Bulletin #2

/0 Comments/in , /by

From: Edward Beardsworth
November 1, 1994

To: UFTO Subscribers

Greetings! We’re making progress. You’ve had the Oak Ridge report for a few weeks–any thoughts?

1. Two more reports on last year’s work are enclosed, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and Argonne National Lab (ANL). I’ve asked each institution to put you on the mailing list for their respective tech transfer newsletters.

You’ll also find another report that gives a set of background reference materials that may be helpful to you in understanding the program. Note the long list of newsletters and magazines that are available to technology scouts–some are even free!

2. I’ll be going to the National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL) in Boulder CO, November 21 and 22. If you have any particular leads you want me to follow, please let me know.

FYI — see the enclosed new fax newsletter from NREL: Distributed Utility Valuation Project ResearchUpdate. The Oct 94 preliminary issue has instructions on how you can get on the distribution list.

3. Regarding selection of the list of labs to visit, NREL seemed to be an obvious choice. Lawrence Berkeley Lab also appears to be a natural for us. My plan is to get started with these two, and take more time to develop our complete list, based on additional conversations with each of you.

4. I decided not to attend Technology 2004 in Washington DC. If any of you do go, please give me a call and tell me what you thought of it.

5. We need to schedule my briefing/needs assessment visit to your company! Let’s do it. You call me or I’ll call you.

Bulletin #1 – Up and Running

/0 Comments/in , /by
Oct 1, 1994
UFTO 94-95 is up and running! Several items for your attention:
1. The first of the reports on last year’s work is enclosed. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has a lot to offer. PLEASE, give me some feedback soon on the format, content and organization of the material, to guide preparation of the other reports. I hope to send you Argonne, Livermore and NIST in the next 4-6 weeks.
Most importantly, let me know what interests you at ORNL, and if you want any help from me in making contact with people there.
2. To date, only one subscriber has completed the startup questionnaire. I hope to hear from everybody else soon, so we can get underway with scheduling the on-site briefings, and with the selection of the federal labs that we’ll focus on over the coming year. (see #4)
3. Also enclosed, a registration brochure for Technology 2004, a major federal tech transfer conference to be held this November in Washington DC. If you want to get a quick introduction to the whole arena of US government technology, I suggest you go. Probably 1 – 1 1/2 days will be enough to take full advantage of the exhibit booths, which is the best part.
A couple of you have suggested that we should get the group together. Here’s a two part question: Do you want such a meeting and would you attend? How about having it in DC during Tech 2004? Let know your views on the next page.
4. Finally, I’ve enclosed a list of candidate labs for us to begin our selection process. Please fax it back to me as soon as possible with your comments.

Technology Transfer Opportunities in the National Laboratories Background Reference Materials

/0 Comments/in , /by
PROPRIETARY
Final Report
Technology Transfer Opportunities in the National Laboratories
Background Reference Materials
July 1993
Revised September 1994
Prepared for:
Utility Federal Technology Opportunities (UFTO)
By:
Edward Beardsworth
Consultant

Part of a series examining technology opportunities at National Laboratories of possible interest to electric utilities

Contents:
page
1. DOE Industry Partners Program
2. Search & Inquiry Support Services
(including the National Tech Transfer Center)
Newsletters
3. The GM Story
4. Outline of a Generic Process

This report is proprietary and confidential. It is for internal use by personnel of companies that are subscribers in the UFTO multi-client program. It is not to be otherwise copied or distributed except as authorized in writing.

DOE Industry Partner Programs

AMTEX — American Textile Partnership

Announced in March 1993, the DOE and the american textile industry formed a multi-million dollar agreement to create a research collaboration among the 8 DOE labs, DOE, and five R&D consortia in the textile industry. It is coordinated by Pacific Northwest Labs.

It is being viewed with considerable optimism, and is one of several organizational “models” for DOE to establish closer ties to industry, noting in particular that it was designed to create a relationship where there hadn’t been one at all–unlike the case of the utility/energy industry.

TECHNOLOGY PARTNERSHIP (as of 7/30/93)

Also in March, Secretary O’Leary directed the DOE and labs to evaluate eight more industries in terms of what the labs might have to offer them. One of the eight was the Utility Industry.

On April 7, a hastily organized meeting was held at Brookhaven National Lab to begin to draft an evaluation and set of recommendations. (BNL had volunteered or been chosen to take the lead for the utility industry study.) Most of the labs were represented (though not LLNL), and GRI and EPRI (Bob Aldridge) were asked to participate as spokesmen for the utility industry, in the interests of time and efficiency, noting the very short time available (one month) to develop the report for Secty O’Leary.

Reports were submitted to the Secretary in early May, on schedule, and some indication of a response is expected by mid June. What form that response will take is not known. There may be a request for more detail, or perhaps a directive to go ahead with a major planning activity. Reports for some of the other 7 industries were sent back to authors for more information. There was no such request for the BNL report, though there have been some comments that the BNL report took insufficient note of extensive and long standing relationships between DOE, the labs and the utility industry.

BNL indicates that they are aware that they only scratched the surface of both the industry and of what the labs might have to offer. These aspects, along with detailed consideration of the organizational model, will be pursued in whatever follow-on activity is put in place.

Update 6/24/93
Rumors have it that the BNL report was not well received, due in large part to internal criticism within DOE. Tracking a report of another intiative reportedly underway in NREL and the DOE/Energy Effic& Renewable Energy.

Update 7/30/93
The NREL initiative is proceeding. A meeting will be held in Denver on August 4 with representatives of all the laboratories. The BNL proposal is reportedly dead.
[Note 10/94 : This effort appears to have faded away also. Rumors are that EPRI had some problems with it. More recent developments will be covered in a separate report.]

Search & Inquiry Support Services

There are a number of public and private operations that provide support and access services of various kinds, to help clients with a specific need or problem to find resources in the federal laboratories.

The National Technology Transfer Center, (316 Washington Ave., Wheeling, WV 26003)
Established 1992. Provides a free inquiry service intended to put one in touch with one or more contact individuals. They are not supposed to to “searches’ (database) per se, as that role is assigned to the various “Regional Tech Transfer Centers”, who do it for pay. NTTC has a free online service called “Business Gold”
1-800-678-NTTC 304-243-2456 fax 304-243-2539

Regional Technology Transfer Centers (various locations around the US)
Originally set up by NASA, these now have a broader charter to do “value-added” service, charging for searches and technical and commercialization assistance.
Westborough MA 508-872-0042 Pittsburgh PA 412-648-7000
Univ of Florida 904-462-3913 College Station TX 409-845-8762
Cleveland OH 216-734-0094 Los Angeles CA 213-743-6132

Federal Laboratory Consortium (224 W. Washington, Suite 3, Sequim WA 98382)
Holds conferences and workshops, publishes guidebooks and a newsletter. Offers “locator” service and has a set of regional contacts around the country.
206-683-1828 fax 206-683-6654

Newsletters:

“Technology Transfer Business” quarterly magazine, free to TT professionals. Published by Washington Technology in association with NIST. Vienna VA 703-848-2800

“Cooperative Technology RD&D Report”, $640/yr., monthly by Technology Publishing Group, Washington DC 202-966-9610

“Technology Access Report”, $447/yr, monthly by University R&D Opportunities, Box 2189, Berkeley CA 800-959-1059. (broad coverage of university & int’l tech. opptys)

“Inside R&D”, $740/yr, weekly by Technical Insights, Inc, Englewood NJ (incl international).

“Inside Technology Policy”, biweekly, $499/year, 1333 H Street,NW, Wash DC 2005, (202)842-0520.

“New Technology Week”, weekly, $624/year, , King Publications (publishers of Energy Daily), 627 National Press Bldg, Wash DC 20045, (202) 662-9711

“Tech Transfer Report”, $395/yr., monthly by McGraw Hill, NY NY, 800-223-6180

“NASA Tech Briefs”, $75 /year. Free to qualified subscribers, monthly by Associated Business Publications, 41 E. 42nd St. NY NY 10017-5391. Contact NASA, Manager Tech Transfer, 800 Elkridge Landing Rd. Linthicum Heights, MD 21090-9908 and ask for application form. Tel 410-859-5300

“Technologies Tomorrow”, $450/year, 8 issues/yr., Box 21897, Albuqurque NM 87154, (505)237-1070.

The General Motors Story

General Motors made a corporate decision to go to the national labs to see what opportunities awaited them there. They made a major commitment of resources to do it, and are participating vigorously at the Federal policy level to improve the process.

• In January ’92 they hosted a conference for the national labs at their Technical Center in Warren MI, with the largest number of National Lab personnel ever, and over 2000 GM employees.
• They have visited or will visit all the major DOE labs repeatedly, and with numbers of personnel, for a series of meetings designed to establish joint projects.

The following are rough notes are from a telephone conversation in April 1993 with Rich Marczewski about the process of getting acquainted with a DOE lab. Rich is a Manager at GMs Tech Center.*

– Phone call to the Lab’s TT office, introducing their objectives
– Followup letter outlines high-level array of the company’s needs
– Schedule a 2 day visit —
– Lab drafts a suggested agenda with one paragraph summaries of presentations to be made by lab personnel.
– GM published abstracts in internal company newsletter to find GM people with the needs

Initially, the lab and GM know virtually nothing about each other, so GM starts meeting with presentation about GM. Need to get acquainted, see what lab’s strengths are, and match to GM needs.

Internally GM identified problems/needs and assistance needed — 1 pagers sent on ahead to Lab.

