DOE prepared this Supplemental EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing financial assistance in a cooperative agreement with General Motors Limited Liability Company (LLC) (General Motors Company or GM). A supplement to the April 2010 EA was necessary due to the proposed building size increasing three fold as well as the addition of a parking lot and widening of a truck dock area. This building size increase is necessary to accommodate more manufacturing equipment and provide office space. If GM received the funding, they would construct a high-volume U.S. manufacturing facility to produce the first U.S.-manufactured electric motor components and assemble electric drive units for hybrid and electric vehicles. This funding would be used for constructing a building of approximately 104,000 square feet, paving an approximately 120,000 square foot parking lot, twenty-foot wide fire road representing approximately 8,000 square feet of pavement or gravel, and widening a truck dock as well as various other supporting infrastructure. DOE's proposed action would provide approximately $105 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement to GM. The cost of the proposed project would be approximately $283.9 million. This EA evaluates the environmental resource areas DOE commonly addresses in its EAs and identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed project could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's fuel efficiency and the local economy.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action -- providing financial assistance to Phycal under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of innovative concepts for beneficial CO2 use, which include, but are not limited to, CO2 mineralization to carbonates directly through conversion of CO2 in flue gas; use of CO2 from power plants or industrial applications to grow algae or biomass. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 80 percent of the funding for the development of a pilot algae farm and processing facility in Wahiawa and Kalaeloa, Hawaii, to demonstrate the beneficial use of CO2 for the growing of algae and production of algal oil (referred to as the proposed project within this EA). The proposed project would develop algae technology that demonstrates the future potential of algae oil for biofuels at a level that results in technical, economic, and environmental advantages. This advanced technology would not only help to enhance U.S. energy supplies through the responsible development of domestic renewable energy but would also help to reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere. The proposed project would include developing an algae farm and processing facility, which would include constructing shallow ponds, greenhouses, lab/offices, a process building, and an outdoor area with various processing equipment facilities. The proposed project would be split into two phases or Modules. Module 1 would provide a baseline assessment of core processes and initial optimization. Module 2 would include the scaling and integration of supporting processes. The overall objective of proposed project would be to confirm the process economics prior to commencing to a commercial scale, development of which is not funded under this award. The proposed project would create approximately 20 jobs in Module 1, and another 20 jobs in Module 2, for the total duration of the approximately three-year pilot. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable, although minor, changes to result from the proposed project would occur in the following areas: utilities and energy use, air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, vegetation and wildlife, solid and hazardous wastes, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

Most Sub-Saharan African countries try to promote rural electrification through both centralized and decentralized approaches. This guide focuses on the decentralized approach, providing practical guidance on how small power producers and mini-grid operators can deliver both electrification and renewable energy in rural areas. It describes four basic types of on- and off-grid small power producers, as well as several hybrid combinations that are emerging in Africa and elsewhere. The guide highlights the ground-level regulatory and policy questions that must be answered by electricity regulators, rural energy agencies, and ministries to promote commercially sustainable investments by private operators and community organizations. Among the practical questions addressed is how to design and implement retail tariffs, quality of service standards, feed-in tariffs, and backup tariffs. The guide also analyzes the regulatory implementation issues triggered by donor grants and so-called top-up payments. It provides a primer for nonengineers on interconnection and operating standards for small power producers connected to main grids and isolated mini-grids. It analyzes whether the option of small power distributors, used widely in Asia, could be employed in Sub-Saharan Africa, and addresses two often ignored questions: what to do when the big grid connects to the little grid and how to practice light-handed regulation. Finally, the guide considers the threshold question of when to regulate and when to deregulate tariffs. All these implementation issues are presented with specific ground-level options and recommendations rather than just general pronouncements. In addition, to make the discussion more useful to practitioners, the guide provides numerous real-world examples of successful and unsuccessful regulatory and policy actions taken in Kenya, South Africa, and Tanzania, as well as Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand. Many of the decisions are inherently controversial because they directly affect the economic interests of investors and consumers. The guide highlights rather than hides these real-world controversies by drawing upon candid comments of key stakeholders national utility managers, mini-grid operators, government officials, and and consumers."

