DOCSLIB.ORG

Barriers, Opportunities, and Research Needs Draft Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Barriers, Opportunities, and Research Needs Draft Report Public Interest Energy Research (PIER) Program FINAL PROJECT REPORT TASK 5. Biomass Energy in California’s Future: Barriers, Opportunities, and Research Needs_ Draft Report Prepared for: California Energy Commission Prepared by: UC Davis California Geothermal Energy Collaborative DECEMBER 2013 CEC‐500‐01‐016 Prepared by: Primary Author(s): Stephen Kaffka, University of California, Davis Robert Williams, University of California, Davis Douglas Wickizer, University of California, Davis UC Davis California Geothermal Energy Collaborative 1715 Tilia St. Davis, CA 95616 www.cgec.ucdavis.edu Contract Number: 500‐01‐016 Prepared for: California Energy Commission Michael Sokol Contract Manager Reynaldo Gonzalez Office Manager Energy Generation Research Office Laurie ten Hope Deputy Director Energy Research & Development Division Robert P. Oglesby Executive Director DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The California Goethermal Energy Collaborative would like to thank the California Energy Commission and its Public Interest Energy Research Program (PIER) for sponsoring this important work as well as the Geothermal Energy Association for assisting in tracking down the most up to date data both within the United States and abroad. The California Energy Commission PIER program supports public interest energy research and development that will help improve the quality of life in California by bringing environmentally safe, affordable, and reliable energy services and products to the marketplace. The PIER Program conducts public interest research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) projects to benefit California. The PIER Program strives to conduct the most promising public interest energy research by partnering with RD&D entities, including individuals, businesses, utilities, and public or private research institutions. PIER funding efforts are focused on the following RD&D program areas: Buildings End‐Use Energy Efficiency Energy Innovations Small Grants Energy‐Related Environmental Research Energy Systems Integration Environmentally Preferred Advanced Generation Industrial/Agricultural/Water End‐Use Energy Efficiency Renewable Energy Technologies Transportation Biomass Energy in California’s Future: Barriers, Opportunities and Research Needs is the interim report for the Integrated Assessments of Renewable Energy Options project (contract number 500‐11‐020) conducted by The University of California, Davis. The information from this project contributes to PIER’s Renewable Energy Technologies Program. For more information about the PIER Program, please visit the Energy Commission’s website at www.energy.ca.gov/research/ or contact the Energy Commission at 916‐654‐4878. i ABSTRACT Biomass from California’s forests, cities and towns, and agriculture is abundant, diverse and technically available. There are many current and newly emerging technologies for converting biomass to energy. Yet biomass use for energy has remained static or declined in recent years despite the state’s policy commitment to significant levels of greenhouse gas reduction, which prudent biomass use supports. Biomass energy is generally more expensive than fossil alternatives, so bioenergy must be justified by the logic of greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions resulting from biomass substitution for fossil energy sources, to minimize adverse effects from climate change. But additional correlated benefits associated with improved landscape management also should be identified and accounted to better value the benefits of biomass use. Forest and agricultural biomass is the product of landscapes and ecosystems. Use of biomass has unavoidable, frequently complex effects on these landscapes, some beneficial, some potentially harmful. The key to the fullest use of suitable biomass in California is linking uses for energy to other important ecosystem functions and public goods associated with landscape maintenance, often called sustainability. The use of forest biomass for energy is associated with the preservation of desirable, functioning forest ecosystems (forest health), reduction in wildfires, the well‐being of rural communities, and additional benefits in addition to displacement of fossil energy and GHG reduction. For agricultural biomass, use of crop residues like rice straw or manures (especially dairy manures), can be linked to GHG and pollution reduction (methane, nitrate) while creating alternative forms of renewable energy and valuable byproducts. For urban organic residues, more alternative energy production is possible than currently achieved, with valuable reductions in associated GHG emissions, but state waste management policy is not well aligned with the state’s GHG reduction and alternative energy policies. Research should identify biomass energy projects with multiple benefits and quantify benefits where possible. Research should also identify the complete costs and benefits of bioenergy projects including those that allow for ecosystem maintenance, and address technical issues and obstacles associated with particular, desirable bioenergy production pathways. The issue of carbon accounting is particularly challenging for forest and agricultural biomass, due to underlying scientific uncertainty and interest group advocacy for conflicting positions about the benefits of biomass use. Without agreement about benefits and methods of accounting, uncertainty and associated policy instability will continue to inhibit further biomass energy development in the state. Stable agreement at the policy level is necessary to allow investment in beneficial projects. Keywords: biomass, bioenergy, power, wooody biomass, urban biomass, agricultural biomass, technology, policy ii Please use the following citation for this report: Kaffka, Stephen, Williams, Rob, Wickizer, Doug. University of California, Davis, California California Biomass Collaborative. 