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.
The electric utility is a crucial partner for electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure projects. Tribes should engage with the utility early and often for successful charging projects. This fact sheet outlines key information a Tribe needs for engagement.
Working together, Sandia National Laboratories, Southern California Edison (SCE) - an Investor-Owned Utility (IOU) - and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) are studying how electric utilities can use equity and resilience metrics to help inform the prioritization and sequencing of resilience-driven infrastructure investments. To this end, this project evaluated “Social Burden,” an equitable resilience metric which measures the potential impact of disruptions in access to non-electric critical services on people and estimates community resilience to these disruptions. The Social Burden was expanded to incorporate SCE’s existing equity metric and applied to evaluate the potential impacts from a range of climate-informed hypothetical outage scenarios developed under SCE’s 2022 Climate Adaptation Vulnerability Assessment. One baseline (“blue-sky”) state and eight different outage scenarios were evaluated to measure the potential impacts of the outages on non-electric infrastructure, critical services, and people. Key findings include: 1) the Social Burden framework is flexible enough to adapt to and build upon existing utility equity and/or resilience metrics, 2) Social Burden results highlight the high degree of non-electric service redundancy within the SCE service area with most (6/8) hypothetical outage scenarios predicted to increase people’s Social Burden by less than 10%; however, 3) access to critical services and people’s ability to obtain them is unequal and spatially clustered, meaning that there are some hypothetical outage scenarios (2/8) that will exert a higher toll on communities directly experiencing the outage as well as some nearby communities with pre-existing vulnerabilities. The report concludes with recommendations for potential use cases of the expanded Social Burden metric and identifies priority follow-on work. Potential use cases may include incorporating equity into IOU’s prioritization of climate resilience investments. Additionally, Social Burden analysis may provide additional data and insights to augment grid planning, potentially by identifying additional needs and/or prioritizing previously identified needs.
Historically, challenges to managing electric utility data exchange have been addressed through dedicated communication solutions, enabling the transmission of data with both speed and security. Protocols have been deployed in a relatively uniform fashion; for example, field communications for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) are commonly implemented using IEEE 1815 (DNP3).
During natural hazard events (hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, etc.) and recent man-made events (e.g., cyber attacks), the exchange of near real-time, spatially refined data within the response community is critical. The EAGLE-I$^{TM}$ platform is one tool that facilitates this data for decision makers within the energy sector. While much information can be collected and integrated into the system directly, other pertinent data must be augmented by other derived data products to enhance the information and allow for a consistent evaluation of on-the-ground conditions. One such data set that requires the addition of other derived data is the electric utility customer outage data that is aggregated to the county level within the EAGLE-I application. Without a county customer data set, outages can only be compared on total counts, which gives greater importance to higher population outages. Including an electric utility customer data set at the county level allows for these outage counts to be converted to percent outages and brings a consistent classification of outages and equal importance to all outages. To achieve this, several available data sets were combined and spatial disaggregation techniques were employed to model customer estimates at the county scale. This paper presents the approach to produce this data for the United States and lessons learned from working with these disparate data sets. Data validation is provided, where possible, and limitations of the model and possible improvements are discussed.
Asset valuation by electric utilities is becoming increasingly difficult in the rapidly changing electric sector. Rapid deployment of variable generation and inverter-based storage systems along with uncertain demand growth, climate, policies, and other factors create a challenging environment for understanding the value proposition of a new potential asset. This report describes an effort between the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and three U.S. Department of Energy laboratories to perform a detailed review of utility modeling and analysis practices for asset valuation and identify challenges and opportunities for advancing its methods into the future. It focuses on a case study of new potential pumped storage hydropower (PSH) because of growing interest in new PSH capacity to provide energy balancing, firm capacity, and a range of ancillary services. Staff from the DOE labs conducted systematic interviews about current practices in capacity expansion modeling, production-cost modeling, hydrological modeling, and transmission stability modeling while also discussing how scenario analysis is conducted and how models and data are integrated. The effort resulted in a set of model, integration, and scenario recommendations that could be valuable to TVA, other utilities, system operators, and other stakeholders conducting integrated grid analysis. Individual model recommendations suggest exploring computational tradeoffs with detail and resolution across spatiotemporal structure, supply- and demand-side details, transmission overlays, market interactions, and ancillary services. Automated processes to pass data between models and conduct larger scenario suites could also enhance valuation practices by enabling a more consistent study of asset value across a broader range of uncertain future grid conditions where PSH could be particularly valuable. TVA and other industry stakeholders can learn from and adapt applied research-grade methods developed by DOE laboratories and other research institutions to improve decision making and accelerate progress towards a reliable, economic, sustainable energy system.