The Department of Energy's (DOE) National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) manages the research and development portfolio of the Vehicle Technologies (VT) Program for the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). A key objective of the VT program is accelerating the development and production of electric drive vehicle systems in order to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum. Another of its goals is the development of production-ready batteries, power electronics, and electric machines that can be produced in volume economically so as to increase the use of electric drive vehicles (EDVs). Congress appropriated significant funding for the VT program in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Public Law 111-5 (Recovery Act) in order to stimulate the economy and reduce unemployment in addition to furthering the existing objectives of the VT program. DOE solicited applications for this funding by issuing a competitive Funding Opportunity Announcement (DE-FOA-0000026), Recovery Act - Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative, on March 19, 2009. This project, Next-Generation Lithium Ion (Li Ion) Battery Recycling Facility, was one of the 30 DOE selected for funding. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $9,552,653.00 in financial assistance in a cost sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Toxco Incorporated (Toxco). The total cost of the project was estimated at $19,107,705.00. The overall purpose and need for DOE action pursuant to the VT program and the funding opportunity under the Recovery Act is to accelerate the development and production of various electric drive vehicle systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. DOE intends to further this purpose and satisfy this need by providing financial assistance under cost-sharing arrangements to this and the other 29 projects selected under this funding opportunity announcement. This and the other selected projects are needed to reduce the United States' petroleum consumption by investing in alternative vehicle technologies. Successful commercialization of EDVs would support DOE's Energy Strategic Goal of "protect ing] our national and economic security by promoting a diverse supply and delivery of reliable, affordable, and environmentally sound energy." This project will also meaningfully assist in the nation's economic recovery by creating manufacturing jobs in the United States in accordance with the objectives of the Recovery Act.

DOE prepared this EA to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its proposed action to provide financial assistance to Chemetall under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the Electric Drive Vehicles (EDV) industry in an effort to reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE is to provide approximately 45 percent of the funding for Chemetall to establish a new 5,000 metric tons per year lithium hydroxide plant at an existing Chemetall facility in Kings Mountain, North Carolina and to upgrade and expand an existing lithium brine production facility and an existing lithium carbonate plant in Silver Peak, Nevada. The Kings Mountain site is located in an industrial area directly south of Kings Mountain, in Cleveland County, North Carolina, and serves as the headquarters for Chemetall. The site is located on 720 acres, with the operations concentrated within an approximately 20-acre developed area that is centrally located within the property. Production currently includes a specialty lithium manufacturing plant, which produces various lithium salt products by reacting lithium carbonate with different materials to produce lithium bromide, lithium chloride, and lithium aluminate. The proposed project would expand operations at the facility by adding a lithium hydroxide plant. The project at Kings Mountain would create approximately 19 permanent jobs. The Silver Peak site is approximately 15,000 acres. Chemetall uses the Silver Peak site for the production of lithium carbonate, and to a lesser degree, lithium hydroxide from lithium-bearing brines that are pumped from a well field. Silver Peak is the only major source of lithium carbonate in the United States. The proposed project would rework the existing brine field's production system, rework and expand the capacity of the existing brine evaporation pond system, and refurbish the existing lithium carbonate plant. All the improvements would occur within Chemetall's patented mining claims. The project at Silver Peak would create approximately 14 permanent jobs. Chemetall may also construct a geothermal power plant in the western portion of its Silver Peak unpatented mining claims. However, that action would be evaluated separate EAs prepared by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and is not part of this EA. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from Chemetall's proposed project would occur in the following areas: air quality, solid and hazardous wastes, and human health and safety for both Kings Mountain and Silver Peak, with the exception of solid and hazardous waste for Silver Peak, which was negligible. Additionally for Silver Peak, minor impacts would occur to groundwater, transportation and traffic. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential for impacts to the human and natural environment associated with its Proposed Action -- providing financial assistance to Honeywell under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's objective is to accelerate the development and production of various EDV systems through building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding for Honeywell to construct a manufacturing plant to produce a critical battery material LiPF6. The project would produce up to 1500 metric tons of LiPF6 on an annual basis for high-quality Li-ion batteries. Additionally, the project would create approximately 34 permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from Honeywell's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas, noise, geology and soils, surface water and groundwater, vegetation and wildlife, wetlands, solid and hazardous wastes, transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these changes.