2013. Biomass Energy in California’s Future: Barriers Opportunities and Research Needs_Draft Report. California Energy Commission. Publication number: CEC‐500‐01‐016. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................... i ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................... iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 2 CHAPTER 1: Biomass Resources in California ................................................................................... 8 Biomass use for power and heat .................................................................................................... 10 Resources by Biomass Type ................................................................................................................ 13 Woody Biomass from Forests ......................................................................................................... 13 Urban Residuals: Resources ........................................................................................................... 23 Disposal Stream ...................................................................................................................................... 23 Energy Potential in the Disposal Stream ............................................................................................... 24 Agricultural Biomass Resources .................................................................................................... 26 CHAPTER 2: Technological Overview ............................................................................................... 37 Conversion Pathways: General .......................................................................................................... 37 Thermochemical Conversion.......................................................................................................... 38 Biochemical Conversion .................................................................................................................. 39 Physicochemical Conversion .......................................................................................................... 40 Technology for Woody Biomass from Forests ................................................................................. 40 Existing Biomass to Power Systems .............................................................................................. 40 Use of wood chips and pellets for power, and co‐firing of biomass and coal ......................... 41 Status of Technology for Woody Biomass ...................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Renewable Tracking Progress Appendix
    California Energy Commission – Tracking Progress Renewable Energy Advancing the use and availability of renewable energy is critical to achieving California’s ambitious climate goals. With this in mind, California has pursued a suite of policies and programs aimed at advancing renewable energy and ensuring all Californians, including low- income and disadvantaged communities, benefit from this transition. This report presents the state’s progress in meeting its renewable energy goals and provides an updated analysis through 2018 of renewable energy generation, installed renewable capacity, and a discussion of the trends, opportunities, and challenges associated with the renewable energy transition. More detailed figures and tables are included in the appendix.1 Renewable Energy Serving California Consumers Annual Renewable Percentage: Renewables Portfolio Standard Progress An increasing percentage of energy consumed by Californians comes from renewable sources. A key mandate advancing the use of renewable energy has been the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires California load-serving entities2 (LSEs) to increase their procurement of eligible renewable energy resources (solar, wind, geothermal, biomass, and small hydroelectric) to 33 percent of retail sales by 2020 and 60 percent of retail sales by 2030. Based on reported electric generation from RPS-eligible sources divided by forecasted electricity retail sales for 2019, the California Energy Commission (CEC) estimates that 36 percent of California’s 2019 retail electricity sales was served by RPS-eligible renewable resources as shown in Figure 1. Although this number is not a final RPS determination, it is an important indicator of progress in achieving California’s RPS goals. Figure 1: Estimated Current Renewables Portfolio Standard Progress Source: CEC staff analysis, December 2019 The annual renewable percentage estimated by the CEC has continued to increase in recent years, often ahead of the timelines envisioned by prior legislation.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioenergy Action Plan for Ireland
    BioEnErgy Action PlAn for irElAnd Report of thE MinistEriAl Task forcE on BioEnErgy Table of Contents Foreword 2 Executive Summary 3 Chapter Energy Trends in Ireland 990 to 2005 8 Chapter 2 Land Use in Ireland 3 Chapter 3 Bioenergy for the Transport Sector - Biofuels 6 Chapter 4 Bioenergy for the Heat Sector - Biomass 2 Chapter 5 Bioenergy for the Electricity Sector 26 Chapter 6 Public Sector Leadership - Driving Bioenergy Demand 32 Foreword Ireland has a significant bioenergy potential in the form of agricultural land, forestry and recycled waste from municipal, agriculture and industrial sources. All of these sources can be used to generate electricity, refined into fuel for the transport sector, provide heating/cooling for the building sector or as a source for biochemical raw materials for Irish industry. The development of our bioenergy resources will contribute to our overall security of energy supply and fuel diversity objectives. Increased use of these resources will also contribute to our renewable energy targets, our climate change mitigation policies, our waste policies and, at a time of great change in our agricultural sector, assist in rural development by providing new markets and employment development opportunities for our farming and forestry sectors as well as community enterprise. The sustainable development of our bioenergy potential and its deployment in the electricity, transport, heating and chemical sectors requires a fully coordinated approach across a number of Departments and State Agencies, working together across the sectors and with all stakeholders. In light of this challenge, the Government established a Ministerial Bioenergy Task Force which oversaw the delivery of the Action Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • 2007: the Role of a Low Carbon Fuel Standard in Reducing Greenhouse
