Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “management”

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

Reservoir Sediment Management and Monitoring Database

Overview This dataset compiles dam sediment management and monitoring information from surveys, case studies, and journal articles. Additionally, features described by the National Inventory of Dams (i.e., presence of sluice gates) are included to indicate known infrastructure features that may address sediment releases. The location and description of records from downstream monitoring gages are catalogued in order to help with tracking conditions over time (e.g., before and after management actions, as operations change, etc.). The data help address national scale understanding of challenges and solutions related to the accumulation of sediment behind a dam as well as downstream passage. Sediment trapping causes problems as it reduces storage capacity, disrupts dam and reservoir function, impedes access for recreation, alters water quality/habitat conditions, and contributes to riverbank and coastal erosion within the reservoir. Data compilation from a variety of sources is a first step towards assessing system-wide efficacy of management solutions. This dataset was developed under the Water Power Technologies Office funded effort which began as a Seedling on Reservoir Sedimentation Data, and was supported by the Reservoir Sedimentation Modeling Framework and Data Analysis project. These projects have addressed challenges in describing sediment transport, trapping, and management at dams throughout the US. Methodology An outer join on dams/reservoirs with surveys and survey reports (documented in the RESSED database, USBR or USACE databases, project websites, etc.) with the National Inventory of Dams, based on the NIDID to determine dams with documented management and/or sluice gates. Additional dams with documented management activity were identified through review of technical articles from the past 25 years in Journal of Hydrology, Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, Geomorphology, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Water, Journal of Cleaner Production, International Journal of Sediment Research, Nature Scientific Reports, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, and Environmental Science and Pollution Research. Individual records were created for each survey or management activity documented. To evaluate downstream sediment monitoring records, the nhdPlusTools and dataRetrieval packages in R were used to find gages within 10km of each dam in the management database. Length of record and location of matched gages were retrieved for those parameters relevant to sediment concentration or total sediment discharge.

Hansen, Carly [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000193280838)↗
DOE OSTI2024

Considerations for Managing DOE Standard Canisters within an Over-canister as Part of an Integrated Waste Management System PPT

To better enable informed decision making regarding the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management Program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring research into a comprehensive integrated waste management system (IWMS) that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). An important aspect of the IWMS is DOE-managed Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF). DOE and its predecessor agencies have generated, transported, received, stored, and reprocessed SNF at DOE facilities nationwide, and DOE is responsible for managing the SNF currently in its possession. These fuels come from a wide range of reactor types that employ various cladding materials, fuel materials, and enrichments. To enable interim, road-ready dry storage (RRDS) of the wide variety of SNF types found in the DOE inventory, a standardized canister system (i.e., the DOE Standard Canister) was proposed for the packaging demonstration. This robust, welded canister system is designed to confine radionuclides, prevent criticality by precluding content moderation, and satisfy other requirements as part of a larger storage, transportation, and disposal system. While SNF has yet to be loaded into a DOE Standard Canister, DOE Standard Canister designs were included in past storage facility and disposal facility design licensing endeavors. In a renewed effort to evaluate packaging SNF at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in a RRDS configuration, researchers are planning the RRDS Packaging Demonstration. This demonstration is supplemented by analytical structural, criticality, and material compatibility evaluations that support management of SNF in DOE Standard Canisters, taking advantage of past analysis work to the extent possible. One of the largest differences between the current Packaging Demonstration and past analytical evaluations is the inclusion of an over-canister containing multiple DOE Standard Canisters. For the Packaging Demonstration, DOE Standard Canisters loaded with SNF are planned to be placed in a larger diameter over-canister. The sealed over-canister could then be placed in a storage overpack for onsite storage, or in a transportation overpack for shipment to an offsite storage location or disposal site once one becomes available. This paper examines the relevant considerations and provides a preliminary evaluation of integrating the over-canister configuration into the storage, transportation, and disposal processes of the overall waste management system. For storage and transportation, the over-canister can be considered analogous to a multi-purpose canister (MPC) for commercial SNF. For disposal, the DOE Standard Canisters could be removed from the over-canister and placed in a co-disposal waste package with canisters containing vitrified high-level radioactive waste (HLW) similar to configurations examined previously, or the sealed over-canisters might be capable of direct disposal in a waste package.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Management of Risks Associated with Application of Novel Materials in Novel Operating Environments in Novel Reactor Designs