GM Needs Briefing–GM presentations to audience of lab personnel. GM and lab people pair off to go discuss possible projects and collaborations in greater detail. In one such session, had 60 presentations resulting in 34 matchups.

Social time built into the schedule–to allow relationships to develop.

Repeat visits–get match ups by the 3rd visit and start writing SOW’s. Takes a lot of time

2 day visit is the most anyone can handle–info overload (e.g. Sandia and Los Alamos too much in one go). Set aside time back at the office immediately on returning to go over notes and follow up, or you’ll forget!

Look beyond what the lab suggests for applications, and look at the underlying technology (e.g. High power lasers adapted for metal parts fab)

Program had a lot of doubters in GM but fewer as time goes on.

The system (and attorneys) holds things back. Government bound to “fairness”. National competitiveness vs exclusivity, etc etc.

More cooperative arrangements and fewer straight licenses or Scientist/Engineer exchanges.

(* Rich left GM in 11/93 and went to NREL.)

Outline of a Generic Process

Getting to Know a National Laboratory

1. Getting Started — Finding allies and network

Call the Lab’s Technology Transfer office, and get names of appropriate people to talk to, as senior as possible. Start calling them. Have crisp “message” to leave with secretary or voicemail. Get secretary’s name. Explain reason for calling. Offer to send a letter/fax outlining the project (e.g. a stripped down version of the proposal), and send it if it’s wanted.

Ask about how tech transfer is accomplished, and by whom. Ask about overall lab organization, key issues, management style, etc.

(It’s also useful to call on the Public Information office, and ask for any publications that describe the overall lab program. Ask a number of different people about this. Also ask to be put on mailing lists.)

2. Expand the Network

As the organization begins to come into focus, identify key people in business development roles and in technical roles — people who are involved in making industry partnerships happen. Call them and get to know them. Keep good notes. Write down as much as possible during phone conversations.

Try to identify a main ally, as a point of contact, and who can sponsor or host a visit, and as someone who’ll begin to identify with the project.

3. Site Visits

Arrange to visit the lab, making no more than 5-6 appointments for one day. Sometimes an hour with someone isn’t nearly enough, but having a time limit does help focus the conversation. Scheduling can be difficult, both as to the day and times of day for individual appointments. A host can be very helpful in making arrangements. They may suggest group meetings, or offer a room where lab people can come to you. (This saves time getting around an unfamiliar campus, but it loses the advantage of visiting people in their offices, where serendipity can intervene in terms of picking up printed materials and meeting people.)

The purpose should be billed as a get-acquainted session, with overviews of programs relating to energy (directly or indirectly), and brief descriptions of the lab’s technology that’s ripe for codevelopment and/or tech transfer.

It is wise to set aside time to review notes and do some follow-up immediately after the visit.
This first visit will invariably open up more areas for investigation, and identify more contacts to make. Telephone calls and perhaps one or two more site visits may be called for.

By now, the relevant opportunities will have begun to emerge, and a few specific areas will have been identified. Focus on these for planning the Utility site visit, where the utility personnel come to the lab for a perhaps more formal set of meetings, including overviews of both the lab and the utility (for the benefit of the lab), and specific topics of interest that have been identified.

4. Making Deals

Know in advance what kinds of business deals are real options for the Utility. Understand what the objectives are. The lab will need to have a sense that the utility is a bonafide industry partner prospect, and not just a curious observer, though they shouldn’t expect to know the utility’s bargaining position or business interests in any detail at the outset.

General Comments:
* People in general are very interested and willing to tell you about their work. It’s human nature, but in the case of researchers, they’re even more glad to do it. It’s important to establish trust, be honest about your intentions and about how much you do or don’t understand of what they’re telling you. Try diplomatically to guide them to the level of technical detail that’s appropriate to what you need to know (in order to evaluate whether to dig deeper). Probe behind the claims. Ask about specifics of performance and cost estimates, and how they were obtained.

* In this iterative process of trying to become a little bit acquainted with a large complex bureaucratic organization, respect the unique culture, recognize the pressures on people, and avoid getting drawn in to local politics.

* Take lots of notes, and begin documenting right at the start.

Technology Transfer Opportunities – Argonne National Laboratory

/0 Comments/in , /by

by Edward Beardsworth
September 1994

Summary

This report details findings about technology and technology transfer opportunities at the Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) that might be of strategic interest to electric utilities. It is based on two visits to ANL near Chicago Illinois (in November 1993 and May 1994), as part of a project for PSI Energy, which had the additional goal to establish relationships that will enable PSI to monitor developments and gain access on an ongoing basis.

Background
Noting the tremendous scope of research underway in the research facilities of the U.S. government, and a very strong impetus on the government’s part to foster commercial partnering with industry and applications of the technology it has developed, PSI Energy supported this project to become familiar with the content and process of those programs, and to seek out opportunities for collaboration, demonstration or other forms of participation that will further the business objectives of PSI. PSI has agreed to make these results available to the participants in UFTO.

ANL Organization

Similar to other DOE labs, ANL has a matrix organizational structure of “Divisions” and “Programs”. The divisions are aligned by programmatic area, and have the people, projects and budgets. Programs are mainly to coordinate the Laboratory’s efforts across divisions. In a few instances, programs take on a larger role, e.g. in the case of fuel cells.

Both divisions and programs live in research “ALD’s” or Associate Laboratory Directorates, headed by Assoc. Lab Directors who along with other administrative and support groups report to the Laboratory Director (Alan Schriesheim).

Argonne’s four research ALD’s are:
– Physical Research (basic research in fundamental sciences)
– Advanced Photon Source (a new high energy x-ray facility for basic research)
– Engineering Research (mostly advanced nuclear and national security)
– Energy & Environmental Science & Technology (EEST)
(name recently changed from “Energy, Environmental and Biological Research”)

Of these, virtually all work of potential interest to utilities is in EEST. However it’s important to understand that EEST has Programs that are carried out by cross-ALD, cross-divisional teams. For example the work of the Electrochemical Technology Program involves major participation by staff from the Chemical Technology Division of the Engineering Research ALD.

ANL has a number of “User Facilities” and “Centers” that focus on particular subjects, and make special equipment, facilities and expertise available to outside users, on a fee or collaborative basis. These are housed within programs and divisions.

ANL also takes on a program management role nationally on behalf of DOE, for some aspect of a DOE program, e.g. supporting PETC or METC or the DOE program office directly, or in collaboration with another national lab.

One other general point: each labs annually publishes an “Institutional Plan”, which is organized according to which DOE Program Office supports the work, not the lab’s own organizational structure. Thus a “mapping” between the two structures is required to be able to see the work of the groups within a lab. In most instances, divisions and programs also publish annual progress reports, providing detailed though not always current accounts of the work

EEST itself is divided into 3 areas reporting to “General Managers”, and then into the divisions and Programs:

1. Energy & Industrial Technologies (Richard W.Weeks, General Manager, 252-9710)
(approx. # people)
Energy Systems Division (Norm Sather, Director, 252-3724) 200
Energy Technology Division (Roger Poeppel, Director, 252-5118) 120
(formerly called Materials & Component Technology Division)

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program (William Schertz)
Electrochemical Technology Programs (Mike Myles)
Fossil Energy Programs (David Schmalzer)
Industrial Technology Development Center (Don Mingesz) (acting)
(formerly called the Technology Transfer Center)

2. Environmental Sciences (Terry Surles, General Manager)
Environmental Research Division (Chris Reilly, Director)
Environmental Assessment Division (Anthony Dvorak, Director) 170
Decision & Information Sciences Division (Paula Scalingi, Director) 150

Environmental Technology & Restoration Program (James Helt)
Global Climate Research Programs (Ruth Reck)

3. Center for Mechanistic Biology & Biotechnology (E Huberman, Director)

Area Code is (708)
ANL Technologies & Programs

Covered in this section:

• Fossil Energy Program
• Advanced Cogeneration
• Plasma Chemistry
• Waste Mgt & Bioengineering
• Environmental Control Technology
• Geographic Information Systems and Environmental Capabilities
• MSW/Biomass Processing
• Advance Heat Exchangers
• Technology Evaluation
• Energy Technology Division Capabilities
• Measurement and NDE
• Superconductivity
• Ice Slurry/District Cooling
• Fuel Cells
• Batteries
• Environmental Assessment Div.
• Decision and Information Sciences Div.
• Global Climate Change Program

Telephone Area Code is (708)

• Fossil Energy Program Dave Schmalzer, Manager, 252-7723, or 202-488-2415 in Wash DC
Manages programs funded by DOE Fossil, including fuel cells. Also $$ from other sources.
Advanced Environmental Control Technology (under PETC). Increasing attention to air toxics, bag houses may be workable if adsorbents can be found. Coal Fired MHD a semi success technically, has been phased out by DOE. Direct Coal Turbine–ANL advisory to METC. Two approaches: UTC doing direct combustion of pulverized coal, and Foster Wheeler’s is mild pyrolysis, with char to be burned on water cooled walls (divides the coal into 2 parts).
Research on multi-phase flow — coal slurries. Also ion-exchange to put catalyst metals into the coal prior to liquefaction.