    FINAL The Role of a Low Carbon Fuel Standard in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Protecting Our Economy Executive Summary Transportation accounts for more than 40% of California’s annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the state relies on petroleum-based fuels for 96 percent of its transportation needs. Petroleum use contributes to climate change and dependency on oil leaves workers, businesses and consumers vulnerable to price shocks from an unstable global energy market. No business should be hostage to a single supplier for its most critical raw materials; neither should any state or nation. To protect our jobs and wages, clean our air and maintain our way of life, we must diversify our fuel sources and reduce our reliance on oil. As one of the world's largest energy consumers and the national leader in energy efficiency, alternative energy and greenhouse gas reduction, California has the opportunity and ability to diversify its transportation fuel supplies, decrease the greenhouse gases emitted from those fuels, and establish a sustainable market for cleaner-burning fuels. Accordingly, by Executive Order the Governor will establish a first-of-its-kind policy to reduce the greenhouse gas impact from California's use of transportation fuels and in so doing diversify the state's transportation fuels portfolio. Specifically, Executive Order S-XX-07 will establish: 1. A Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels sold in California, and 2. An initial LCFS goal of reducing the carbon intensity of California's passenger vehicle fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. The LCFS is the world’s first global warming standard for transportation fuels, and as with other groundbreaking California policies, it may serve as a model for state, federal and international standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Incorporating Renewables Into the Electric Grid: Expanding Opportunities for Smart Markets and Energy Storage
    INCORPORATING RENEWABLES INTO THE ELECTRIC GRID: EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SMART MARKETS AND ENERGY STORAGE June 2016 Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 I. Technical and Economic Considerations in Renewable Integration .......................................................... 7 Characteristics of a Grid with High Levels of Variable Energy Resources ................................................. 7 Technical Feasibility and Cost of Integration .......................................................................................... 12 II. Evidence on the Cost of Integrating Variable Renewable Generation ................................................... 15 Current and Historical Ancillary Service Costs ........................................................................................ 15 Model Estimates of the Cost of Renewable Integration ......................................................................... 17 Evidence from Ancillary Service Markets................................................................................................ 18 Effect of variable generation on expected day-ahead regulation mileage......................................... 19 Effect of variable generation on actual regulation mileage ..............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Green Economic Recovery: Wind Energy Tax Policy After Financial Crisis and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Oregon Scholars' Bank JEFFRY S. HINMAN∗ The Green Economic Recovery: Wind Energy Tax Policy After Financial Crisis and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009 I. The Benefits, Challenges, and Potential of the U.S. Wind Industry................................................................................... 39 A. Environmental Benefits of Wind...................................... 40 B. Economic Benefits of Wind ............................................. 41 1. Jobs and Economic Activity........................................ 41 2. Competitiveness with Traditional Power Plants ......... 43 C. Challenges for the Wind Energy Industry ......................... 44 1. Efficiency, Grid Access, and Intermittency ................ 44 2. Environmental Concerns and Local Opposition ......... 45 II. Federal Support for Renewable Energy Past and Present ....... 46 A. Renewable Energy Tax Policy 1978 to 1992 .................... 47 1. The National Energy Act of 1978 ............................... 48 2. Additional State-Level Tax Incentives in California During the 1980s ....................................... 50 3. The California Wind Boom......................................... 51 4. Shortcomings of the Wind Boom................................ 52 5. The Free Market Approach 1986 to 1992 ................... 53 ∗ J.D., University of Oregon School of Law, 2009; Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation, 2008–2009; Recipient, Tax Law Certificate of Completion; B.S., Oregon State University, 2002. I want to thank the editorial staff of the Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation for their friendship and masterful edits. I also want to extend my appreciation to the excellent tax law faculty at the University of Oregon, Professors Roberta Mann and Nancy Shurtz, for their guidance and feedback. Finally, and most importantly, I owe a huge debt of gratitude to my incredible wife Kathleen for her patience and support.
