighbors living within 3 miles (4.8 km) of completed LSS projects (i.e. “solar neighbors”) and project details from the U.S. Large-Scale Solar Photovoltaic Database (USPVDB), this study seeks to answer the following questions: How are solar neighbors' perceptions of community engagement associated with their attitudes toward their LSS projects? How do solar neighbors' perceptions of community engagement compare to their expectations? And, how do neighbors explain what they perceived about the planning process? We answer these questions using mixed methods, including regression modeling, a new gap analysis technique, and qualitative coding. We find that higher perceived engagement is associated with more positive attitudes toward the project, even when controlling for respondents who acted in opposition. Supporters and opponents alike expect more engagement than they perceived and information about projects both before construction and after operation is lacking. Awareness and engagement expectations increase at certain project size and proximity thresholds. However, most neighbors expect the public to offer input during engagement, but not make decisions. We contextualize these findings with explanatory comments from respondents.
Communities who experience disproportionate climate change impacts tend to be excluded from resilience planning. Those efforts typically follow top-down processes within established governance practices that are inaccessible to marginalized folks and reinforce inequalities. Regenerating the commons includes creating opportunities for everyone to meaningfully shape community resilience decisions and experience related benefits. Resilience planning that shifts power into communities and focuses on social vulnerability can affect how people survive and thrive in a climate changed world. The Massachusetts Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) 2.0 program is an attempt to change the status quo in resilience planning by bringing new voices into decision-making power, recognizing their labor, addressing root causes of vulnerability, and investing in social infrastructure. It aspires to build capacity for equity-focused community engagement within teams of municipal staff and community liaisons, and ultimately build social capital and community cohesion. My research investigates implementation of this state grant program in several western Massachusetts towns. I am using document review, participant observation, and interviews to understand the MVP 2.0 process as written, how different towns navigate it, and how individuals make sense of their experiences in it. I seek to understand how those experiences explain relationships between engagement approaches, mediating factors, and process outcomes. I am interested in the conditions that allow for community empowerment and how a model like MVP 2.0 can shift conditions that hold systems in place. In a practical sense, our findings will help municipalities reflect on their work during MVP 2.0 and plan for future community engagement. They may be informative for designing future iterations of the MVP program and for other municipalities or offices of community engagement. The findings will also contribute to the participation, resilience, and climate justice literatures, by adding perspectives on equity-centered resilience and community engagement approaches in smaller towns and rural settings.
Communities who experience disproportionate climate change impacts tend to be excluded from resilience planning (Vale, 2014). Those efforts typically follow top-down processes within established governance practices that are inaccessible to marginalized folks and reinforce inequalities (Malloy & Ashcraft, 2020; Adger, 2003). Such participatory planning processes may offer the public little opportunity to influence the process itself or the outcomes (Smith & McDonough, 2001). They might ignore important public values or alternative ways of knowing which can be critical assets in resilience (Few et al., 2007). Designing communities for climate action and resilience means creating opportunities for everyone to meaningfully shape those decisions and experience related benefits. Having the opportunity to shape one’s community is necessary for human flourishing (Allen, 2016). Resilience planning that shifts power into communities and focuses on social vulnerability can affect how people survive and thrive in a climate changed world. The Massachusetts Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) 2.0 program is an attempt to change the status quo in resilience planning by bringing new voices into decision-making power, recognizing their labor, addressing root causes of vulnerability, and investing in social infrastructure. It aspires to build capacity for equity-focused community engagement within teams of municipal staff and community liaisons, and ultimately build social capital and community cohesion. My mixed methods research investigates implementation of this state grant program in several western Massachusetts towns. I am using document review, participant observation, and interviews to understand the MVP 2.0 process as written, how different towns navigate it, and how individuals make sense of their experiences in it. I seek to understand how those experiences explain relationships between engagement approaches, mediating factors, and process outcomes. I am interested in the conditions that allow for community empowerment and how a model like MVP 2.0 can shift conditions that hold systems in place. In a practical sense, our findings will help municipalities reflect on their work during MVP 2.0 and plan for future community engagement. They may be informative for designing future iterations of the MVP program and for other municipalities, offices of community engagement, and practitioners. The findings will also contribute to the participation, resilience, and climate justice literatures, by adding perspectives on equity-centered resilience and community engagement approaches in smaller towns and rural settings. References: Adger, W. N. (2003). Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Economic Geography, 79, 387-404. Allen, D. (2016). Toward a connected society. Our compelling interests: The value of diversity for democracy and a prosperous society, 71-105. Few, R., Brown, K., & Tompkins, E. L. (2007). Public participation and climate change adaptation: avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Climate Policy, 7(1), 46–59. Malloy, J. T., & Ashcraft, C. M. (2020). A framework for implementing socially just climate adaptation. Climatic Change, 160(1), 1–14. Smith, P. D., & McDonough, M. H. (2001). Beyond public participation: Fairness in natural resource decision making. Society & natural resources, 14(3), 239-249. Vale, L. J. (2014). The politics of resilient cities: whose resilience and whose city? Building Research & Information, 42(2), 191–201.