Report analyzes plans developed by water and electric utilities to address the impacts of changes in the climate within their service territories. The analysis identifies the main types of changes that utilities address, such as sea level rise, extreme heat, and compound events such as freezing rain/show and extreme wind events. It then identifies adaptation approaches utilities have proposed or adopted to address the changes that are anticipated in their service territories. The report also identifies the mechanisms utilities (and in some cases the governments which the utilities are part of) use to ensure that energy or environmental equity is increased as a result of the resilience program. In summary, the report provides a compendium of adaptation strategies that can be used by others as they review their own need to increase climate resilience.
The rapid evolution of Software as a Service (SaaS), cloud computing, and artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming the electric utility industry, reshaping operations, customer engagement, and financial models. This webinar introduced how utilities can deploy advanced software solutions and AI-driven analytics to improve grid efficiency, optimize asset management, and accurately forecast demand.
NLR designed and led a six-month peer-learning cohort from July through December 2025 on “Engaging With Electric Utilities for Successful Local Partnerships” as part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy to Communities (E2C) program. Representatives from 15 local and regional governments from across the United States participated in monthly workshops covering best practices for engaging with their utilities to advance their own energy goals. This document shares key takeaways, lessons learned, and resources from the cohort that may be useful to local governments, regional governments, or Tribes.
Modern electrical grids face growing stability risks from customer-owned generators, especially at points of common couplings (PCCs). Disruptive behavior from power-electronic sources can cause protective relays to isolate problematic generators, making measurement integrity critical. This article presents a distributed ledger technology (DLT) approach that uses smart contracts to evaluate PCC voltage measurements and trigger backup breaker operations. The approach is framed as a verifiable, multi-organization attestation and audit layer, not as a real-time control security mechanism. In the proposed architecture, voltage measurements from a hardware protective relay are anchored on a DLT through the Cyber Grid Guard (CGG) system for attestation by both the grid utility and customer-owned generator. A Voltage Service Limits (VSLs) smart contract evaluates the on-chain measurements against allowable phase-voltage limits derived from the ANSI C84.1 standard. The framework is validated in a hardware-relay-in-the-loop test bed under sustained-undervoltage, sustained-overvoltage, and transient line-to-line fault scenarios. The results show that the VSL smart contract can process these measurements and issue backup breaker actions consistent with the defined service-limit criteria, demonstrating the DLT potential as a verifiable audit layer at the PCC that complements primary protection.
This scoping study synthesizes information that will help stakeholders understand the scope, scale, and drivers of recent increases in investor-owned utility (IOU) expenditures on local distribution power grids, while providing regulators and other decision-makers with potential strategies to keep electricity bills down. The study includes five distinct components. Drawing first on data from FERC Form 1, it summarizes key trends in past and recent IOU distribution costs. Next, through a review of a sample of distribution-system plans, it characterizes material drivers of planned distribution expenditures. Ultimately, regulators must approve cost recovery for IOU expenditures, including those for the distribution system. The study therefore also: examines trends in utility requests and regulatory approvals related to changes in retail rates and return on equity; identifies areas where utility shareholder and customer incentives may be misaligned; and develops a menu of options that state regulators might consider to optimize distribution system expenditures. Some of the key findings include: - IOU distribution spending at a national level has grown by 6%/yr since 2014 in real dollar terms, 4x faster than in the prior 20 years and consisting mostly of capital (not operating) expenditure. - On a per-kWh basis, increases in IOU distribution costs since 2014 represent over 30% of the overall national-average increase in retail electricity rates. - Regional spending growth has ranged from 2-8%/yr, with larger estimated rate impacts in CAISO, then NYISO & ISO-NE, and then the Southeast, MISO & PJM (see figure). - Some utilities are planning for significantly increased distribution system spending. Planned spending on managing the existing system (asset replacement, safety & reliability, and resilience are all important drivers) exceeds that for capacity expansion. - IOU rate increase requests ($18 billion in 2025) and public utility commission (PUC) approval levels (average of 64% of requested amounts from 2021-2025) have recently hit multi-decadal highs. - PUCs in New England and the Southeast have recently approved a greater fraction of rate requests (>75%, on average) than in ther regions, while PUCs in California and the Southeast have generally authorized higher equity returns than in other regions. - Regulators have many tools to tackle potential misalignments between utility and customer interests and, more specifically, to optimize and reduce distribution costs. Shorter-term options include those related to return on equity, capital structure, depreciation, trackers, construction work in progress, and securitization. Longer-term options include performance-based regulation and a wide variety of planning-related requirements. All options embed important tradeoffs.