    [Show full text]
  • Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy Development Strategy and Investment Plan for Western Africa Region
    AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE UNIÃO AFRICANA Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, P. O. Box 3243, Telephone: +251-11-551 7700, Fax: +251-11-5517844, website: www. africa-union.org REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy development strategy and investment plan for Western Africa region Procurement No: AUC/IED/C/011 April 2019 May 2019 1 AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE UNIÃO AFRICANA Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA, P. O. Box 3243, Telephone: +251-11-551 7700, Fax: +251-11-5517844, website: www. africa-union.org Section I: Letter of Invitation 9 May 2019 Dear Sirs, REF: REQUEST FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST: Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy development strategy and investment plan for Western Africa region 1. The African Union would like to engage the services of a consulting for Consultancy Services to Undertake Bioenergy development strategy and investment plan for Western Africa region. The African Union Commission invites interested and eligible bidders to submit technical and financial proposals for the assignment as per attached Terms of Reference (TORS). 2. An Individual Consultant will be selected under the Consultant Qualification Selection procedures described in the AU Procurement Manual available on https://au.int/en/bids. The pass mark shall be 70%. 3. The deadline for submission of EOIs is 31 May 2019 at 1500hrs. Late submissions will be rejected. 4. Bidders may request for clarifications no less than 7 days from the deadline for submission, from The Chairperson, Internal Procurement Committee, African Union Commission, Telephone number (+251) 11 5517700, Ext 4341, Email tender@africa- union.org with a copy to [email protected] 4.
    [Show full text]
  • California's Energy Future
    California’s Energy Future: The View to 2050 Summary Report May 2011 Jane C. S. Long (co-chair) LEGAL NOTICE This report was prepared pursuant to a contract between the California Energy Commission (CEC) and the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST). It does not represent the views of the CEC, its employees, or the State of California. The CEC, the State of California, its employees, contractors, and subcontractors make no warranty, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the use of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would also like to thank the Stephen Bechtel Fund and the California Energy Commision for their contributions to the underwriting of this project. We would also like to thank the California Air Resources Board for their continued support and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory for underwriting the leadership of this effort. COPYRIGHT Copyright 2011 by the California Council on Science and Technology. Library of Congress Cataloging Number in Publications Data Main Entry Under Title: California’s Energy Future: A View to 2050 May 2011 ISBN-13: 978-1-930117-44-0 Note: The California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) has made every reasonable effort to assure the accuracy of the information in this publication. However, the contents of this publication are subject to changes, omissions, and errors, and CCST does not accept responsibility for any inaccuracies that may occur. CCST is a non-profit organization established in 1988 at the request of the California State Government and sponsored by the major public and private postsecondary institutions of California and affiliate federal laboratories in conjunction with leading private-sector firms.
    [Show full text]
  • California's Water-Energy Relationship
    CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION California's Water – Energy Relationship Prepared in Support of the 2005 Integrated EPORT Energy Policy Report Proceeding (04-IEPR-01E) R TAFF S INAL F NOVEMBER 2005 CEC-700-2005-011-SF Arnold Schwarzenegger, Governor 1 CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Primary Author Gary Klein California Energy Commission Martha Krebs Deputy Director Energy Research and Development Division Valerie Hall Deputy Director Energy Efficiency & Demand Analysis Division Terry O’Brien Deputy Director Systems Assessment & Facilities Siting Division B. B. Blevins Executive Director DISCLAIMER This paper was prepared as the result of work by one or more members of the staff of the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees, or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this paper; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This paper has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this paper. 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The California’s Water-Energy Relationship report is the product of contributions by many California Energy Commission staff and consultants, including Ricardo Amon, Shahid Chaudhry, Thomas S. Crooks, Marilyn Davin, Joe O’Hagan, Pramod Kulkarni, Kae Lewis, Laurie Park, Paul Roggensack, Monica Rudman, Matt Trask, Lorraine White and Zhiqin Zhang. Staff would also like to thank the members of the Water-Energy Working Group who so graciously gave of their time and expertise to inform this report.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy Is Not the Answer