“Argonox” additives to reduce NOx — Pilot test at CG&E — Dave Livingood, 252-3737
Alkali control for PFBC — newly hot topic — Sheldon Lee, 252-4395
CO2 capture, utilization and disposal for IGCC — Richard Doctor (ESD)

• Advanced Cogeneration Roger Cole, 252-6245
O2 enriched air for diesels; H2O emulsified in fuel; low grade fuels
— research stage results –incr. power, reduce particulates, but incr. NOx
–Dupont looking at membranes to produce O2

HPSS (High performance steam system) hi pressure hi temp steam bottoming cycle for GT — DOE and Solar Turbine: Overall electric efficiency 55%, with flexible electricity/heat ratio — looking for industrial cogen demo site. OPPORTUNITY (may be too late)
Also can use it for stand-alone once-thru boiler–unique turbine, thick wall tubes in hi-temp section prevents H2 corrosion.

Tool/method to estimate “value” of steam from Cogen –> better pricing

• Plasma Chemistry John Harkness, 252-7636
Waste Treatment for H2S — big electric load– Based on Russian work — ANL has a proprietary position. Needs demo. Individual reactors 1-2 MW (EPRI/Houston & Ami Amarnath are aware of the project).
Destec gasifier repowering produces H2S — Microwave technology could recover chemical/fuel value of H2 (no current H2S treatment process can do this).

Other applications for plasmas and microwaves: degrading plastics for recycling, novel materials, hazardous waste disposal. (Research Cottrell/PETC project tried radio waves on stack gas, and got more NOx.)

• Waste Mgt & Bioengineering Jim Frank, 252-7693
Keen to solve problems! New aggressive group looking for business. Combined multidisciplinary group to develop better solutions for waste treatment problems, source reduction, and high-value by-product production. Doing projects for EPRI: Arsenic removal (Mary Maclearn) Corrosion, microbial (Joe Gilman).

Other areas of work include: removing impurities from Al scrap, removing lead from brass and bronze scrap, recovering plastics from auto scrap; recovery of H2S — H2 and S; converting food wastes. Also soil remediation, membrane separations, air toxics treatment, remediation sensor development, environmental biotech.

• Environmental Control Technology Dave Livingood, 252-3737
Test facility for dry scrubbing and spray drying –HANDBOOK — “5 yrs ahead of EPRI’s HSTF”. Combined NOx/SOx control –developed additives, systems for both wet and dry scrubbing at lab and pilot scale.

Dravo-Lime ThioNox (like Argonox but better) — add chemicals to wet scrubber to remove NOx along with SOx — it works! CG&E pilot will clarify economics in 1 yr.

Spray-dryer/fabric filter FGD for high sulfur coal — showed long term reliable operation

Air Toxics –have PETC to work with — how to capture heavy metals such as mercury.
dry sorbents (carbon) in wet scrubbers — waste testing (what’s in the output)
Activated carbon performance extreme variation depending on type/source

Sequestering CO2 from IGCC –system study of costs for METC. Estimate all costs, emissions from mining on. Don’t wait till the stack; modify the plant with a shift reactor to H2, and capture the CO2. Algae approach unrealistic.– paper 11/93 at Dallas PowerGen.Conference.

• Geographic Information Systems and Environmental Capabilities Pat Wilkey, 252-6258
Innovative Spatial Analysis system, began work 5 years ago for GRI on pipeline right-of-ways. Provides visualization of various “false terrains” e.g. when cost or other impact factors replace elevation as the z-variable. Allows routes to be optimized against different scenarios and tradeoffs. Graphic imaging to model the visual impact of projects (e.g. a transmission tower) against the “view-shed”. GIS can be a logical extension of CAD-AM/FM systems, as an integrated system.

Argonne also has extensive multi-disciplinary capabilities for analysis and field work in site rehabilitation and restoration.

• MSW/Biomass Processing Ole Ohlsson, 252-5593
Fuel pellets from MSW to cofire with coal–handles like coal — OK in cyclone or grate, not PC.
In ’87, tested 100’s of binders–lime works the best. NSP (NRG Energy is unreg subsid) is building a facility–EPRI involved. CRADA with Otter Tail, — Archer Midland Daniels, Decatur, wants to cofire in their FBCs.

• Advance Heat Exchangers Tom Rabas, 252-8995
“Enhanced Tubes” for condensers — actively seeking new users — TVA (only utility so far) doing it in 18 units, starting 14 years ago — see Power Engineering July ’93 page 36. ANL has software to predict heat rate improvements. Heat transfer enhanced x1.7. NIPSCo has a program, Alabama Power did some tests a while back; NYPA and PP&L are interested.

Need host utilities to test tubes. ANL would facilitate and provide specs, measurements and test program OPPORTUNITY

– Proposed a plate/fin type heat exchanger for H2 – cooling in generators –could reduce costs of new units — Westinghouse contact. CRADA proposal not selected. (copy on hand).

– With PG&E, proposed a study of potential to improve cooling of transmission transformers to increase system capacity. CRADA proposal not selected. (copy on hand).

(Note: this program is funded by DOE Industrial, not power program — these ideas tend to fall in between.)

• Technology Evaluation Alan Wolsky, Director, Industrial Partnership Program, Energy Systems Div. 252-3783
Capabilities available to utilities: (Crada or hire ANL)
– Modeling combustion–esp. FBC, erosion, gas-solid flows.
– Studies on CO2 capture/use.
– Recover SO2 as salable liquid (proprietary-ANL is under nondisclosure to an outside co.)
– SMES Demo/test–ANL has an idle magnet — 180 MW sec– could do Power quality tests.
– Superconductivity–available to consult; internal study on future applications
– Scrap Metals recycling — Tom Sparrow at Purdue has studied this with utilities
– Coal Ash — general area of interest, e.g. metals recovery, other..

• Energy Technology Division Capabilities Roger Poeppel, Director, 252-5118
Ken Natesan, 252-5103

– Component Failure Analysis — standing agreement to do tests for Commonwealth Ed.
– Corrosion — alloys, coatings. Particular focus on combustion and power plants via DOE Combustion 2000 program funding — sulfur-bearing gases effects, erosion prevention, etc. In ’70s, developed refractories for coal gasification–resistance to corrosion and thermal shock–led into ability to do HTSC materials.
– All kinds of NDE
– Thermal Hydraulics and Fluid Mechanics — two phase flow, heat/mass transfer, flow-induced vibration ( issue for steam generators).
– Tribology — measure friction and wear; surface coating apparatus/techniques, lubricants

• Measurement and NDE Paul Raptis, 252-5930 & Stephen Dieckman, 252-5628
Acoustic leak detection (for Con Ed) Put microphones in the system — Identifying noise signatures for Steam Leaks. Some big wins finding leaks. NSP involved in testing. (Valves, boilers–straightforward, EPRI doing it.) Can apply to any steam system, not just distribution systems. Working on ASME guidelines. Next area for study is water leaks. Applicable in power plants!
Non-intrusive viscometer–good at high viscosity have working prototype — several manufacturers. interested.
Surface Wave Chemical Detector–exists commercially, but needs applications development, e.g. for stack gases.
Mass Spectrometer fits in a briefcase, measures to ppb; more sensitive than current CEM methods.
MM wave sensor chemical spectroscopy- recently declassified arms control spin-off. Can look at large spaces, e.g. plumes–wide angle, and as good as Lidar.
Measurement, generally — flow, density, concentration, on line NMR (chemistry), NDE via optics, acoustics neutrons, microwaves. Effluent detection. Stress analysis.

• Superconductivity John Hull, 252-8580, and Ken Uherka, 252-7814
High Temperature SuperConductors (HTSC) — 3 distinct areas of work: (all projects are with outside companies!)
1. Basic theory — physics and chemistry
2. Materials fabrication — wire and tape for devices (with mfgs.) largest Federal program center for measuring samples. Use high flux neutrons to look deep in metals; look for O2. Adding particulate Silver to increase fracture resistance. Alloy, draw, roll and heat treat–need grains aligned. Wire development getting close to practical for devices.
3. Applications (notably in the electric utility industry)
– Intermediate link for existing Low temp (liquid He) SC applications, as current leads to the outside, to get lower cooling and insulation needs — for SMES w/ Superconductivity Inc’s 1 MW-1 sec. UPS. Also for B&W 1/2 MW-hr (@ sev. MW for 5-10 min) SMES for Anchorage Electric (TRP/DOE funding).
– Fault current limiter–limits by going from superconducting to normal, limiting rather than interrupting–allows higher transmission line loading. Issues whether to interrupt all 3 phases, and question whether application limited to large concentrated loads.
– Levitation — very different materials requirement–don’t need to align grains! For very low friction bearings, flywheel energy storage program for large diurnal storage systems (with Comm Ed).
(DOE solicited teams 1 year ago for Superconducting Partnership Initiative to develop applications. ANL proposal with Allied Signal unsuccessful–had found sev. utilities willing to invest–Comm Ed, Southern, C&SW, NiMo…)

• Ice Slurry/District Cooling Ken Kasza, 252-9260 (additional info on hand)
Advanced energy transmission fluids–study for DOE — phase change and particulates in water
Additives to reduce friction in flow — very effective

Pelletized ice can be pumped with water in existing chilled water systems or new systems–greater heat transfer capacity & reduced pumping load, and customer storage volume is reduced by factor of 10. Small scale field demo being built with EPRI and NSP–NRG (unreg) subsid has proprietary position–sees business oppty in engineering consulting, licensing and TOU rates.

Handbook done–design for slurries. Have plan to develop Engineering Design Database (whoever does this will control the technology).

Large scale demo will be at ANL–800 ton ice maker–looking for utility participation–need funding for detailed engineering, testing, analysis, etc. Proprietary rights available.

Window of Opportunity –Equipment makers/users will have to phase out CFCs! Utilities can offer central cooling–sell ice , do peak shaving on customer site. Unreg business to sell engineering, equipment, service.