The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to the Thermal Energy Corporation to facilitate installation of a combined heat and power system (CHP), water chillers, and cooling tower at a district power plant that supplies the energy, heating, and cooling needs of the Texas Medical Center campus in Houston, Harris County, Texas. This EA analyzes the potential environmental consequences of DOE's Proposed Action to provide the Recovery Act grant, Thermal Energy Corporation's proposed project of installing and operating a CHP system, and the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated in detail potential impacts to air quality, sound levels, water resources, health and safety, and socioeconomics. After performing a screening analysis of other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to other aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or would not be detectable. The proposed project would be designed and operated in compliance with federal and Texas air quality regulations, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and have a net beneficial impact on air quality in the region. Operation of the CHP system would cause a small increase in noise outdoors near the adjacent medical facilities. Installation of the CHP system in a floodplain would not adversely impact natural and beneficial floodplain values or increase risks to lives or property. The project would have no or only small impacts to surface water quality and future availability of potable water in the Houston area, and would not cause significant hazards to workers or the public at the Central Plant. Manufacturing and installation of the equipment would result in a minor to moderate, temporary beneficial impact to the economy. Incremental increase in cumulative impacts from the proposed project, relative to impacts from other activities in the surrounding area, would be negligible to small.

PPL Renewable Energy, LLC and the Lancaster County Solid Waste Management Authority propose to construct and operate a 2 turbine wind energy project at the Frey Farm Landfill (FFLF) in Manor Township in Pennsylvania's Lancaster County to provide up to 3.2 megawatts of electricity principally to the adjacent Turkey Hill Dairy. Pennsylvania proposes to provide the project a $1.5 million grant, which would come from a formula grant Pennsylvania received from DOE pursuant to the Department's State Energy Program. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of the proposed construction and operation of the FFLF wind energy project and the alternative of not implementing this project.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) grant to Exide Technologies for expansion of its operations to manufacture advanced lead-acid batteries. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide $34.3 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Exide Technologies. The total cost of the project is estimated at $70 million. Exide Technologies' proposed project would expand its domestic capacity to produce advanced lead-acid batteries for use in the transportation industry. This EA evaluates 14 resource areas and identifies no significant adverse impacts for the proposed project. Beneficial impacts to the nation's air quality and transportation industry could be realized from implementation of this proposed project. In addition, beneficial socioeconomic impacts would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in the affected local economies.

Cephas Industries (Cephas) is proposing to construct an open-loop biomass manufacturing facility in Richmond, Virginia. The demand for recycling construction and demolition (C&D) debris has rapidly increased in recent years prompting the construction of approximately 200 biomass manufacturing facilities nationwide, with more expected to be developed. Of particular value is the recycling of wood and woody material into biomass commodities that can be sold to end-users as an alternative fuel source. Studies have shown that the recycling of C&D debris serves to: produce energy, conserve landfill space, reduce the environmental impact of producing new materials, and reduce overall construction project expenses by lessening disposal costs. The Cephas Open Loop Biomass Manufacturing Facility is a shovel-ready biomass project that would support the C&D and recycling industries in metropolitan Richmond. The proposed facility would be located on approximately 5.2 acres within the Broad Rock Industrial Park, which is located within the Richmond City limits south of the James River (Appendix 1). Development of the facility would include constructing an approximately 33,000 square foot metal building from recycled materials that would house the operational equipment (Appendix 2). The facility would have the capacity to accept and process 250-500 tons of C&D debris on a weekly basis, of which approximately 35% is expected to be biomass fuel. Cephas applied for funding assistance from Virginia's State Energy Program (SEP) through the Virginia Department of Mines Minerals and Energy (DMME). DMME selected this project to receive a grant from the SEP. States can apply their SEP funds to a variety of activities related to energy efficiency and renewable energy. Recently, much of states' SEP funding came from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) of 2009 (Public Law 111-5, 123 Stature 115; Recovery Act), in which Congress appropriated $3.1 billion to the Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) for SEP grants and from which Virginia received $70 million pursuant to a statutory formula for financial distribution. Virginia recently informed the Department that it proposes to use $500,000 of its SEP funds as a grant to the Cephas project. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) DOE must complete a review of potential environmental impacts of projects funded under the SEP before deciding whether to allow states to use their funds for the projects they select. DOE prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the proposed biomass project and the no action alternative. This EA analyzes the following areas of potential environmental impacts: water resources, geology, topography, soils, vegetation, wildlife, air quality, noise, visual resources, archeological and historic resources, land use, environmental justice, and infrastructure.