This report was prepared as part of the U.S. Department of Energy's Communities Local Energy Action Program (Communities LEAP) pilot competitive technical assistance for the Lawrence Massachusetts Stakeholder Coalition (LSC) composed of The City of Lawrence, All In Energy, MassDevelopment, Mill City Community Investments, BlocPower and Groundwork Lawrence, and led by Browning the Green Space. The LSC identified rooftop solar photovoltaics as a top priority for this technical assistance opportunity. Lawrence faces high energy burden and electricity prices, thus rooftop solar can be a tool to help lower those costs. However, the coalition received feedback that some solar companies were using deceptive and unfair practices when marketing, selling, or financing solar energy, costing residents more money than utility rates and increasing the energy burden. This project sought to address rooftop solar community priorities through two pathways: 1. facilitating community engagement to understand community perspectives and experiences with rooftop solar development; and 2. conducting a financial cash-flow analysis highlighting the varying fiscal outcomes for rooftop solar adopters based off rooftop solar leasing, ownership, or buying electricity from the utility (National Grid).
The intensification of the hydrologic cycle due to climate change poses a threat to aging and under-designed water infrastructure systems which cannot adequately manage intense storm events. Developing a comprehensive plan for managing rain-driven flooding events is challenging due to uncertainties in the magnitude and frequency of future storm events and conflicting stakeholder objectives. In the City of Baltimore, Maryland, stormwater infrastructure is struggling to keep up with rainfall-driven (pluvial) flooding events, which regularly damage housing and disrupt transportation for residents. In this study, a hybrid of community engagement, numerical modeling, and artificial intelligence techniques are employed to explore prospective urban flooding adaptations. Community engagement drives the development of an urban flooding model (EPA Storm Water Management Model) for the Baltimore Harbor watershed. The model integrates complex surface and subsurface stormwater infrastructure data from the City, high-resolution spatial data, insights from local public works experts, and the lived experiences of City residents. This co-developed model simulates adaptations of interest to stakeholders in the city, including green and grey infrastructure and operational management strategies. Stormwater management scenarios focused on inlet cleaning and spatially concentrated green infrastructure are found to be the most effective in reducing flood depths in community priority locations. Together, these adaptations can reduce the duration of intersection inundation by more than twenty minutes, allowing for quicker emergency response and restoration of typical transportation systems. Future work will combine this community engaged flooding model with the Deep Uncertainties Pathways framework to explore tradeoffs between adaptations and develop dynamic adaptations which align with community objectives, enhance climate resilience in Baltimore, and can be adjusted in response to changing future conditions.
The report marks the team’s completion of all required tasks and milestones. Work completed for Task 1 (Technical and Economic Feasibility Assessment & Procurement Drafting) included development of analysis and design model; completion of technical, economic, and environmental assessments; and technical outreach and coalition design. Components for Task 2 (Outreach & Community Engagement) involved broad outreach and community-engagement efforts (including stakeholder meetings and a webinar as well as development of a formal engagement plan) and development of a web page and a case study. For Task 3 (Workforce Transition, Development, & Training Plan), the team undertook a formal statewide geothermal workforce needs assessment, developed corresponding recommendations for both the state as a whole and the Wallingford project, and held several workshops. For Task 4 (Project Management & Data Sharing), the team drafted a data-sharing plan.