• Friction & Wear Technology George Fenske 252-5190
Surface Modification and characterization, and friction and wear assessment

Protective Surface Modification for High Temp. Alloys — dramatic increase in corrosion resistance of protective scale, by vapor deposition of silicon and high temperature heat treatment–feasible for treating large areas. (Jong Hee Park 252-5104)

Boric-Oxide/Acid coatings-dramatically effective high temperature bearing lubricant (R&D 100)
Diamond-like carbon on steel or ceramics — reduce friction and wear in bearings, fuel injectors, etc.

• Fuel Cells Mike Myles, Director, Electrochemical Technology Program, 252-4329
Michael Krumpelt, Manager, Fuel Cell Technology, 252-8520
ANL does in-house research and is lead lab for DOE Fuel Cell Program and manages the fuel cell effort. Solid Oxide(SO) and Molten Carbonate( MC) for stationary power applic. As phosphoric acid (PA) is considered to be a commercial reality, the only work at ANL is some management activity.

Also Polymer Electrolyte and DOE Bus Program for Transportation. Ballard Technology and Dow aggressive on PEM — big R&D effort with Mercedes Benz and others. Ballard is sub to GM-Allison for DOE passenger car. (IFC pursuing with GE lic., as is Seimens) On-board methanol –>H2

Argonne does Systems Analysis for DOE and EPRI, and work on CO tolerant catalysts and partial oxidation reforming.

MC — gets most of the R&D funding. Some in-house, some to MC Power for electrode development–goal is longer life cathode–trying double doped materials and conductive ceramics. DOE program goals are to double the power density to over 3000 amps/m2 to reduce the plant footprint, to simplify the design and to reduce corrosion. 10 years ago, MC was thought to be the next generation of fuel cell. Not working out easily. Demos in 2-300kw to 2 MW. R&D to increase power density and new stack configuration for cheaper mfg.

SO — Westinghouse is the prime developer. 25-40KW system demos. Alternative for Distributed Generation. More entries internationally. In U.S., B&W with a major chem co. Also, Allied Signal is prime to ANL for work on “Monolithic SO”. Need to control shrinkage, flatness, match coeffic. of thermal expansion–going to thin layers.

ANL has some funding from SCE — opportunities in SO. EPRI forming consortium for new concept “Planar SO” (Rocky Goldstein and John O’Sullivan)

Suggest that in the long run MC may drop back and end up like phosphoric acid (basically leapfrogged) — remains to be seen! World competition is picking up, and U.S. losing lead. The Westinghouse SO technology is expensive. Utilities unwilling to pay higher initial cost of early systems, and private sector can’t do it by themselves (DOE study by Prof. Penner –why commercialization hasn’t happened). Need utilities to work with mg and govt. to commercialize existing systems and support new concepts — 3-way teams.

PEM, primarily being developed for transportation use, could reach low cost mass production first–despite disadvantages for stationary use. Dow is committed to be supplier of membranes –ANL to do concept design for stationary applications. OPPORTUNITY for a 3-way partnership–other utilities avoiding, due to belief that PEM not appropriate for stationary.

NREL/DOE solicitation on infrastructure for H2–utilities to have role in demos.

• Batteries Gary Henriksen, 252-4176
Most action is in transportation. Hybrids getting attention. High power requirement is a problem.
ANL has proposed a bipolar Li Sulfide battery–has small funding from USABC.
ANL has major battery test facility, able to handle anything from cells to systems. All work is tied to manufacturers, one way or another. ANL did ABC tests — results to be announced very soon.

• Environmental Assessment Div. Tony Dvorak, Director, Contact: Dale Pflug, 252-6682
Environmental Impact, Decision support software, Risk Management — lots of work for others

New program Technology Connection: Identify needs for restoration at DOE sites, and identify/inventory available technologies in DOE that can be used–verify claims. Also search for technology domestic and foreign–now monitoring over 800 items in Database.

Expedited Site Characterization — Shrink time and cost by 90% — first done for Dept. of Agric, now being implemented across DOE–accepted by EPA and state regulators. Looking of users, collaborators and trainees. Smart sampling schemes, based on other information.

“ConSolve-site planner” visualization tool
“Plume” licensable code, could add transport and ground water modeling
Chemical Risk Code based on radiation risk code
Geographic Information Systems: graphical interpretation for environ impact, planning.

• Decision and Information Sciences Div. Paula Scalingi, Director
Contact: Dave South, Technology and Environmental Policy, 252-6107

– Compliance with Environmental Mandates (e.g. CAA, CWA,CERCLA/RCRA, greenhouse gases, etc.) — Analysis of regulations, synergies and conflicts, trade-off analysis/ decision framework at the plant level of compliance strategies, vis a vis other business goals, rate regulation etc. A dynamic and complicated process. Models developed allow rapid assessment of scenarios, based on actual plant data.

– Incentive regulation–adoption of innovative technologies–detailed analyses.
– Integrated Resource Planning
– Technology Assessment (e.g. CFC replacement — utilities need to inventory commercial a/c installed base and plan a response.)
– AI applied to reliability/value based maintenance. Did earlier (non-AI) work on boiler aging/vintaging.

– R&D Portfolio Management–long standing program for Defense Nuclear Agency, and other applications (e.g. Wisc PUC!) –software and information gathering techniques. A rigorous approach using multi-attribute utility function decision techniques, for optimizing portfolio and prioritizing projects, against measurable objectives, as the situation changes.

• Global Climate Program Ruth Reck, Director (Contact David South)
Climate Processes, Societal and Environmental Impacts, Response Strategies and Assessment, and Data Management. Policy and Regulatory analysis; interactions between climate change and other environmental issues (domestic and international); voluntary/joint implementation. Publish an extensive quarterly report called “Global Change Scaler”.

ANL Contacts (general phone # is 708-252-2000)

The primary contacts for UFTO are:

Thomas J. Marciniak, Manager Industrial and Utility Technology, Energy Systems Division,
252-5860

David W. South, Technology and Environmental Policy Program, Decision and Information Sciences Division, 252-6107

Roger Poeppel, Director, Energy Technology Division, 252-511. Also Chuck Malefyt, 252-5125

Technology Transfer:

The Industrial Technology Development Center (ITDC) (formerly called the Technology Transfer Center) — Don Mingesz is the acting director; Primary contact is Shari Zussman (252-5230) — is administratively located in EEST, but serves the entire lab. It handles interactions with industry and DOE on all tech transfer matters. The ITDC has a Hotline 800#: 1-800-627-2596.

ITDC publishes a newsletter called Tech Transfer Highlights. Call the above hotline # to be put on the mailing list

There was recently a new program put in place to have each Division appoint a tech transfer point of contact. Most of these people, however, already have demanding full time jobs, some as heads of sizable research groups. Their role and way of working is just beginning to evolve.

Information Source Contacts / Technical Information Services:

Office of Public Affairs : 708-252-5575 — can provide general information, annual reports, etc.
They publish a biannual “Research Highlights” and a technical magazine called “logos”.

Technology Transfer Opportunities – National Institute of Standards and Technology

/0 Comments/in , /by
PROPRIETARY
Final Report
Technology Transfer Opportunities in Federal Laboratories
National Institute of Standards and Technology
April 1994
Revised August 1994
Prepared for:
Utility Federal Technology Opportunities (UFTO)
By:
Edward Beardsworth
Consultant

This report is part of a series examining technology opportunities at National Laboratories of possible interest to electric utilities

Contents:
page
1. Summary
3. NIST Organization
4. NIST Technologies and Programs
9. NIST Contacts

This report is proprietary and confidential. It is for internal use by personnel of companies that are subscribers in the UFTO multi-client program. It is not to be otherwise copied or distributed except as authorized in writing.

Summary

This report details findings about technology and technology transfer opportunities at National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that might be of strategic interest to electric utilities. It is based on two visits to NIST headquarters in Gaithersberg MD (in April and August 1994), as part of a project for PSI Energy, which had the additional goal to establish relationships that will enable PSI to monitor developments and gain access on an ongoing basis.

Background
Noting the tremendous scope of research underway in the research facilities of the U.S. government, and a very strong impetus on the government’s part to foster commercial partnering with industry and applications of the technology it has developed, PSI Energy supported this project to become familiar with the content and process of those programs, and to seek out opportunities for collaboration, demonstration or other forms of participation that will further the business objectives of PSI. PSI has agreed to make these results available to the participants in UFTO.

NIST Organization

NIST, formerly the National Bureau of Standards, is part of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Its mission and organization are quite different from other federal research entities, and it has gained significantly increased stature, budget, and role with the Clinton administration.

There are approximately 3000 employees, mostly at Gaithersberg MD and in a smaller facility in Boulder CO.

NIST is organized into 8 “Laboratories”, each of which has a remarkable degree of independence in style and approach. In fact, the NIST culture is said to have decision making pushed down to the lowest appropriate layer of the organization. Decisions about industry collaborations are made at the project level 90% of the time, and only 1% need management attention above the Laboratory level.

Each Laboratory covers a particular set of disciplines:

The Laboratories:
Electronics and Electrical Engineering (EEEL)
Manufacturing Engineering
Physics
Chemical Science and Technology
Materials Science and Engineering
Computer
Building and Fire Research
Computing and Applied Mathematics

Each laboratory is made up of a number of “divisions”. EEEL, for example, includes the Electricity Division, and the Semiconductor, Electromagnetic Fields, and Electromagnetic Technology Divisions. Each Division is made up of a number of “groups”, which are in turn subdivided in smaller subgroups.

