Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “demand growth”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Potential Solutions to Demand Growth in Virginia: Options for Demand Flexibility [Slides]

This slide deck report presents a literature review on virtual power plants (VPPs) and a demand flexibility analysis for the state of Virginia as part of DOE's State Energy Program (SEP) technical assistance work. The literature review describes key concepts, examples, participation models, and other issues for VPPs, and the analysis section presents a state-specific demand flexibility analysis estimating the technical potential for demand response from various sectors and end-uses. These materials are meant to inform and support VA's ability to shepherd ongoing dialogue and meet energy needs in the midst of strong load growth.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Revisiting the relationship between demand growth and electricity prices

Here, in this Commentary, we aim to clarify the relationship between electricity demand and prices in the short- and longer-term. We outline three dimensions that shape this relationship: system capacity utilization, system expansion costs, and cost allocation in the rate design process. We explain why demand growth has historically been largely associated with falling electricity prices and explore arguments that future C&I demand growth may increase prices.

O'Shaughnessy, Eric [Lawrence Berkeley National La↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Data Center Driven Grid Stress Dataset for the U.S. Western Interconnection

This dataset provides projected grid stress and reliability results (including all model inputs and outputs from an open-source grid operations modeling framework - GO), for the Integrated Multisector, Multiscale Modeling (IM3) project, under varying levels of data center demand growth between 2025 and 2035 in the U.S. Western Interconnection. The scenarios and sensitivity experiments are combinations of different data center demand growth rates and energy, weather, population and economic pathways. Data center demand growth projections were sourced from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). The data center demand growth projection names are: Low (3.71% annual data center demand growth) Moderate (5% annual data center demand growth) High (10% annual data center demand growth) Higher (15% annual data center demand growth) Energy, weather, population and economic pathways are informed by two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) and two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5) following the hotter general circulation model (GCM) forcing group from a set of perturbed thermodynamics simulations. The resulting pathway names are: rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 The main scenarios and sensitivity experiments are detailed below. Reference scenario: The projected grid stress and reliability results for the U.S. Western Interconnection from a previous study. This scenario does not consider data center demand growth explicitly. Data center scenario: Building on the reference scenario, this scenario considers various data center growth rates and how they impact the U.S. Western Interconnection. Data center loads are modeled as flat 8760-hr profiles. This scenario does not consider new generation and transmission capacities specifically designed to meet the new data center demands. The related folder is named "flat". Delayed generator retirements sensitivity experiment: Building on the data center scenario, this experiment explores the impact of different levels of natural gas and nuclear generator retirement delays. The resulting scenario names are: (1) postponing 100% nuclear retirements; (2) postponing 100% nuclear and 25% natural gas retirements; (3) postponing only 50% natural gas retirements; (4) postponing 100% nuclear and 50% natural gas retirements; (5) postponing 100% nuclear and 75% natural gas retirements; and (6) postponing 100% nuclear and 100% natural gas retirements. The related folder names are: no_gen_retire_0_gas, no_gen_retire_25_gas, no_gen_retire_50_gas, no_gen_retire_50_gas_only, no_gen_retire_75_gas, and no_gen_retire_100_gas. Demand response through curtailment sensitivity experiment: Building on the data center scenario, this experiment explores the impact of different participation and compensation levels of data center demand response. The resulting scenario names are: (1) 5% demand available for curtailment with 750 $/MWh compensation; (2) 5% demand available for curtailment with 500 $/MWh compensation; (3) 5% demand available for curtailment with 250 $/MWh compensation; (4) 15% demand available for curtailment with 750 $/MWh compensation; (5) 15% demand available for curtailment with 500 $/MWh compensation; and (6) 15% demand available for curtailment with 250 $/MWh compensation. The related folder names are: dr_cost_250_drup_0_drdown_5, dr_cost_250_drup_0_drdown_15, dr_cost_500_drup_0_drdown_5, dr_cost_500_drup_0_drdown_15, dr_cost_750_drup_0_drdown_5, and dr_cost_750_drup_0_drdown_15. Combination of delayed generator retirements and demand response through curtailment sensitivity experiment: The impact of combining postponing 100% nuclear and 25% natural gas retirements with 5% demand available for curtailment with 750 $/MWh compensation is simulated. The related folder is named "dr_cost_750_drup_0_drdown_5_nuc_100_gas_25". Please refer to the README file for a detailed description of the dataset including individual files and references.