    WIND ENERGY IS NOT THE ANSWER by Bradley S. Tupii Abstract. Wind energy is not the answer to climate change concerns and cannot do the heavy lifting required by the modern American economy. It would take hundreds of thousands of wind turbines to make a substantial contribution to America’s energy needs. Building so many turbines inevitably causes conflicts with human and animal habitats. Wind turbine noise is a serious problem for those who live in the vicinity of so-called wind farms. * * * Introduction. Wind energy is not a modern phenomenon. Man harnessed the wind with sailboats and windmills hundreds of years ago. Charles Brush developed a wind-powered electric generator in 1888.2 Small, wind-powered generators such as the Jacobs Wind-Electric Machine became popular in the Midwest in the early 20th Century.3 These windmills became obsolete when Depression-era programs brought more reliable electric power to rural areas.4 Wind energy began a slow resurgence during the Carter administration when the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 19785 fostered state tax incentives for wind power development and allowed non-utility energy producers to sell electricity to utilities.6 Currently, wind power is hailed by some as a key weapon in the battle against global warming and as an important contributor to American energy independence. This paper will argue that wind energy is neither. Wind power cannot generate enough reliable electricity to replace conventional energy sources, including those that generate greenhouse gases. Assuming for the sake of argument that carbon dioxide is contributing to global climate change, wind power will not materially reduce CO2 emissions.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioenergy Action Plan
    DEDICATION Loyd Henry Forrest Jr. 1940–2006 The Interagency Bioenergy Working Group dedicates this report to Loyd Forrest — the quintessential public servant. We gratefully recognize his contribution to California, as a state government executive, and as an early pioneer and advocate of biomass energy technology, and a successful and talented bioenergy consultant and entrepreneur. Over the course of his long and successful career, governors, legislators, state executives and staff called upon Loyd for his guidance and expertise. He was a person who stood for honesty, integrity and hard work — a man whose word could be trusted. Loyd was dedicated to issues and programs that mutually improved California’s environment and economy. This report honors his commitment and legacy to making California the best that it could be. Prepared By: Navigant Consulting, Inc. One Market St, Spear Tower 1200 San Francisco, CA Richard Germain Ryan Katofsky Contract No. 700-02-004 Prepared For: The Bioenergy Interagency Working Group James D. Boyd, Commissioner and Working Group Chair, California Energy Commission Air Resources Board California Environmental Protection Agency California Public Utilities Commission California Resources Agency Department of Food and Agriculture Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Department of General Services Integrated Waste Management Board State Water Resources Control Board Susan J. Brown Project Manager Pat Perez Manager SPECIAL PROJECTS OFFICE Rosella Shapiro Deputy Director FUELS AND TRANSPORTATION DIVISION B. B. Blevins EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Joseph F. Desmond CHAIRMAN DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission and prepared by Navigant Consulting, Inc. on behalf of the Bioenergy Interagency Working Group, composed of state agencies.
    [Show full text]
  • Energy from Wind, Water and Solar Power by 2030
    RETHINKING “HOBBITS” THE EVERYTHING TV What They Mean for Human Evolution Get Ready for the Wide-Screen Web The Long-Lost Siblings of OUR SUN page 40 November 2009 www.Scientif cAmerican.com A Plan for a Sustainable Future How to get all energy from wind, water and solar power by 2030 Chronic Pain What Goes Wrong Plus: • The Future of Cars • Farms in Skyscrapers $5.99 ENERGY A PATH TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY BY 2030 Wind, water and n December leaders from around the world for at least a decade, analyzing various pieces of will meet in Copenhagen to try to agree on the challenge. Most recently, a 2009 Stanford solar technologies Icutting back greenhouse gas emissions for University study ranked energy systems accord- can provide decades to come. The most effective step to im- ing to their impacts on global warming, pollu- 100 percent of the plement that goal would be a massive shift away tion, water supply, land use, wildlife and other from fossil fuels to clean, renewable energy concerns. The very best options were wind, so- ) dam world’s energy, sources. If leaders can have conf dence that such lar, geothermal, tidal and hydroelectric pow- ( eliminating all a transformation is possible, they might commit er—all of which are driven by wind, water or to an historic agreement. We think they can. sunlight (referred to as WWS). Nuclear power, fossil fuels. A year ago former vice president Al Gore coal with carbon capture, and ethanol were all Photos Aurora HERE’S HOW threw down a gauntlet: to repower America poorer options, as were oil and natural gas.
    [Show full text]
  • Biomass Energy Production in California: the Case for a Biomass Policy Initiative
    November 2000 • NREL/SR-570-28805 Biomass Energy Production in California: The Case for a Biomass Policy Initiative Final Report Gregory Morris Green Power Institute Berkeley, California National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 NREL is a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Operated by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle • Bechtel Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 November 2000 • NREL/SR-570-28805 Biomass Energy Production in California: The Case for a Biomass Policy Initiative Final Report Gregory Morris Green Power Institute Berkeley, California NREL Technical Monitor: Richard Bain Prepared under Subcontract No. AXE-9-18132 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 NREL is a U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Operated by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle • Bechtel Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]