Cost-effectiveness evaluation of potential grid modernization solutions is integral to integrated distribution system planning (IDSP). This report synthesizes and updates prior cost-effectiveness approaches identified by the U.S. Department of Energy for grid modernization investments, incorporating multi-objective decision-making. The structure of the report follows the IDSP process, from identifying objectives and priorities to prioritizing grid solutions. The report details two methods for conducting initial cost-effectiveness screening of individual and interdependent grid components: (1) Lowest Reasonable Cost and (2) Benefit-Cost Analysis. Drawing on solutions that passed the initial cost-effectiveness screen, the utility prioritizes grid solutions based on policy objectives and priorities, regulatory compliance, operational efficiencies, and other factors to develop a portfolio of distribution solutions. The utility uses multi-objective decision-making to assess each proposed expenditure against each objective and respective metric. The utility applies a weighting factor, reflecting the priority ranking of the objective, to the total numerical “score” based on the contribution of the proposed solution to addressing each objective. Ultimately, the utility ranks each expenditure from highest to lowest priority using the final score for each solution as well as its cost. The report includes examples of emerging best practices for states and utilities and a cost-effectiveness process checklist.
LBNL researchers developed a template and companion guide for structuring distribution system plans. The template covers 10 key sections in utility distribution system plans and underlying topics: -Executive Summary -Planning Objectives -Current Distribution System -Planning Approach -Asst Management, Reliability and Resilience -O&M Expenses -Capacity Expansion Planning -Solution Identification -Cost-effectiveness -Implementation For each section in the template, the companion guide provides: a description of the topics covered and their importance; the type of content to include in the plan; an example utility approach; and references to other utility plans that serve as models for the topic.
In 2021, Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations, Inc. launched the “ICE 2.0 Initiative” – a national study to refresh the underlying data and enhance the functionality of the ICE Calculator. The Initiative involves Berkeley Lab contracting with sponsoring utilities to administer identical, updated and comprehensive interruption cost surveys to statistically representative samples of each utility’s customers. Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations then pool the survey results across the utilities and use them to update the analytical engines that drive the ICE Calculator. The ICE 2.0 Initiative is being conducted in phases. Each phase involves the administration of interruption cost surveys to the customers of sponsoring utilities, followed by an update to the ICE Calculator based on analysis of the pooled survey results. This report describes the activities and findings from Phase 1 of the ICE 2.0 Initiative. Phase 1 was sponsored by eight utilities: American Electric Power, Commonwealth Edison, Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, DTE Electric, Exelon, National Grid, and Puget Sound Energy. Phase 1 involved 11 customer interruption cost survey activities representing a total of 24 electricity distribution service territories, 23 of them located in the Eastern and Midwestern regions of the U.S. and one located in the Pacific Northwest. ICE 2.0 vs. 1.0 Comparison This memorandum compares customer power interruption costs estimated using the recently updated Interruption Cost Estimate (ICE) Calculator (“ICE 2.0”) to the original ICE Calculator (“ICE 1.0”). ICE 1.0 was developed in 2009 based on 15 independent power interruption cost surveys conducted by 10 electric utilities between 1989 and 2012. ICE 2.0 was developed in 2025 through a national initiative based on a consistent set of power interruption cost surveys and 11 surveying efforts conducted across 24 electric utility service territories between 2022 and 2024.