The Electricity Division of EEEL has the greatest overlap with the electric utility industry, and has agreed to act as a main point of contact for UFTO.

NIST and the Electric Power Industry
NIST is very different from the DOE labs or other federal research organizations, in that it’s primary mission is and has always been to provide direct support to industry. Its origins were in the early 1900’s, as the electric equipment industry was taking off. Needed measurement capabilities were available only in Europe, and the equipment makers lobbied for the creation of the National Bureau of Standards (as NIST was known until fairly recently). Accuracy in metering was a big consumer issue in the 1920’s, and NBS’s findings that watthour meters underreport power consumption made them welcome friends to the utilities. NIST continues to be very active in metering reference standards, loss measurements, and a number of other areas of direct connection with the industry.

NIST Programs
NIST will work with a single company as a means to an end, with the goal clearly in mind to help all industry on a broad basis. Its entire budget is programmed for this purpose, unlike other agencies like DOE which must try to reprogram funds earmarked for specific R&D in order to be able to work on industry problems. NIST’s budget is growing at a dramatic rate with the new administration. However this growth is on a base that is still quite small in comparison to DOE and other agencies, reflecting the traditional discomfort in the U.S. with the idea of government working directly with industry.

NIST treats nondisclosure/confidentiality/proprietary concerns on a case-by-case basis, recognizing that some times it is necessary to work with just one player in order to make something happen. This has been clearly the case in working with the highly competitive semiconductor industry. (The suggestion was made that a case study of Sematech would be instructive — very successful industry collaboration.) Until recently, NIST had a larger total number of CRADAs than DOE, with a factor of 100 fewer people (about 3000 altogether).

Until the very recent broadening of NIST’s mandate (see below), the emphasis has always been on metrology, or the science of measurement. That is the point of view from which NIST has generally viewed the world, and which continues to describe their primary mission. For example, they have a major initiative to develop standards based on fundamental properties, rather than physical copies (e.g. the “electronic kilogram”). Nanometrology, or micromeasurement, is another key area of effort.

Major new programs reflect a broader perspective and mission related to U.S. competitiveness and jobs.

• The Advanced Technology Program (ATP) , Tom Leedy, Program Manager, 975-2410
Funding tripled this year to $200 million, and will increase to $450 and $750 million over the next two years. This money is for grants for high risk high payoff technology development proposals. ATP has recently begun discussing possible “themes” . One suggestion is the productive use of byproducts in materials processing–could be an opening for flyash utilization!

• The Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Modeled on the agricultural extension service concept, this program will soon expand to over 100 centers around the country, to teach new production methods to small manufacturers.

• NIST also administers the Malcolm Baldridge award.

General Observations
Visiting NIST, one can’t help but notice the total openness of the environment. There is no security! One simply drives in to the grounds, which resemble a college campus surrounded by huge open space, enters a building and looks for the corridor and office of the person being visited. (This is in dramatic contrast to DOE facilities. At weapons labs in particular, you need to declare your U.S. citizenship and provide your social security number in advance, and come prepared with a photo ID.) And NIST’s phone directory and a guide to their technical programs is available on-line.

NIST has not experienced any lack of opportunities to work with industry, and rarely have to beat the bushes. Very few of the 300 CRADAs were advertised.

All of NIST’s funds are programmed for working with industry. There is no separate budget for this, and each lab director has full authority for decisions on partnering, and how much of the budget is to be allocated for this kind of activity. Business arrangements can be highly varied, from a handshake to a 50 page contract.

NIST is required to have “Review Panels” that review programs and make recommendations regarding NIST’s strategy and tactical approach. Organized by the National Research Council, these groups meet annually for 2-3 days, one for each NIST “Laboratory”. Each Division makes presentations, and there are smaller breakout meetings also. These have included representatives from utilities from time to time.

Technology Commercialization/Transfer
NIST is in the process of reevaluating its whole approach to technology commercialization, i.e. whether to pursue technology development further up or downstream, to get more industry input, to go for more patents, etc. Currently there is no “generalized marketing” function, and technical staff are generally wary of uninformed cold calls from the outside (but will always respond to phone calls or letters!). The Office of Technology Commercialization serves the Laboratories and Divisions with help on patents, licensing and other business arrangements, e.g. for use of facilities by outsiders, or guest researchers.

NIST Technologies and Programs

(Telephone Area Code is 301)
Electronics and Electrical Engineering Laboratory (EEEL)

The Electricity Division has a number of programs directed at issues connected with the utility industry, including improved techniques for measurements of steady-state and transient high voltages and currents, characterization of power quality, and calibration and measurement techniques to characterize electric and magnetic fields and ion densities.

• Partial Discharge, Dick Van Brunt, 975-2418
— Partial Discharge Analysis. Phase correlated noise near the peaks of the plus and minus parts of the 60 cycle waveform are recorded and digitized, and saved for subsequent analysis. The best commercially available instrument is expensive and complex, and lacks the important capability to store data for later reanalysis (and to maintain a history). NIST is developing new techniques to analyze signal properties using pattern recognition.

Patterns are compared against simulations to provide diagnosis of type of discharge, probable cause, and consequences (Is it changing? How soon to failure?). They are just starting a project for the NRC to test instrument cables from decommissioned plants. Also, PDA can help to interpret implications of manufacturers specs. (picocoulomb partial discharge).

Partial Discharge in liquids has very different phenomenology from what occurs in gases, and is only partially understood. Work in this area was motivated by the need for high voltage switches for SDI, and contributes to the development of PCB replacements for transformers and capacitors.

— Detecting trace quantities of S2F10 in small samples. S2F10, which is highly toxic, is produced in tiny quantities during partial discharge in SF6. Possible but unlikely health risk. Developing cheaper more portable instrument as add-on to a residual gas analyzer to use in place of laboratory gas chromatograph and mass spectrometer. (with ORNL and Ontario Hydro)

• Optical CT (HV Current Meter), Gerry Fitzpatrick, 975-2737 & Eric Simmon, 975-3956
A few manufacturers (ABB, 3-M, Square-D, also Toshiba) have prototype “production” units, and want NIST calibrations. There are two types. One uses bulk glass, and the other has a glass fiber looped around the conductor a number of times. The magneto optic (Faraday) effect causes a rotation in the polarization of light along the length of the fiber, and thus a measure of the magnetic field and current. Advantages: electrically isolated, explosion-proof. Disadvantages: more complicated, sensitive to vibration and temperature. There are still problems to be overcome. Fibers need to be annealed to get rid of stresses of coiling–made for light/data transmission, not this application. ABB’s unit, a bulk glass type, is now commercialized, and there are 35-40 units in service at various utilities. There’s an Optical Sensor Mfg. User Group (OPSMUG), and EPRI (Jan Stein) is involved.

[Note by EB — I have contact names at each of the manufacturers.]

• High Voltage Impulse Testing, Gerry Fitzpatrick, 975-2737
Multi-megavolt testing of apparatus requires a voltage divider to measure the applied voltage. The divider can see a pulse shape that’s different from the actual applied pulse, leaving doubt whether test standards have been accurately met. NIST develops faster reference dividers and better (digitized) HV measurements, and also sets up round-robin tests with manufacturers. The standards themselves are established by industry to reflect ultimate equipment performance, NIST’s role is to assure that the (metrology of the) test itself meets the standard, and not whether the standard correctly represents performance of the equipment under test.

• Watt-hour Meter Testing, Tom Nelson, 975-2986, and Barry Bell, 975-3972
This original mission of NIST continues to be important, particularly as new metering technology (e.g. solid state) and power quality issues(e.g. harmonics) raise new concerns about the accuracy and impact of meters. NIST both performs tests of meters and maintaining an active R&D program, enabling them to conduct special tests beyond the standard ones. Also, the Measurement Assurance Program evaluates the performance of a customer’s (manufacturer’s own energy measuring systems.

Calibration of secondary standards is done for manufacturers, utilities and PUCs on a fee-for-service basis.

• EMF Measurement Techniques, Martin Misakian, 975-2426
NIST’s activities include providing EMF related consultation and measurement support to other agencies and researches, and the development of metrology related standards. For example, EMF measurements in exposure systems during site visits provide for quality control of the exposure parameters; standards aid in ensuring uniformity of measurement procedures and accuray of measurements. This latter activity is important because a number of states have set maximum field limits in and at the edge of the right-of-way.

Material Sciences and Engineering Laboratory has about 300 people altogether. In addition to metallurgy, there are four other divisions which have not yet been reviewed: Ceramics, Polymers, Materials Reliability, and Reactor Radiation.

• Metallurgy Division, Neville Pugh, Chief, 975-5960

Prime collaboration with industry –have 20 CRADAs. In process of developing closer ties with Federal Labs (Sandia, ORNL, Wright Labs and with universities (MIT).

Emphasis on Process Control–sensing in-situ for “intelligent processing”, using models of the process to provide feedback in real time.
Powder metallurgy–able to control particle size
Materials Characterization — structure, properties, corrosion, fracture, fatigue, hydrogen embrittlement, stress corrosion cracking.

Material Performance Group, Richard Ricker, 975-6023
Formed by the recent joining of the Mechanical Properties and Corrosion Groups. This group studies all factors that influence the behavior of materials in service, e.g. corrosion, fracture, fatigue, and laboratory measurements for predicting performance.

Work with materials producers for the most part, and to some extent “users” like GE or Pratt and Whitney. Would have liked to respond to EPRI RFP on Corrosion Cracking Embrittlement Data Program, but couldn’t due to restrictions on competing with industry.