There is currently no widely agreed, detailed general method for licensing a novel plant incorporating novel materials (or materials being deployed in novel environments); in many such situations, there are no directly applicable engineering code cases for decision-makers (including regulators) to rely on. This paper discusses a framework for solving this problem that is based on the Reliability and Integrity Management (RIM) approach delineated in ASME BPVC Section XI Division 2. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.246, Rev. 0, endorses, with conditions, the subject portion of the ASME Code. The proposed framework is meant to support development of a licensing case by addressing certain technical challenges. The framework discussed here is compatible with the Licensing Modernization Project, but applying it in a specific case will call for advances in the state of practice, if not the state of the art. The RIM approach calls for applicants to (a) allocate reliability targets to plant structures, systems, and components (SSCs), (b) show that they are able to relate the currently observed physical condition of each SSC in the program to its failure probability well enough to determine whether the target reliability allocations are being satisfied, allowing for uncertainty related to the novelty of the materials/designs/operating environments, and (c) be able to demonstrate that the proposed program of surveillances will reliably detect unacceptable degradation of an SSC before SSC failure occurs. These challenges are discussed in the paper, and a potentially applicable modeling approach based on cumulative damage rather than failure rates is briefly illustrated.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Best Practices for Plug Load Management Using a Building Energy Management System

The University of California San Diego (UCSD) successfully integrated PLCs with their BEMS, which resulted in 66% energy savings over one week across 25 plug loads (K. Chia et al. 2023). UCSD documented each step of this effort, highlighting best practices along the way, in their 10-page brief, "Best Practices for Plug Load Management Using a Building Energy Management System" (also referred to as "brief" in this document). This fact sheet provides highlights and key takeaways from UCSD's brief. The reader is encouraged to read UCSD's full brief if they wish to move forward with implementing PLC integration with their BEMS.

Building Energy Management System Integration↗
DOE OSTI2025

Soil fertility management for sustainable Miscanthus × giganteus production: Increased tiller weight from nitrogen management explains yield gains in aged miscanthus

Aging-related yield decline in Miscanthus × giganteus (miscanthus) remains a major constraint to sustainable biomass production. This study evaluated how nitrogen (N) management and soil fertility influence yield-component traits and productivity in aging miscanthus. Trials were conducted at two sites established in 2008 at the University of Illinois Energy Farm, Urbana, IL. (i) The Sun Grant trial received 0, 60, and 120 kg N ha −1 annually until 2015. Starting 2021, half of each plot received 60 or 120 kg N ha −1 , resulting in six legacy-contemporary treatments: 0N–0N, 0N–120N, 60N–0N, 60N–60N, 120N–0N, 120N–120N. (ii) The Energy Farm trial remained unfertilized until 2014, when one half of each plot received 56 kg N ha −1 , forming two treatments: 0N–0N, 0N–56N. Sun Grant trial results showed N fertilization increased tiller density (tillers m −2 ) and tiller weight (g tiller −1 ) in juvenile to early-mature miscanthus (2011–2015). After N withdrawal, both traits declined (20 % and 40 %), though legacy effects persisted in tiller weight in the aging stands (2020–2023). Contemporary N had little effect on tiller density but increased tiller weight by 34 %–77 %, resulting in 23 %–106 % higher machine-harvested biomass yield in 0–120N, 60-60N, and 120-120N plots. At the Energy Farm trial, 0N–56N plots yielded 59 %–108 % more biomass than 0N–0N. Soil total N increased (Sun Grant: 47 % by 2020; Energy Farm: 58 % by 2023), while Mehlich-3 P (42 %–44 %) and K (21 %–46 %) declined. These findings identify tiller weight as a key determinant of biomass yield in aging miscanthus and highlight the need for P and K management for long-term productivity.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Data for Soil Fertility Management for Sustainable Miscanthus × giganteus Production: Increased Tiller Weight from Nitrogen Management Explains Yield Gains in Aged Miscanthus