Flooding poses a growing threat to Iowa's electric distribution system, yet utilities face significant data and modeling challenges in planning effective resilience investments. This report provides a foundational assessment of how distribution utilities in Iowa, investor-owned, municipal, and cooperative, approach resilience planning, with a focus on flood risk. It combines hazard characterization, review of state and utility practices, and application of NLR's Energy Resilience Analysis for Distribution Systems (ERAD) and Capacity Expansion Decision Support for Distribution Networks (CADET) tools. Using FEMA floodplains, Iowa Flood Center depth grids, and utility infrastructure data, the analysis quantifies asset exposure, simulates outage risks, and evaluates resilience strategies such as pole hardening, undergrounding, and substation protection. Results indicate that while feeder-level upgrades provide incremental benefits, the most significant reductions in outage risk are achieved through targeted substation interventions. The report highlights key data gaps, such as limited elevation data and fragility functions, and underscores the need for probability-weighted investment frameworks to address both frequent and catastrophic flood events. These insights aim to support utilities, state agencies, and federal partners in prioritizing resilience investments that safeguard Iowa's electric grid against future flooding.
Rural-serving electric utilities (RSEUs)—including electric cooperatives, municipal systems, and small investor-owned utilities—are essential players in the evolving energy landscape. These community-focused entities are increasingly being asked to consider distributed energy resources (DERs) such as rooftop and ground-mounted solar, wind, battery storage, smart water heaters, and demand response programs (NRECA 2025; Lenhart et al. 2020). Yet the path to DER adoption is far from straightforward in the rural context. This report is based on in-depth interviews with managers of rural electric cooperatives across the United States. These conversations offer a grounded, unvarnished look at how DERs are perceived, what barriers exist, and what conditions might enable integration and adoption. While the utilities interviewed vary in geography, size, and DER experience, several clear and common themes emerged across electric cooperatives such that the report recommends the development of a DER Integration Runbook to help utilities assess readiness, define local use cases, engage stakeholders, pilot projects, and iterate, expanding over time.
Residential buildings account for significant energy consumption, creating opportunities to offer grid services. As electric utilities seek to implement effective system operation strategies, understanding residential energy consumption patterns becomes essential; However, the time intervals of load profiles measured by utilities' smart meters are typically from 15 minutes to 60 minutes. The low-resolution data make it hard to extract appliance-level load information, which is critical for providing grid services. This paper presents a load profile generator designed to produce synthetic load profiles for residential buildings that emphasizes the importance of accurate representations of realistic energy consumption patterns. The generator takes realistic low-resolution residential load measurements and weather data as inputs, producing 1-minute interval profiles that match the characteristics of the original profiles. Further, this generator can be used to populate load profiles in areas where actual measurements are limited to improve the ability of utilities to analyze their distribution systems. By providing more high-resolution residential building load profiles, this tool supports electric utilities to enhance their residential building load control strategies and improve overall grid stability.
The Electrical & Computer Engineering (ECE) Department at Portland State University (PSU) has developed a Power Engineering Internship (PEI) program that provides engineering career development pathways within the electric utility industry. The PEI is supported by several U.S. Department of Energy grants that aim to develop quality career opportunities and develop a future electric utility workforce that represents the nation’s diverse populations. The PSU ECE Department intends to use surveys of internship participants as assessment tools for its ABET accreditation process, in particular, the ABET Criteria 3 Student Outcomes (SOs). SOs relate to the knowledge, skills, and behaviors that students acquire as they progress through an engineering program [1]. They describe what engineering students are expected to know and should be able to do by the time they graduate. Engineering education literature presents multiple methods for using internships as means for assessing SOs. Methods include using self-assessments that derive from internship experiences as well as mapping survey responses from employers and interns to SOs. Such methods gain value as they are assessed over multiple years. However, the majority of this literature discusses assessment tools that were developed for the ABET 2000 Criteria 3 “a through k” SOs. One of our motivations is to provide assessment tools that can be used to assess modern Criteria 3 SOs based on students’ internship experiences.
Most states today require regulated electric utilities to file an IRP every 1 to 5 years, and some utilities voluntarily prepare these plans. Planning needs have changed in recent years due to emerging load growth, plant retirements, rising costs, and more extreme weather events – among other factors. In response, Synapse Energy Economics and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory produced a joint report, Best Practices in Integrated Resource Planning: A guide for planners developing the electricity resource mix of the future. The guide offers best planning practices for electricity systems undergoing a major transition, but also contains a wealth of practical guidance to develop technically sophisticated, clearer, more effective, and state-of-the-art electric utility resource plans. The guide is for resource planning professionals and stakeholders involved in resource planning processes. This diverse group includes utility personnel tasked with conducting resource planning and making investment decisions, state regulatory commissions that develop planning guidance and oversee the resource planning process, and stakeholders that represent a wide range of interests—utility consumer advocates, environmental groups, industrial customers, local governments, independent power producers, and many other