Develops Expert Systems and databases on Corrosion for EPRI with N.A.C.E. — “POWER•COR” software modules guide electric utilities on corrosion control in condensers and service water systems, environmentally induced fracture, intergranular corrosion in fgd systems, and microbiological influenced corrosion.

Prefer to work on generic problems rather than special/single situations. Feels there would be too much in the program that doesn’t apply to utilities for a general “dog & pony” tour at NIST.
Perhaps discussions would be useful about condensors (Indicated that it is well known that copper is the main problem, and only need to keep ammonia out of the system — really an educational issue to take the proper care and monitoring of water chemistry.)

Building and Fire Research Laboratory has four divisions:

Structures Div.: has interacted with EPRI on wind engineering (design standards for wind loads) and earthquake codes and retrofit.
Building Materials Div: G. Frohnsdorff, Chief 975-6706 — leading research group in U.S. on cement science. Work on concrete, paint, roofing–durability standards, predicted life. Interests in uses for flyash — open to suggestions about how NIST can become involved. Held a workshop 6/93 on autoclaved autocellular concrete
Fire Science and Fire Safety Engineering Div. — a possibly significant area for utilities that has not yet been tapped!

• Building Environment Division, Jim Hill, Chief, 975-5851
The Building Environment Division (about 50 people) deals with energy use in buildings, CFC replacement, indoor air quality, and interior environment (lighting, thermal comfort, etc.)

Green Buildings — with funding specifically mandated by Congress, this may turn into something like the intelligent buildings program, with manufacturers promoting their wares. Basic objective is to use environmentally safe materials in buildings, and to develop technologies that are conducive to energy efficiency. NIST’s part includes indoor air quality, CFC replacements, thermal insulation, building automation, envelope design concepts, and standards (thru ASTM). A series of demonstration buildings will be constructed. (See NIST Special Publication 863, U.S. Green Building Conference–1994)

Insulation R-Value Measurement: Hunter Fanney, 975-5864
Develop measurement standards and technniques, and certify NAHB measurements. New higher insulation value materials can be harder to measure accurately, for example, gas filled panels have an R-value of about 15/inch, powder evacuated panels 25/inch, and vacuum stainless steel is estimated theoretically to reach as high as 100/inch. A large calibrated hot box can accommodate actual size wall systems for detailed performance measurements vs. temperature and humidity, including weather cycles.

Thermal Conductivity: A unique “guarded hot plate” device enables the calibration of samples.

CFC replacements David Didion, 975-5881 and Piotr Domanski, 975-5877 — Fundamental research, system modeling, flammability and performance testing of new refrigerants (with EPRI and individual companies). NIST had a long head start with this work, having begun in 1983 to investigate refrigerant mixtures for other reasons. Adequate replacements for R-22 not coming easily. To keep same efficiency, equipment modifications may be needed. Don’t expect U.S. to accept a flammable refrigerant, making search more difficult

NIST supports the DOE Appliance Standards Program (they specify the tests in 15 categories of appliances) they were able to expedite establishment of the testing and rating procedures for the EPRI/Carrier heat pump. They also did modeling and ran tests. For a local utility, they monitored a unit in a field test in a home.

• Network Architecture, Tassos Nakassis, Acting Chief, Systems and Network Architecture Division, Computer Systems Lab, 975-3632

NIST has been involved with establishing specs for open systems for over 15 years, when effort began to make DARPA network (original internet) widely used. First tried open standards, where government agencies “should” conform unless specifically exempted.
Most recently, the Industry Government Open Standards Spec (IGOSS) allow for custom additions (e.g. for security) to basic OSI specs. (EPRI’s UCA is an OSI derivative.)

Proposed NII/Internet protocols (EPRI has provided comments) conflict with OSI. New government procurement policies expected that leave it wide open, with only a “suggested” spec.

This group also involved in the issue of Internet is running out of addresses and routing tables, and there is a direct concern for the utility industry. Recently EPRI asked for 5 million addresses for an experimental program (500,000 customers and 10 devices each??). Outcome is unclear at this time.

Other: Need to assure protocols function with security. Remote database access. Use of OSI addresses on the Internet. EDI procurement, conventions. Collaborating with industry on health care systems. Automatic translation tools (to modern programming languages).

Research interest: How to test software and assure reliability. Need mtbf > 500 years!! Concept of “holographic proof” to get around basic impossibility of testing every possible situation.

NIST Contacts:

General Phone # is 301-975-2000 , in Gaithersburg, MD
A smaller facility is located in Boulder CO , 303-497-3000

Primary UFTO Contact:
Dr. Alan Cookson, Associate Director, EEEL, Chief, Electricity Division, 301-975-2220
Also, Joe Greenberg 301-975-2439

Public Affairs Division: 301-975-2762
Jennifer Wright 301-975-2785

Publications:

Over 300 publications/year. Contact Publications and Program Inquiries, 301-975-3058

Technology at a Glance (free quarterly newsletter) call Gail Porter 301-975-3392

Guide to NIST (Oct ’93) Special Publication 858
116 page book — excellent overview of NIST, programs, facilities, organization, services.

Electronic Systems: NIST is accessible via Internet and several specialized bulletin boards. (See Guide to NIST.)

Technology Transfer Opportunities in the National Laboratories

/0 Comments/in , /by
PROPRIETARY
Final Report
Technology Transfer Opportunities in the National Laboratories
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
January 1994
Revised September 1994
Prepared for:
Utility Federal Technology Opportunities (UFTO)
By:
Edward Beardsworth
Consultant

This report is part of a series examining technology opportunities at National Laboratories of possible interest to electric utilities

Contents:
page
1. Summary
1 ORNL Organization
3. ORNL Technologies & Programs
10. ORNL Contacts

This report is proprietary and confidential. It is for internal use by personnel of companies that are subscribers in the UFTO multi-client program. It is not to be otherwise copied or distributed except as authorized in writing.

Summary
This report details findings about technology and technology transfer opportunities at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) that might be of strategic interest to electric utilities. It is based on two visits to ORNL in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (in November 1993 and March 1994), as part of a project for PSI Energy, which had the additional goal to establish relationships that will enable PSI to monitor developments and gain access on an ongoing basis.

Background
Noting the tremendous scope of research underway in the research facilities of the U.S. government, and a very strong impetus on the government’s part to foster commercial partnering with industry and applications of the technology it has developed, PSI Energy supported this project to become familiar with the content and process of those programs, and to seek out opportunities for collaboration, demonstration or other forms of participation that will further the business objectives of PSI. PSI has agreed to make these results available to the participants in UFTO.

ORNL Organization

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a “GOCO” lab (government-owned, contractor operated). Martin Marietta Energy Systems Inc., a division of Martin Marietta Corp., is the contractor that manages ORNL and four other facilities, including the Y-12 Plant and the K-25 Site in the town of Oak Ridge, and gaseous diffusion enrichment facilities at Paducah (KY) and Portsmouth (OH). [Added Note: The recently announced merger of Lockheed and Martin Marietta is not anticipated to have any major impact on ORNL, except that over time there may be more joint activity with Idaho National Energy Lab. This is similar to the closer contact with Sandia that developed after Martin Marietta took over the management of that facility.]

Thus ORNL is a separate entity and organization from Y-12 and K-25, though they are all operated by the same management company. There are many overlapping activities, and some ORNL staff have their offices and facilities physically located at the other sites. For example, Y-12 is also the site of a joint program called “Centers for Manufacturing Technology” (Dave Beck is the contact), a manufacturing skills campus available to private industry on a full cost recovery basis. Thus, any interaction with ORNL will also provide a point of entry to the other Oak Ridge facilities.

Similar to other DOE labs, ORNL has a matrix organizational structure, where “divisions” aligned by discipline have the people, and “programs” have the projects and budgets. On some occasions, divisions do get funds and projects of their own. Overall, the matrix system is mature and functions very effectively at ORNL.

Both divisions and programs live in research “ALD’s” or Associate Laboratory Directorates, headed by Assoc. Lab Directors who along with other administrative and support groups report to the Laboratory Director (Alvin Trivelpiece).

ORNL’s four research ALD’s are:
– Physical Sciences & Advanced Materials
– Engineering and Manufacturing (name recently changed from “Nuclear Technologies”)
– Biomedical & Environmental Sciences
– Advanced Energy Systems

There is work in all four ALDs of potential interest to utilities. The point of contact for this study was established through the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program, which oversees activities involving 11 different research divisions. Contact was also made with the Fossil Energy Materials Program, with a similarly broad scope. Both of these programs are in the Advanced Energy Systems ALD.

ORNL also takes on a program management role nationally on behalf of DOE, for some aspect of a DOE program, e.g. supporting PETC or METC or the DOE program office directly, or in collaboration with other national labs.

Mechanisms to Work with ORNL

There are a variety of mechanisms for working with ORNL. The laboratory often subcontracts work to industry (usually cost-shared), and can also perform industry-funded work (but must demonstrate that it is not competing with other private industry companies).

One of the major mechanisms is the “CRADA” (cooperative research and development agreement), which is analogous to a joint venture between private companies. No money changes hands, but both parties bring something to the table, and get something of benefit from it, most typically intellectual property rights.

ORNL also has a number of “User Facilities” and “Centers” that focus on particular subjects, and make special equipment, facilities and expertise available to outside users, on a fee or collaborative basis.