Aging-related yield decline in Miscanthus × giganteus (miscanthus) remains a major constraint to sustainable biomass production. This study evaluated how nitrogen (N) management and soil fertility influence yield-component traits and productivity in aging miscanthus. Trials were conducted at two sites established in 2008 at the University of Illinois Energy Farm, Urbana, IL. (i) The Sun Grant trial received 0, 60, and 120 kg N ha−1 annually until 2015. Starting 2021, half of each plot received 60 or 120 kg N ha−1, resulting in six legacy-contemporary treatments: 0N–0N, 0N–120N, 60N–0N, 60N–60N, 120N–0N, 120N–120N. (ii) The Energy Farm trial remained unfertilized until 2014, when one half of each plot received 56 kg N ha−1, forming two treatments: 0N–0N, 0N–56N. Sun Grant trial results showed N fertilization increased tiller density (tillers m−2) and tiller weight (g tiller−1) in juvenile to early-mature miscanthus (2011–2015). After N withdrawal, both traits declined (20 % and 40 %), though legacy effects persisted in tiller weight in the aging stands (2020–2023). Contemporary N had little effect on tiller density but increased tiller weight by 34 %–77 %, resulting in 23 %–106 % higher machine-harvested biomass yield in 0–120N, 60-60N, and 120-120N plots. At the Energy Farm trial, 0N–56N plots yielded 59 %–108 % more biomass than 0N–0N. Soil total N increased (Sun Grant: 47 % by 2020; Energy Farm: 58 % by 2023), while Mehlich-3 P (42 %–44 %) and K (21 %–46 %) declined. These findings identify tiller weight as a key determinant of biomass yield in aging miscanthus and highlight the need for P and K management for long-term productivity.

miscanthus↗
DOE OSTI2025

Underground Test Area Activity Waste Management Plan; and Attachment 1 Fluid Management Plan for the Underground Test Area Activity

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office initiated the Underground Test Area Activity to characterize the risk posed to human health and the environment as a result of underground nuclear testing activities at the Nevada National Security Site. The UGTA Activity is now administered by the DOE Environmental Management Nevada Program. This document is a revision to NNSA/NSO (2009). The new document and revision number reflect EM Nevada Program as the current UGTA Activity administrator.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Opportunities for Earth Observation to Inform Risk Management for Ocean Tipping Points

Abstract As climate change continues, the likelihood of passing critical thresholds or tipping points increases. Hence, there is a need to advance the science for detecting such thresholds. In this paper, we assess the needs and opportunities for Earth Observation (EO, here understood to refer to satellite observations) to inform society in responding to the risks associated with ten potential large-scale ocean tipping elements: Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation; Atlantic Subpolar Gyre; Beaufort Gyre; Arctic halocline; Kuroshio Large Meander; deoxygenation; phytoplankton; zooplankton; higher level ecosystems (including fisheries); and marine biodiversity. We review current scientific understanding and identify specific EO and related modelling needs for each of these tipping elements. We draw out some generic points that apply across several of the elements. These common points include the importance of maintaining long-term, consistent time series; the need to combine EO data consistently with in situ data types (including subsurface), for example through data assimilation; and the need to reduce or work with current mismatches in resolution (in both directions) between climate models and EO datasets. Our analysis shows that developing EO, modelling and prediction systems together, with understanding of the strengths and limitations of each, provides many promising paths towards monitoring and early warning systems for tipping, and towards the development of the next generation of climate models.

Wood, Richard A. (ORCID:0000000239609513)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Insights Into Nature-Based Climate Solutions: Managing Forests for Climate Resilience and Carbon Stability

Successful implementation of forest management as a nature-based climate solution is dependent on the durability of management-induced changes in forest carbon storage and sequestration. As forests face unprecedented stability risks in the face of ongoing climate change, much remains unknown regarding how management will impact forest stability, or how interactions with climate might shift the response of forests to management across spatiotemporal scales. Here, we used a process-based model to simulate multidecadal projections of forest dynamics in response to changes in management and climate. Simulations were conducted across gradients in forest type, edaphic factors, and management intensity under two alternate radiative forcing scenarios (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). This allowed for the quantification of forest stability shifts in response to climate change, and the role of management in modulating that response, where ecosystem stability is characterized as the resilience and temporal stability of net primary production, aboveground biomass, and soil carbon. Our results indicate that forest structure is primarily shaped by management, but the same management strategy often produced divergent structures over time, due to interactions with regional climate change. We found that management can be used to increase stability and minimize the release of stored carbon by reducing mortality, but also highlight the regional dependency of management-induced changes in resilience to climate change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Impacts of Forest Management-Induced Productivity Changes on Future Land Use and Land Cover Change