Artificial Intelligence↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2021

U.S. Renewables Portfolio Standards 2021 Status Update: Early Release

Berkeley Lab’s annual status report on U.S. renewables portfolio standards (RPS) provides an overview of key trends associated with U.S. state RPS policies. The report, published in slide-deck form, describes recent legislative revisions, key policy design features, compliance with interim targets, past and projected impacts on renewables development, and compliance costs. The 2021 Early Release, published in lieu of a 2020 edition, presents historical data through year-end 2019, with some limited results for the year 2020. Key trends from this edition of the report include the following: Evolution of state RPS programs: States continue to refine and revise their RPS policies. Among other significant changes since the start of 2019, eight states enacted higher RPS targets or created new clean-energy/zero-carbon targets (AZ, DC, MD, NM, NV, VA, WA), in most cases setting targets equal to at least 50% of retail sales. Historical impacts on renewables development: Roughly half of all growth in U.S. renewable electricity (RE) generation and capacity since 2000 is associated with state RPS requirements, though that percentage has declined in recent years, representing 23% of all U.S. RE capacity additions in 2019. However, within particular regions-namely, the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic-RPS policies continue to serve a central role in motivating RE growth. Future RPS demand and incremental needs: RPS demand growth through 2030 will require roughly 90 GW of new RE capacity and will require total U.S. non-hydro RE generation to reach 17% of electricity sales (compared to 12% in 2019). Relative to EIA projections, this amounts to roughly one-third of projected RE growth over the next decade. RPS target achievement to-date: States have generally met their interim RPS targets in recent years, with only a few exceptions reflecting unique, state-specific issues. REC pricing trends: Prices for NEPOOL Class I RECs rose steeply over 2019, reaching $40/MWh and remaining at roughly that level over 2020. PJM Tier I REC prices continued to rise at a modest pace over the course of 2020, reaching $10/MWh by year-end. Prices for solar RECs remained relatively stable over 2020, and continue to exhibit wide variation across states, with the highest prices ($200-450/MWh) in NJ, MA, and DC.RPS compliance costs and cost caps: RPS compliance costs in 2019 averaged roughly 2.6% of retail electricity bills in RPS states, compared to 2.3% in 2018, with costs in most states ranging from 0.5% to 4.5% of retail electricity bills.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Access System Enhancement (EASE): Assessment of a Distributed Energy Resource Management System for Enabling Dynamic Hosting Capacity

The Electric Access System Enhancement (EASE) project demonstrated a scalable, interoperable, and cost-effective means of integrating high penetration of distributed energy resources (DERs). The control architecture developed leveraged a Distributed Energy Resource Management System, Distribution System Operator for transacting energy, and 3rd Party DER Aggregator platform. The project identified ways to enhance the customer interconnection process to the grid and improve access to information from DERs and optimize the usage of DERs to provide energy services in a simulated day-ahead shadow market while maintain grid reliability. By integrating these capabilities into a scalable system of systems, the DSO can effectively balance DER generation and customer demand on the distribution network. This capability allows the grid to host more DER than traditionally possible on wires alone. Hosting more DER has the added benefit of supplying increased demand growth, sometimes beyond the capacity limits of the distribution network itself. This is known as a dynamic hosting capacity, which could help utilities manage the forecasted growth in electricity demand as California switch to electric vehicles and appliances. This could help to establish energy storage and PV generation as a “pseudo firm” generation resource mix if managed appropriately and provide sufficient resource adequacy for distribution capacity upgrade deferrals.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Enhancing supply resilience for critical materials: case study of gallium supply in the United States

Accelerating energy technology development will increase demand for critical raw materials, such as gallium, that enable clean energy technologies. Processing of gallium is concentrated in mainland China (98 % of global production in 2023), resulting in high supply risks for importing countries. To investigate pathways for more resilient supply, we develop a material flow analysis and apply it to the United States, showing the impacts of future domestic primary raw material production and end-of-life (EoL) product recycling on reducing import reliance of raw gallium metal. We complement this analysis with a techno-economic assessment of North American gallium production costs under various demand growth scenarios. Our results indicate that sufficient domestic feedstocks exist to meet U.S. demand under most scenarios by 2035, while EoL recycling can supply up to 50 % under a low-demand growth scenario. Domestic primary production shows significant cost advantages over gallium recycling.