One other general point: — the lab annually publishes an “Institutional Plan”, which is organized according to which DOE Program Office supports the work, not the lab’s own organizational structure. Thus a “mapping” between the two structures is required to be able to see the work of the groups within the lab. In most instances, divisions and programs also publish annual progress reports, providing detailed though not always current accounts of the work

Specific ORNL Technologies & Programs

Covered in this section:

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program
• Power Systems Technology Program
• Superconducting Technology Program for Electric Energy Systems
• Electric & Magnetic Fields Bioeffects
• Motors
• Power Electronics Technology Center
• Fuels, Combustion and Propulsion Technology Group
• Efficiency and Renewables
• Biofuels Feedstock
• Bioprocessing R&D Center
• Integrated Resource Planning
• Energy Planning and Evaluations
• Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC)
• Center for Global Environmental Studies
• Developing Country Program

Fossil Energy Materials Program
• Energy Efficiency Materials Program

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program
A.C.(Tony) Schaffhauser, Director, 574-4826. This office manages a wide spectrum of programs involving many functions and groups within ORNL.

• Power Systems Technology Program, James VanCoevering, Manager, 574-4829
OPPORTUNITY
ORNL has been active in T&D research since 1974, and handles all DOE work in T&D. “System 2020 Workshop” (Denver 1990) identified high priorities for T&D (DOE and utilities). ORNL focus is on high capacity transmission and power electronics. A complex organizational framework to coordinate initiatives has very little utility representation except thru EPRI and BPA & WAPA.

High Capacity Transmission Options: Goal is to develop new-construction options that increase power density on a corridor. Work is in areas of High-Phase Order and HVDC.

Real Time Control: They see T&D network as the world’s most complex process system, with trend away from “security by reserves” to “security by control.” Goal is zero reserve capacity — “N-1” criteria are expensive in terms of idle equipment. (Niagara Mohawk is only other utility representation on technical committee for this.)

High Capacity Power Electronics: Goal to reduce converter costs to make DC compete with AC at 150 miles instead of 400 mi.

Power Transients: Geomagnetic Induced currents and EMP/Lightning transients

Equipment Diagnosis: SF6 degradation detection — major CRADA, with work at NIST, Ontario Hydro and ORNL.

Reliability Centered Maintenance of T&D equipment — approach is to understand underlying physical processes, and acquire data on degradation processes. [Alternate approach would emphasize codifying “expert” experience.]

SMES Market Potential & Benefits for Electric Utilities: Extensive array of studies with utilities just getting started in early ’94, to examine various uses for SMES. Five under contract already, and 2 more in negotiation. AD Little did major evaluation of utility benefits for Storage and PLC.
[Anchorage Elec and B&W got $5 mil ARPA grant to design and build a SMES unit!]

• Superconducting Technology Program for Electric Energy Systems
Robert Hawsey, Director, 574-8057

In partnerships with ANL, LANL and industry. Issue quarterly bulletin. ORNL has advisory, study role, and receives 1/4 of the $20 million DOE budget. Doing work on motors, generators, transmission, but not bearings or current limiters. HTSC applications of greatest interest.

Interested particularly in adding inductor/reactors and transformers to the original list of applications of potential use to the utility industry. Also see SMES discussion above.

Looking for vertically integrated teams — “Partnership Initiatives” — 3 @ $2 million each, with a manufacturer, utility and laboratory. OPPORTUNITY

• Electric & Magnetic Fields Bioeffects Paul Gailey, Program Manager 574-0419

ORNL has lead role in coordinating DOE effort–program mgt., conferences, Q/A, publications, etc. on Engineering and Biological Effects. Good relations with EPRI. Also issue RFPs for DOE. Biology research looking for theoretical models, going outside of EMF community to main technical/academic societies (e.g. engineering study of current tomography of the human body).

Staff are urging more attention be given to what it would cost to mitigate EMF, for use in social risk/benefit decisions.

• Motors Ben McConnell, 576-2733

Motors themselves are already very efficient, and only small gains can be made. However, if the entire system (electric motor system — EMS) is taken into account, 30% improvements are possible. The entire system includes the power conditioning (ASD), the motor, mechanical drive/coupling, and the process device (e.g. pump, impeller, fan, etc.). The problem is that these are never looked at as a system, but as separate components. (Even in large companies involved in more than one area, the motor people don’t talk to the drive people don’t talk to the device people).

The “Motor Challenge Showcase” will start in ’94. Awards will be made to 5-6 industry teams, each to consist of a customer, a manufacturer, and a utility. A Notice of Program Interest (NOPI) is due shortly. Voluntary industry/government collaboration to promote efficient EMS; develop tools, protocols, guidelines; national EMS database and information clearinghouse.

• Power Electronics Technology Center William Key 576-0278

Advanced motor development, based on ultra centrifuge program. Axial gap permanent magnet; working with HTSC to see how to use it in motors.
(Note: referred by Ron Graves to Dan Linehan and John Conyer, ETD at K25, program development staff for adv. motors. Also to Y-12 Howard Haynes and Don Casada for Electric Motor Signature Analysis & Condition Assessment — for Reliability Centered Maint. Already successful with valves in nuclear plants.)

Inverters — internal development program for hi effic, hi reliability, low EM interef. 40kW 300VDC for automotive program.

Photonics — also internal effort — on non-contact remote power sensor and strain measurement (EPRI–B. Dooley), fiber optic sensors, Si rubber weight-in-motion.

Flywheels (Dave O’Kain) –applying experience from gas centrifuge program that was canceled in ’85 –high speed rotor in vacuum. High peripheral velocity is key variable. Hold world record. Spin test facility can spin to failure. Program not a solo effort — team with others for system.

Elec Machinery Systems Test Facility
Motor Test Lab (Bob Schilling, 576-7859) Based on work for NRC on life extension and aging of motor operated valves, studying reliability and harmonics of high efficiency motors. For large motors (50-100 hp and higher) harmonics measured back at transmission substation (with Commonwealth Edison).

Diagnostics (Steve McNeany) Remote temperature measurement and Electrical Current Signature Analysis – can see mechanical vibration, etc. by analyzing the current waveform, with exciting implications for assessing motor/systems condition on line.

• Fuels, Combustion and Propulsion Technology Group (Ron Graves) (located at Y-12)

Work for EPRI on FBC; also applied chaos theory.

Piston Engine tests– emissions, advanced materials, alternate fuels; CRADA’s with auto makers.

Full vehicle test–managed Federal Methanol fleet project; detailed measurements, especially effects on lube oil.

Program Mgt. for DOE in Alternate Fuels; Subs with Detroit Diesel, Caterpillar on adv. diesel; Emission reducing additives for diesel fuels (with Cummins and Texaco) — NOx down 40% with expensive custom molecule; natural gas in diesels.

ORNL not involved with large stationary engines, but has work in fuel chemistry relevant to standby generators (fuel stagnation and fire safety). Also Cogen (GT and diesel) for military bases.

Emissions after-treatment — sensors, controls, instrumentation.

• Efficiency and Renewables Dr. George Courville 574-1945, Jeff Christian 574-9338

“Building Technology Center” is a “User Facility”, and has the recently consolidated activities related to buildings. There are major test facilities for heating, air conditioning, refrigeration, insulation and building materials. The also do performance analysis for Program Evaluation projects, and have a strong role in ASHRAE and ASTM standards, tests and procedures committees.

There are several technology developments also:

– Powder Evacuated Panels (PEP) insulates 5 times better than conventional insulation, or >R25 per inch. (It’s similar in structure to a package of vacuum packed coffee.) GE and Corning are vigorously pursuing applications, and ORNL’s role is on process and measurement improvements.
– Gas adsorption A/C — ORNL has basic patents on “triple adsorption”, licensed to Trane.
– Improvement for auto and window A/C–permitted 20% improvement in performance by overcharging the system while avoiding the “slugging” problem that usually results. It’s basically an liquid overfeed system, a separator/accumulator that keeps the liquid refrigerant from entering the compressor.
– High efficiency building block — a new geometry that reduces the front-to-back thermal bridging and amount of mortar that’s needed.
– Handbooks for Builders on building envelope, foundations, etc.

• Biofuels Feedstock Janet Cushman 574-7818; Lynn Wright; Robin Graham 576-7756

ORNL has managed the DOE’s Transportation Program’s work in crops and cropping systems for biofuel for over 14 years. (SERI/NREL handles the conversion technology.) An emphasis on ethanol is now broadened, with additional funding from DOE/EER and EPRI. Initially focused on crop yield research, there is now also work on demonstration and analysis (environmental CO2, economic development benefits, etc.)

Working with utilities on trees, especially interested due to opportunity to co-fire with wood, and “closed CO2 cycle” aspects. Also with ethanol producers and NREL. No plans to use existing forests, but need fuel while waiting for trees to grow. Ultimate objective is agricultural cropping. Doing project with TVA (Bruce Gold) and EPRI on cofiring woodwaste and crop residues, and resource assessment (economics, GIS/network model, etc.). Planting 1000 acre poplar farm in S. Minn., cofunded with EPRI, NSP and Minn. Power.

Species breeding — focus on poplars (hardwood). Best non-wood option is switch-grass–screening/breeding program at Purdue.

DOE/NREL recently released an RFP for feasibility studies of complete systems for biomass power and liquid fuels. (When making alcohol from biomass, 25% of mass is lignin, which goes unused unless it’s burned for power–i.e. power as a by-product–same idea would apply for paper mills.)