Anthropogenic land use and land cover change (LULCC) is projected to continue in the future. However, the influence of forest management on forest productivity change and subsequent LULCC projections remains under-investigated. This study explored the impacts of forest management-induced change in forest productivity on LULCC throughout the 21st century. Specifically, we developed a framework to softly couple the Global Change Analysis Model and Global Timber Model to consider forest management-induced forest productivity change and projected future LULCC across the five Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). We found future increases in forest management intensity overall drive the increase of forest productivity. The forest management-induced forest productivity change shows diverse responses across all SSPs, with a global increase from 2015 to 2100 ranging from 3.9% (SSP3) to 8.8% (SSP1). This further leads to an overall decrease in the total area with a change of land use types, with the largest decrease under SSP1 (-7.5%) and the smallest decrease under SSP3 (-0.7%) in 2100. Among land use types, considering forest management-induced change significantly reduces the expansion of managed forest and also reduces the loss of natural land in 2100 across SSPs. This suggests that ignoring forest management-induced forest productivity change underestimates the efficiency of wood production, overestimates the managed forest expansion required to meet the future demand, and consequently, potentially introduces uncertainties into relevant analyses, for example, carbon cycle and biodiversity. Thus, we advocate to better account for the impacts of forest management in future LULCC projections.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Database and Explorer

Overview The Carbon Management Projects (CONNECT) Toolkit is an online exploratory visualization tool developed by the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) with support from other federal agencies such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). It provides a single point of access to authoritative information on federal agency investment in a portfolio of research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects that have been publicly announced to advance technologies for point source carbon capture, carbon dioxide removal, transport, storage, and conversion, collectively referred to as carbon management. The RD&D programs covered in this tool are authorized by annual congressional appropriations ("Base Program") and the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The tool also incorporates public information on other federal initiatives, such as the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs, and public information released by other government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) and Primacy States’ Underground Injection Control Class VI permits and EPA’s facility level greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Developed in a geographic information system, the tool organizes carbon management projects into five groups based on the primary technology that a project aims to advance, each visually represented as a digital layer ("carbon management project layer"). Only federally funded projects are included, which can be awarded projects that are completed or ongoing, or projects that have been selected but are currently under negotiation. Project information can be viewed in the map or in the attribute table below it when turned on. In the map view, each project is displayed at either its host site (for field work), where available, or its performer site (project lead's location, further explained in the table below). Host sites and performer sites are represented in distinct icons. Several reference layers offer additional public information on infrastructural and natural resource environment for carbon management. These reference layers, combined with multiple geographical basemaps, enable users to visualize the carbon management project layers in context. Carbon management project information will be updated monthly based on feedback and information availability. Carbon management project layers Point Source Carbon Capture (PSC) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from power plants or industrial facilities. Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on capturing CO2 from the atmosphere, including direct air capture (DAC) and DAC hubs, direct ocean capture, enhanced mineralization, and biomass carbon removal and storage. For projects with multiple host sites, each of the sites are displayed individually with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the total for the entire project. Carbon Transport This layer contains DOE- and DOT-funded projects focused on CO2 transport. The Transport Research and Development sublayer contains projects that do not involve physical infrastructure; the Proposed Transport Corridor sublayer contains projects for which either a route for the transport infrastructure has been proposed or a general area for the transport infrastructure has been identified. Carbon Storage This layer contains DOE-funded key projects focused on CO2 storage. For projects with multiple field-work sites, each of the sites are displayed individually on the map with the project cost and cost sharing information representing the overall total for the entire project. Carbon Conversion This layer contains DOE-funded projects focused on converting CO2 into economically valuable products. Reference layers The following layers provide additional information in the geographic proximity of carbon management projects. Users should reference the original sources for more details (weblinks provided below and in pop-up windows on the map). Regional Clean Hydrogen Hub and Facility These layers illustrate the approximate areas of the Regional Clean Hydrogen Hubs announced by DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) and the approximate locations of individual facilities that constitute the hubs (see "Where are the H2Hubs located?" on the webpage linked above). EPA Facility Level GHG Emissions (direct emitter) This layer shows direct CO2 emissions from stationary sources in 2022, using data extracted from EPA's Facility Level Information on GreenHouse gases Tool (FLIGHT). Captured and injected CO2 are not deducted from direct emitters’ total emissions. Contact EPA for additional details. Underground Injection Control Class VI permit/permit application This layer shows the locations of CO2 injection wells that are granted or in the process of applying for an Underground Injection Control Class VI permit by EPA or a Primacy State (currently Louisiana, North Dakota, and Wyoming). The URLs for the permits or permit applications are provided in the pop-up windows associated with the well locations. Contact EPA for additional details. Carbon Storage Resource This layer contains information on prospective CO2 storage resources in saline formations and oil and gas reservoirs provided by the National Carbon Sequestration Database and Geographic Information System (NATCARB) spatial database. Contact NETL for additional details. Existing CO2 pipeline This layer shows active CO2 pipelines based on information digitized from the map issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Contact PHMSA for additional details.