Cost analysis↗
DOE OSTI2023

2022 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook

This report documents the eighth edition of the annual Standard Scenarios. It summarizes 70 forward-looking scenarios of the U.S. electricity sector that have been designed to capture a wide range of possible futures. In August 2022, the United States Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), a law aimed at accelerating U.S. decarbonization, clean energy manufacturing, and deployment of new power and end-use technologies. This year’s scenarios include representations of the main electricity-sector provisions from IRA and the potential impact on electricity demand. The Standard Scenarios are simulated using the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model, which projects utility-scale electricity sector evolution for the contiguous United States using a system-wide, least-cost approach subject to policy and operational constraints. A subset of the scenarios are simulated in the PLEXOS production cost model to obtain a broader suite of metrics at the hourly resolution, which are made available through the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) annual Cambium data sets. The scenarios can be viewed and downloaded from NREL’s Scenario Viewer. Annual results are available for the full suite of scenarios in the Standard Scenarios projects in the viewer, whereas the Cambium projects contain hourly data for a subset of scenarios. The Standard Scenarios includes a scenario called the Mid-case, which has central or median values for core inputs such as technology costs and fuel prices, moderately paced demand growth averaging 1.3% per year, and electricity sector policies as they existed in September 2022 (including IRA). The remaining 69 scenarios are created by varying inputs such as technology and fuel prices, resource availability, demand growth, whether nascent generation technologies are allowed, and by introducing national decarbonization constraints.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Application of sensitivity analysis in DYMOND/Dakota to fuel cycle transition scenarios

The ability to perform sensitivity analysis has been enabled for the nuclear fuel cycle simulator DYMOND through its coupling with the design and analysis toolkit Dakota. To test and demonstrate these new capabilities, a transition scenario and multi-parameter study were devised. The transition scenario represents a partial transition from the US nuclear fleet to a closed fuel cycle with small modular LWRs and fast reactors fueled by reprocessed used nuclear fuel. Four uncertain parameters in this transition were studied – start date of reprocessing, total reprocessing capacity, the nuclear energy demand growth, and the rate at which the fast reactors are deployed – with respect to their impact on four response metrics. The responses – total natural uranium consumed, maximum annual enrichment capacity required, total disposed mass, and total cost of the nuclear fuel cycle – were chosen based on measures known to be of interest in transition scenarios and to be significantly impacted by the varying parameters. Furthermore, analysis of this study was performed both from the direct sampling and through surrogate models developed in Dakota to calculate the global sensitivity measures Sobol’ indices. This example application of this new capability showed that the most consequential parameter to most metrics was the share of new build capacity that is fast reactors. However, for the cost metric, the scaling factor of the energy demand growth was significant and had synergistic behavior with the fast reactor new build share.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Prospects of hydrogen cogeneration and carbon dioxide utilization in electrochemical refineries for ethylene production via oxidative coupling of methane: A techno-economic assessment

Ethylene is recognized as one of the most significant chemicals globally. The projected ethylene production for 2023 stands at 227.6 million tonnes, with expectations of continued demand growth. The primary use of ethylene, accounting for over 76%, lies in the production of plastics such as polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride, and polystyrene. Despite the enduring carbon retention potential of plastics themselves, traditional ethylene feedstock production from fossil resources contributes substantially to greenhouse gas emissions, ranging from 0.29 to 2.29 kg CO2 /kg Ethylene depending on various factors like feedstock and process design. Various decarbonization strategies, including the utilization of hydrogen as a primary heat source, have been proposed to reduce the carbon footprint of ethylene production, but their efficacy remains limited, offering at best a 0–30% reduction in on-site CO 2 emissions.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Policy and Regulatory Environment for Utility-Scale Energy Storage: India

This report is part of a series investigating the potential for utility-scale energy storage in South Asia. The first part of the work is focused on opportunities and barriers for energy storage within existing policy and regulatory frameworks in the region. This report applies the previously-developed Energy Storage Readiness Assessment to evaluate the policy and regulatory environment for energy storage in India. Forthcoming reports will expand this analysis to other countries in South Asia. These evaluations are designed to provide insights on the opportunities and barriers for energy storage growth and deployment in each country. The second part of this work consists of techno-economic analysis to understand the drivers of energy storage investments in South Asia. Using NREL’s power system planning and operational models of South Asia, this analysis will identify potential storage applications and growth under various cost, policy, and demand growth scenarios. In addition, the regulatory and policy barriers and incentive mechanisms identified in the first task will be incorporated into the modeling task to understand their impact on energy storage deployment and operation. Together these studies will inform the applications and value of energy storage on South Asia power systems and policy and regulatory pathways to realize this value.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Impact of Transport Electrification Demand and Charging Schedules on Electricity Markets and Nuclear Generators