Ethanol producers formed a Consortium for Plant Biotechnology at Purdue, to use cellulose waste. (Involves New Energy of Indiana and ADM)

• Bioprocessing R&D Center Charles D. Scott, Director 574-6775
Timothy Scott 574-5962

Applied (not basic) biological research, making basic processes into high production rate systems (as distinct from slow chemical reactions):
– Cellulose –> glucose
– Remove S, N from coal (difficult) and from liquid/gas fuels (more likely)
– Stack gas cleanup with biocatalysts–lab stage; about 3 years to decision on next steps.
– Liquefying coal with enzymes

Bioengineering–unconventional, faster, more efficient. Reactor systems, separation and purification, models for scale up.
Looking for industry participation in segregated waste paper to ethanol project
OPPORTUNITY

• Integrated Resource Planning Eric Hirst 574-6304

Series of studies on relationship between regulation and DSM/IRP. Also an evaluation of “collaboratives”, which refers to programs to involve interest groups and intervenors in utility planning. Also survey of PUCs on DSM incentives.

“Climate Challenge” is new program like EPA’s Green Lights involving DOE and 60 utilities.

• Fuel Cycle Externalities are receiving renewed attention. ORNL has some notable work by Russ Lee in this area, that has gotten the attention of the NCA, among others.

• Energy Planning and Evaluations Marilyn Brown 576-8152
Evaluate the effectiveness of programs from weatherization to tech transfer.

– National Evaluation of DOE Weatherization Program for Low Income Households
Services delivered through local community agencies, and utilities can piggyback to deliver services to low income customers. A number of utilities have worked with the program.
– Economics of Low Income DSM Programs (ongoing with 4 utilities–Con Ed, Duke, CP&L, and Niagara Mohawk, 2 states and DOE): How will Utilities and PUCs assess cost effectiveness, and how to treat government funds?
– New England Audit Program (“NEAT”) is a software package available to agencies, and provides a user-friendly shell around DOE-2 for single family houses.
– Support DOE commercialization efforts, in tracking, data collection and analysis of experience and success rates–have done case studies in building technology and Energy related invention program.

• Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center (CDIAC) 574-0390

In the Environ. Sciences Division, CDIAC provides extensive data services and products on CO2 and trace gases in the atmosphere, and their impacts on climate and ecosystems. Numerous reports, periodicals and publications are available.

• Center for Global Environmental Studies Michael P. Farrell, Director 576-7785

This program cuts across the entire lab. Principal strengths include data systems; large scale environment study; scientific measurement and instrumentation (spin offs from defense work). Working with CIA to declassify some data — especially population and energy consumption; Photo Interpretation Center — system to scan old photos to develop land use histories; Energy Policy and Human Systems Analysis — human behavior–cause & effects — technology & population as drivers–model economic incentives.

• Developing Country Program Thomas J. Wilbanks 574-5515

Developing countries experiencing very high growth rates, but face capital constraints for new capacity, e.g. explosive growth in appliances in China and India, putting pressure on power systems. Thus, utilities have to be innovative. Also, as they go to the world financial market, there are new pressures regarding the environment, growth, DSM, conservation, etc. They want U.S. experience to guide them, especially in management and organizational structure.

US utilities can get involved, and not just to make $$:
– Public service philosophy, especially to help stabilize the global environment!!
– Foreign situations offer a laboratory to test things
– Provides interesting careers for utility senior staff–good for morale
– Money available from US and international agencies.
-Can help with economic development back home.

“Joint Implementation” on Climate/Greenhouse gases — producers invest elsewhere to buy abatement credits (e.g. tree planting). TVA is helping fund IRP in China to open it up for Joint Implementation.

He’s working with EPRI/Wash DC office, and AID, World Bank, etc. Since ’82, more than 60 projects in 34 countries. AID setting up a “Sister Utility Program” with USEA.

Fossil Energy Materials Program
Rod Judkins, Director 574-4572. The Fossil Energy Materials Program is manager of the national program in materials development, which also involves 5 other labs and many contractors. They provide support to PETC Clean Coal and METC. They’re involved in bioprocessing and EIS/assessments for Clean Coal projects. In combustion there is work to evaluate fuels, and mild gasification (pyrolysis), and a CRADA with B:&W to study deterministic chaos theory applied to mixing of coal in FBCs.

There is also a User Center for Characterizing Materials.

Gas Clean-up with Ceramic Composite Filters (Dave Stinton 574-4556) They have a long history in CVD for coating nuclear fuel with continuous fiber ceramic composites, and are now doing chemical vapor “Infiltration”. A Nikalon fiber preform is infiltrated with CV Silicon Carbide, to make tougher high temperature materials impervious is breakage by thermal shock. Near term applications include filters for PFBC flyash and char. (Commercially available candle filters aren’t tough enough.) In work funded by METC, 3-M won the bid to commercialize, and is making 5′ candles prototypes, replacing the traditional clay or glass binder with CV Si Carbide, making it very resistant to corrosion. They performed well in tests by Westinghouse. (Not related to EPRI’s candle filter project in the U.K.)

Applications work on alloys, ceramics for corrosion problems: Iron Aluminide alloys have superb resistance to sulphadizing, e.g. in H2S in coal gasification (not the same as sulfates in combustion). Good structurally only to 600°C, but as a cladding to 1100 °C in sulfur environment and to 1300°C in an oxidizing environment.

An application has been developed to create a porous sintered filter metal. Amitech is the licensee for the invention, and makes the powder. In 1987, the Pall Corp. and Amitech entered into an informal collaboration with ORNL, and Pall is making filters from this material, and is replacing its own product on the market. The market is small currently, but since hot gas cleanup technology doesn’t exist–plants are designed more conservatively than may be necessary, particularly in the area of heat recovery. The technology may make 700°C flue gas cleanup possible.
OPPORTUNITY A utility could do the tests needed to go to the next step!

• Energy Efficiency Materials Program
Ron Bradley, Assoc Director, Metals & Ceramics Div. (MC) 574-6094
Michael Karnitz, Manager, Industrial Conservation Program, 574-5150
Philip Sklad, Manager, Adv. Industrial Concepts Materials Program, 574-5069

Metallurgy and Ceramics originally supported the nuclear program, but the scope has been broadened over time. Ron Bradley also is responsible for the Material Research activities in the Energy Efficiency and Renewables Program.

The MC Division has a budget of $60 million, almost all from DOE. It does both basic and applied research. About 1/3 is for energy efficiency, however none in solar PV, wind or geothermal.

Materials for Energy Efficiency: similar to the Iron Aluminide development, Nickel Aluminides came out of work on ordered inter metallic alloys, and have the interesting property that their strength increases with temperature! While they have good high temperature properties and oxidation resistance, they have poor sulphadation resistance. They do have applications in industry, such as heat treatment furnace components, and are being evaluated by Cummins under a license for turbocharger rotors.

Ceramics for automotive Gas Turbine–ORNL has managed the DOE effort for 10 years. Silicon Nitride ceramics have met the performance requirements for GT rotors, and the next issue being addressed is cost, and possible use in IC piston (diesel) and stationary GT for industry and utility use. (Allied Signal is already using ceramics for vanes in auxiliary power units for aircraft.)

A new program at DOE has been set up mid ’93 jointly by Fossil and Energy Efficiency, to develop advanced turbine systems, with efficiencies increased to 60% for large machines and into the high 40’s for smaller ones. (GE’s goal for 1998 is a new 250 MW turbine operating at 2550˚ C and 60% efficiency.) There are contracts in place with Allison, GE, Westinghouse and Solar Turbine, and possibly one with Siemens. ORNL’s role is materials support: coatings (silicon nitride), alloy development, machine characterization, ceramics for vanes, shrouds and uncooled blades.

A utility could become involved in possible application to GT/CC. There hasn’t been much interaction with EPRI, though Wate Bakker was testing the Iron Aluminide at Lockheed.

Corrosion in scrubber linings and coal powder abrasion are key issues for coal utilities.
ORNL had done a big review on corrosion 15 years ago, and couldn’t offer much at the time. Now, ceramic work tends to be aimed in different direction. Intermetallics a possibility–just learning how to put FeAl coatings down on steel, and NiAl would be ideal, but how to install? Aluminides being developed for gasifiers perform very well in high temperature sulfur environments–some common problems in DOE incinerator work.

Inorganic membrane technology from the isotope separation work is just emerging from secrecy. It has been licensed for some commercial applications, and there could be some intriguing possibilities of using it for hot gas separation in power plants.

Key Contacts:
general phone # Martin Marietta Energy Systems 615-576-5454
Oak Ridge National Labs

Primary UFTO Contact:
A.C.(Tony) Schaffhauser, Director, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program 574-4826

Office of Technology Transfer — part of Martin Marietta Energy Systems, overseeing technology transfer for all the facilities they manage. Mission is to facilitate contacts and help with business arrangements. Want long term strategic partnerships/teaming with industry, not just companies buying lab technology. Martin Marietta’s winning bid to manage ORNL in ’84 had strong tech transfer component. “Nothing is not possible.” “Never say no, say how” There’s always a way to make something work. Always looking for new ideas.

William R Martin, Vice President & Director, Technology Transfer 576-8369

Ralph Donnelly was named Deputy Director in March ’94

Public Relations

Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Carol Grametbauer 574-1640, Ms. Eddie Stout, Assistant

ORNL Public Affairs Dept., 574-4160

Global Emissions/Atmospheric Release Modeling

/0 Comments/in , /by

Source: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Date: 7/1/93 Record No.: 10016
Contact: Jesse Yow, 510-422-3521

Global Emissions/ Atmospheric Release Modeling
LLNL was called upon for analysis of Chernobyl, the Kuwaiti Oil Fires, etc. Can handle accident/leak situations on any scale.