Carbon Conversion↗
DOE OSTI2025

Sustainable forest management for carbon, wood and biodiversity must consider natural disturbance regimes

Abstract Forests provide multiple benefits that include sequestering carbon, supporting biodiversity, and providing wood products. Managing temperate forests to achieve these benefits sustainably is challenging given the legacy of past human impacts, the complexity of forest development, and increasing but unpredictable disturbances. These intricacies prompted debate about the most effective management of temperate forests to achieve climate mitigation while sustaining forest productivity, regeneration, and diversity. Most research focused on management impacts under relatively stable environmental conditions, whereas forests are facing increasingly frequent and more severe climatic and biotic disturbances. Here, we used a regionally calibrated forest growth model to simulate the effects of forest management on carbon, biodiversity, and wood production under prevalent natural disturbances in the northeastern US. We developed scenarios combining forest management and disturbance regimes based on assumptions of species-specific tree regeneration and mortality rates. We compared passive management with no cutting that prioritizes maintaining existing forest trees with two common regional harvest practices: exploitative timber harvest that prioritizes short-term wood production and regenerative timber harvest that prioritizes regenerating biodiverse native forest tree seedlings. In the absence of natural disturbance, no cutting provides 41% higher forest carbon storage and 50% higher tree structural diversity after 100 years than exploitative or regenerative practices. The presence of drought, windstorm, pest, and disease disturbances altered these outcomes. Regenerative forest management provides 25% higher forest carbon storage and 26% higher tree structural diversity after 100 years than no cutting. Our results demonstrate that wood products and their carbon storage and fossil emission avoidance are important for determining the total climate benefits of forest management under natural disturbances. Our findings highlight that natural disturbance regimes should be considered when selecting management to promote multiple forest benefits, suggesting the need for tailored as opposed to one-size-fits-all policies to sustainably manage temperate forests worldwide.

Liu, Weier (ORCID:0000000265914239)↗
DOE OSTI2026

Advancing Asset Management in Water Infrastructure Systems

Aging water system infrastructure, including drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater, poses a growing challenge for utilities and municipalities. These water systems have well documented challenges with respect to their age, condition, and level of service. ASCE annual report cards consistently rate these infrastructure systems in the United States as underfunded, overcapacity, or past service life (ASCE 2025 Report Card). For example, Chini and Stillwell (2017) estimated that the mean water loss in drinking water systems, i.e., non-revenue water, is approximately 16% across the United States. These concerns are not just relegated to the United States, with Courtenay, British Columbia, identifying 17% of their water main pipes as in a ‘poor’ condition state, defined as a category condition 5 out of 5 (City of Courtenay, 2024). These cases illustrate the challenges utilities are facing to manage extensive networks of infrastructure to deliver a consistent and high level of service. For buried infrastructure such as water systems, studies suggest that preventative interventions can lead to lower maintenance costs and fewer service disruptions (Mazumder et al, 2018; Li et al, 2014). The demonstrated need and benefit of appropriately applied asset management is juxtaposed against the relatively sparse literature that evaluates water systems within an asset management construct. Since 2020, just 37 papers specifically reference asset management in the Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management. Of those, only a few specifically look to develop strategies for improved asset management. Therefore, we highlight four key research areas that represent opportunities for advancement of asset management research for water systems. First, advances in condition assessment and forecasting are needed to better estimate asset deterioration using diverse datasets. Second, machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) hold promise for predictive maintenance and investment prioritization, though questions of generalizability and model transparency remain. Third, applying a value of information framework can guide utilities in making cost-effective sensor deployment and data collection decisions, to direct monitoring strategies towards data-informed asset management decisions. Finally, integrated infrastructure management is critical, requiring coordinated planning with other infrastructure systems and stakeholder engagement to reduce costs and enhance service delivery.