As the U.S. pursues deep decarbonization targets, electric vehicles (EVs) are likely to become a major driver of demand growth and a major determinant of daily demand patterns. This study analyzes a possible future ERCOT-like electricity grid, and examines the impact of different types of EV charging schedules on grid and market outcomes. This analysis demonstrates the significant impact of EV charging patterns on capacity expansion simulations. Even without EVs, the overall daily demand profile in a market can have significant impacts on prices and grid stability in that system, especially if non-dispatchable renewable generators (e.g. wind and solar) make up a significant fraction of the generation mix. EV demand will not necessarily follow this preexisting demand profile, so its daily trends may significantly change what generation portfolio would optimally serve the system. Furthermore, the effects of EV demand can alter the profitability of different types of units, by altering the frequency of market events like extreme-demand hours or zero-price hours. These effects are explored in this study. The EV demand levels were derived from MARKAL simulations of the West-South-Central North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) region for the year 2050, using a carbon tax of $100/ton. The baseline MARKAL simulation forecasted that 23% of the region’s annual electricity demand in 2050 would be attributable to EVs, and broke out demand projections for EV and non-EV end-use in that year. To model lower EV penetration into the system, an additional case was explored which assumed that EVs only achieved 75% of the demand level projected by MARKAL.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRS2009

Expanding Regional Airport Usage to Accommodate Increased Air Traffic Demand

Small regional airports present an underutilized source of capacity in the national air transportation system. This study sought to determine whether a 50 percent increase in national operations could be achieved by limiting demand growth at large hub airports and instead growing traffic levels at the surrounding regional airports. This demand scenario for future air traffic in the United States was generated and used as input to a 24-hour simulation of the national airspace system. Results of the demand generation process and metrics predicting the simulation results are presented, in addition to the actual simulation results. The demand generation process showed that sufficient runway capacity exists at regional airports to offload a significant portion of traffic from hub airports. Predictive metrics forecast a large reduction of delays at most major airports when demand is shifted. The simulation results then show that offloading hub traffic can significantly reduce nationwide delays.

Russell, Carl R.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Survey of projected growth and problems facing air transportation, 1975 - 1985

Results are presented of a survey conducted to determine the current opinion of people working in air transportation demand forecasting on the future of air transportation over the next ten years. In particular, the survey included questions on future demand growth, load factor, fuel prices, introduction date for the next new aircraft, the priorities of problems facing air transportation, and the probability of a substantial change in air transportation regulation. The survey participants included: airlines, manufacturers, universities, government agencies, and other organizations (financial institutions, private research companies, etc.). The results are shown for the average responses within the organization represented as well as the overall averages.

Williams, L. J.↗
DOE OSTI2026

Hybrid Power Purchase Agreements for Flexible 24/7 Energy Delivery – A Comprehensive Review of Current Practices and Research Pathways

Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) are becoming increasingly preferred among large energy consumers, such as data centers, to secure cost-effective energy and meet accelerating demand growth. Traditionally, variable renewable energy (VRE)-based PPAs operate on a pay-as-produced basis, balancing supply and demand for a relatively longer duration (e.g., annually). However, the focus is shifting toward matching supply and demand on an hourly basis to fully meet energy needs. This shift requires the integration of flexible energy resources, such as hydropower, thermal generation, and energy storage, to complement VRE sources like wind and solar, forming the foundation for 24/7 PPA. This work contributes by: (i) reviewing emerging market trends and current practices in PPA procurement, supported by data on PPA prices and technology portfolios; (ii) synthesizing the existing literature on modeling approaches for contract pricing, quantities, hybrid resource procurement, and risk management in 24/7 PPA design, while identifying key research gaps; and (iii) proposing an integrated 24/7 PPA design framework along with two contracting mechanisms from the perspectives of both PPA providers and consumers. The proposed framework highlights critical modeling challenges, risk-allocation issues, and future research opportunities for 24/7 PPA design.

24/7↗
DOE OSTI2026

Key Drivers for Offshore Wind Deployment in the Western United States

The western coast of the United States has abundant natural resources, including wind, sun, and water. Despite strong ocean winds, offshore wind energy (OSW) in the Western United States is in the early stages of technology development due largely to the deep water off the coast, which requires floating platforms rather than fixed‐bottom turbines. Floating OSW increases the technical difficulty of installation and thus the cost relative to both fixed‐bottom OSW and land‐based turbines. OSW is a potential generation option to help meet increasing demand on the west coast of the United States because it likely has fewer land‐use conflicts than other technologies and complements sources in the existing electricity supply by providing energy during times of high system stress. This paper examines the possible drivers and barriers to OSW deployment on the West Coast using the National Laboratory of the Rockies' state‐of‐the‐art capacity expansion model and the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) model. We use ReEDS to explore a multitude of future scenarios looking at key drivers for OSW deployment, including variations on the cost of OSW, electricity demand growth, and the availability of competing technologies to examine the factors that may play a role in OSW growth. Assuming coastal state policies such as renewable portfolio and clean energy standards remain in place, we find that OSW can play a role in meeting electricity demand and provide energy during stressful grid conditions and find that deployment from the least‐cost investment model ranges from 7.6 to 38 GW by 2045.

17 WIND ENERGY↗