Marine energy offers a reliable energy solution for island and coastal communities, which often lack traditional local generation, to support their transition to energy independence and reduce reliance on externally imported fuels. Successful deployment of new technologies in these isolated locations requires community acceptance and approval from the outset, as these communities typically lack the financial and technical resources to operate and maintain new systems. This report presents a community-centric microgrid planning framework for remote coastal and island communities. Community engagement is integrated as the first step in the planning process, incorporating community profiles and visions into energy development scenarios. A case study was conducted in St. George, Pribilof Islands, Alaska, which relies entirely on diesel yet has significant wind and wave energy potential. Community engagement revealed a unique history and current economic status, with an interest in adopting advanced energy technologies despite past failures. Various microgrid configurations were optimized, considering different technologies to meet current and future energy needs while balancing cost and energy resilience. Wave energy converters (WECs) were a key component, integrated with other energy sources using the Xendee optimization tool. The Marine Energy Microgrid Toolkit, developed as part of this work, uses commercial power system analysis tools to optimize and analyze microgrid scenarios. The developed framework and toolkit can be applied to island and coastal communities to enhance resilience and support microgrid deployments. Future enhancements will include incorporating new marine resources, developing dynamic models, and automating the integration of Xendee and PowerFactory simulations.
Resilience efforts tend to reinforce injustices. Communities who experience disproportionate climate impacts are often excluded from resilience planning, and those plans do not typically address root causes of social vulnerability. More transformational approaches to resilience would shift decision-making power into communities and affect how people survive and thrive in a climate changing world. The Massachusetts Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) 2.0 program is an attempt to change the status quo in resilience planning by bringing new voices into decision-making power, recognizing their labor, addressing root causes of vulnerability, and investing in social infrastructure. It aims to build capacity for equity-focused community engagement within teams of municipal staff and community liaisons, and ultimately build community cohesion. My mixed methods research investigates implementation of this state grant program in several Massachusetts towns. I am using document review, participant observation, and interviews to understand the MVP 2.0 process as written, how different municipalities navigate it, and how individuals make sense of their experiences in it. I seek to understand how those experiences explain relationships between engagement approaches, mediating factors, and process outcomes. I am interested in the conditions that allow for community empowerment and how a model like MVP 2.0 can shift conditions that hold systems in place. In a practical sense, my empirical results will help municipalities reflect on their work during MVP 2.0 and plan for future community engagement. They may be informative for designing future iterations of the MVP program and for other municipalities, offices of community engagement, and practitioners. The findings will also contribute to the participation, resilience, and climate justice literatures, by adding perspectives on equity-centered resilience and community engagement approaches in smaller towns and rural settings.
The Stakeholder-guided holistic, Adaptive Framework for enhancing community Energy Resilience (SAFER) project advances resilience science and engineering by addressing challenges in rural Kansas communities where aging infrastructure, extreme weather, and socioeconomic disparities heighten vulnerability to energy disruptions. Traditional approaches often focus on technical performance while overlooking community concerns and priorities. SAFER responds by integrating community perspectives with advanced analytical frameworks to create a holistic model for measuring and improving resilience. Project objectives included developing novel resilience metrics, advancing modeling frameworks that capture interdependencies across infrastructures, and embedding community-centric indicators directly into planning processes for distributed energy resources. The key technical innovations included the creation of self-organizing map (SOM)-based indices for objective resilience quantification, hetero-functional graph theory (HFGT) models linking power, water, transportation, and community assets, and graph neural network (GNN) tools for identifying critical nodes in complex systems. Community-centric energy planning was demonstrated through optimal siting and sizing of (photovoltaic) PV and battery storage, ensuring resilience enhancements also addressed energy burden and energy insecurity. SAFER engaged community partners in Dodge City and Ford County through surveys, focus groups, and workshops, generating more than 600 responses that established baseline measures of energy burden, financial insecurity, and willingness-to-pay to avoid outages. This data, organized in terms of a community capitals framework, informed the development of weighted reliability indices that better reflect community costs than traditional utility metrics. SAFER’s GNN-based critical node identification framework identified expert-labelled critical nodes with over 99% accuracy, while also uncovering additional functionalities essential for proactive resilience planning. The project’s models demonstrated that optimal PV and storage deployment could improve resilience indices by over 11 percent, with dispatch strategies further enhancing outcomes, confirming both the technical effectiveness and economic feasibility of these approaches. Through its combined emphasis on rigorous modeling, community-focused planning, and community engagement, SAFER advances the state of resilience research while delivering direct benefits to rural communities. The project provides tools, guidelines, and resilience heatmaps that help utilities, local governments, and residents better anticipate disruptions, prioritize investments, and strengthen the capacity to withstand and recover from energy-related hazards. Furthermore, the developed HFG and GNN frameworks are designed for transferability, allowing them to be adapted for resilience planning in other communities with minimal retraining. This inductive learning capability provides a scalable pathway to extend the SAFER project’s impact. Thus, creating a foundation for a nationally applicable model of infrastructure resilience. Additionally, the HFG can also be extended to include other FEMA community lifelines.