Chini, Christopher M.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Wildfire management decisions outweigh mechanical treatment as the keystone to forest landscape adaptation

Modern land management faces unprecedented uncertainty regarding future climates, novel disturbance regimes, and unanticipated ecological feedbacks. Mitigating this uncertainty requires a cohesive landscape management strategy that utilizes multiple methods to optimize benefits while hedging risks amidst uncertain futures. We used a process-based landscape simulation model (LANDIS-II) to forecast forest management, growth, climate effects, and future wildfire dynamics, and we distilled results using a decision support tool allowing us to examine tradeoffs between alternative management strategies. We developed plausible future management scenarios based on factorial combinations of restoration-oriented thinning prescriptions, prescribed fire, and wildland fire use. Results were assessed continuously for a 100-year simulation period, which provided a unique assessment of tradeoffs and benefits among seven primary topics representing social, ecological, and economic aspects of resilience. Projected climatic changes had a substantial impact on modeled wildfire activity. In the Wildfire Only scenario (no treatments, but including active wildfire and climate change), we observed an upwards inflection point in area burned around mid-century (2060) that had detrimental impacts on total landscape carbon storage. While simulated mechanical treatments (~ 3% area per year) reduced the incidence of high-severity fire, it did not eliminate this inflection completely. Scenarios involving wildland fire use resulted in greater reductions in high-severity fire and a more linear trend in cumulative area burned. Mechanical treatments were beneficial for subtopics under the economic topic given their positive financial return on investment, while wildland fire use scenarios were better for ecological subtopics, primarily due to a greater reduction in high-severity fire. Benefits among the social subtopics were mixed, reflecting the inevitability of tradeoffs in landscapes that we rely on for diverse and countervailing ecosystem services. This study provides evidence that optimal future scenarios will involve a mix of active and passive management strategies, allowing different management tactics to coexist within and among ownerships classes. Our results also emphasize the importance of wildfire management decisions as central to building more robust and resilient future landscapes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Herbicide‐resistant weed management with robots: A weed ecological–economic model

The heavy reliance on herbicides for weed control has led to an increase in resistant weeds in the United States. Robotic weed control is emerging as an alternative technology for removing weeds mechanically using artificial intelligence. We develop an integrated weed ecological and economic dynamic (I‐WEED) model to examine the biophysical and economic drivers of adopting robotic weed management and simulate the optimal timing and intensity of robotic adoption within and across growing seasons. We specify a cohort‐based weed growth model that relates yield damages to effective weed density and treats the susceptibility of weeds to herbicides as a renewable resource that can be regenerated by using mechanical weeding robots, due to a fitness cost that makes resistant weeds less prolific. Compared to myopic weed management which ignores resistance development, forward‐looking management leads to earlier adoption of robots and treating robots as complements instead of substitutes to herbicides. This weed management results in adopting fewer robots, deploying robots on a smaller portion of the land, higher profitability, and lower yield loss in the long run, relative to myopic management. Counterintuitively, myopic management leads to a lower resistance level through its higher robot adoption intensity. We also find that a lower level of initial weed seed resistance and/or a higher fitness cost result in a higher level of resistance because they create incentives for farmers to delay the adoption of robotic weed control. Our analysis shows the importance of jointly considering the interactions between weed ecology and economics in analyzing the incentives and effects of robotic weed management on weed resistance.

agricultural robotics↗
DOE OSTI2024

Survey and Gap Prioritization of U.S. Electric Vehicle Charge Management Deployments

The goal of this study was to survey and characterize the scope of current technical and programmatic knowledge pertaining to EV charge management technologies and practices in the US and relevant international jurisdictions. This characterization of existing field demonstrations and knowledge derived were used to determine gaps in the SCM demonstration landscape. Addressing these gaps through research and demonstration could increase confidence in the U.S. that load management and EV charge control could achieve overarching societal benefits. A survey of charge management deployments and input from stakeholders was completed to determine the state-of-the-art of smart charge management (SCM) where SCM is defined as controlling the amount of power exchanged between chargers and EVs to meet customers' charging needs while also responding to external power demand or pricing signals to provide load management, resilience, or other benefits to the customer and electric grid. The survey was the basis of the gap analysis in this report and determines which areas are well understood, with high confidence, and which areas need further investigation. Existing examples of EV charge management are characterized here to determine aspects that are ready for widespread deployment and have been demonstrated in the field. These include demonstration studies, pilots, programs, and EV-specific tariffs. In all, 110 examples of charge management were characterized. The data sources were public literature and utility filings as well as targeted interviews. In addition, 43 interviews with stakeholders were conducted with a consistent set of questions used in each interview. This study prioritized gaps in demonstrated SCM capabilities based on 1) Urgency of the particular use-case to offset traditional grid assets, 2) Impact, extensibility, and scaling of results across the entire spectrum of 3000+ utility service territories including projected technical and market potential for a given grid service, and 3) Value of federal funding in addressing the gap, including potential to leverage and/or add scope to existing field demonstrations funded by other non-federal funding mechanisms.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