Rockwood Lithium, Inc. is proposing to construct, operate, and maintain the Silver Peak Area Geothermal Exploration Project within Esmeralda County, Nevada to determine subsurface temperatures, confirm the existence of geothermal resources, and confirm the existence of a commercial geothermal reservoir at the proposed well sites within federal geothermal lease N-87008. An Operations Plan for the construction, operation, and maintenance of these exploration wells was submitted to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Tonopah Field Office (TFO) in July 2011 and finalized in November 2011. Geothermal drilling permits would be submitted for the drilling of the exploration wells. Should this exploration project encounter and prove that a suitable geothermal resource is present, Rockwood would pursue development of the resource with the intent of providing electrical power for their adjacent lithium processing facilities. Given the uncertainties associated with geothermal exploration and the fact that most geothermal exploration on BLM land does not lead to the identification of geothermal resources that prove viable at a commercial scale, future development of the resource is not considered reasonably foreseeable for the purposes of compliance with the NEPA. Under the terms of the Geothermal Steam Act, its revisions of 2007, and its implementing regulations and the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Geothermal Leasing in the Western United States and its Record of Decision of December 2008, BLM must respond to the proposed plans, applications and programs submitted by a geothermal lessee. BLM's need is to comply with its Statutory and regulatory obligations to respond to the Operations Plan submitted by Rockwood to conduct geothermal exploration and either approve the plan as submitted, approve the plan with required modification, or deny the plan. The BLM's project purpose is to provide Rockwood with an approved Operations Plan for geothermal exploration on their federal geothermal lease in the Silver Peak Area of Nevada. The plan would also ensure that development of the geothermal resource would be conducted without significant impact to the environment. This project would also further the purpose of Secretarial Order 3285A1 (March 11, 2009) that establishes the development of environmentally responsible renewable energy as a priority for the Department of the Interior. As part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act), DOE's National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), on behalf of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy's Vehicle Technologies Program, is providing up to $2 billion in federal funding nationwide under competitively awarded agreements to facilitate the construction of U.S. manufacturing plants (including increases in production capacity at existing plants) that produce advanced batteries and electric drive components. DOE is participating with BLM in the preparation of this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing a grant under this initiative. Pursuant to a cost-sharing agreement with the project proponent, approximately $4.47 million in DOE financial assistance would be provided under the Proposed Action. The overall purpose and need for DOE action is to accelerate the development and production of various electric drive vehicle systems, through building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, battery components, recycling facilities, and electric drive vehicle components, in addition to stimulating the U.S. economy. The selected projects are needed to reduce the U.S. petroleum consumption through investment in and deployment of alternative vehicle technologies. Rockwood's proposed project will also assist with the nation's economic recovery by creating jobs in the U.S. in accordance with the objectives of the Recovery Act.

DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of providing $1.6 million in financial assistance pursuant to a Congressional earmark to Boston Architectural College (BAC) for its Urban Sustainability Initiative for the Renovation of Public Alley #444. The financial assistance would be in the form of cost-shared funding. This EA analyzes the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of providing the grant funding and the No-Action Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated potential environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project on air quality, geology and soils, biological resources - sensitive species, water resources, cultural/historic resources, traffic, noise, aesthetics and visual resources, and socioeconomic resources. The proposed project would be designed in compliance with all federal and state regulations, would reduce storm water runoff into the Charles River Basin and would become an ongoing tool for the BAC curriculum and community public education. The project would include the installation of 13 to 15 open loop geothermal wells to provide heating and cooling energy to BAC's facilities; the installation of a green screen trellis system, planting soils, concrete pavement, pavers, landscaping; and mechanical upgrades (plumbing and electrical) to accommodate the geothermal solution into the facilities. Operation of the geothermal wells would not result in any increase in noise in the vicinity. The aesthetics of Boston's Historic Back Bay District community would be enhanced with the addition of the green screen trellis system, planting soils, concrete pavement, and pavers. After consulting with Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) DOE has determinated that this project would not have an adverse effect on the historical Back Bay District. As part of the Green Alley Phase II, the green screen trellis system is a vine covered vegetated screen intended to provide an attractive visual amenity that benefits both the public and the institution by softening the appearance of two faces of an existing masonry block stair tower. Developing the geothermal wells on the BAC site would not significantly impact any population of plant or animal species. The project site is relatively small (less than 1.0 acre) and isolated from larger tracts of undisturbed land; nor does the area provide any unique habitats for special species. The Indiana bat (Myotis sodalist), an endangered species, is known to reside in Suffolk and Middlesex counties and in various locations throughout Massachusetts. However, given the localized construction area in the alley and the species' tendency to not stray from its wooded habitat, it is highly unlikely that the proposed action would have any negative impacts on the endangered Indiana bat species.

DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the potential impacts to the human and natural environment of its Proposed Action - providing financial assistance to Burns & McDonnell Engineering under a cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the development of innovative technologies that when deployed commercially, will enable industry to reduce natural gas requirements for chemical feed stocks and increase opportunity fuels. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE would provide $1,655,945 for Burns & McDonnell Engineering to facilitate the development and demonstration of a biomass energy center at the Frito-Lay manufacturing plant. It would consist of a fuel storage area, a boiler building, and a pipe rack to connect the center to existing plant utilities. The center would use a traditional stoker fired (saturated steam) boiler, which would burn a combination of dried wood waste, green wood waste, and less than 7% of tire derived fuel. The boiler would have an output of up to 78.3 Million British Thermal Units per hour. The proposed biomass energy center would be integrated into the Frito-Lay manufacturing plant's existing site procedures and operations. The plant's existing air emissions permit would be revised and resubmitted to include the energy center. No other permit changes are anticipated to be needed. Currently undeveloped land (0.137 acres) would be developed to accommodate the energy center.

Inadequate electricity services pose a major impediment to reducing extreme poverty and boosting shared prosperity in Sub-Saharan Africa. Simply put, Africa does not have enough power. Despite the abundant low-carbon and low-cost energy resources available to Sub-Saharan Africa, the region's entire installed electricity capacity, at a little over 80 gigawatts (GW), is equivalent to that of the Republic of Korea. Looking ahead, Sub-Saharan Africa will need to ramp up its power generation capacity substantially. The investment needed to meet this goal largely exceeds African countries already stretched public finances. Increasing private investment is critical to help expand and improve electricity supply. Historically, most private sector finance has been channeled through privately financed independent power projects (IPPs), supported by nonrecourse or limited recourse loans, with long-term power purchase agreements with the state utility or another off-taker. Between 1990 and 2014, IPPs have spread across Sub-Saharan Africa and are now present in 18 countries. However, private investment could be much greater and less concentrated. The objective of Independent Power Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa: Lessons from Five Key Countries is to evaluate the experience of IPPs and identify lessons that can help African countries attract more and better private investment. The analysis is based primarily on in-depth case studies carried out in five countries Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, and Uganda that have the most extensive experience with IPPs. At the core of this analysis is a reflection on whether IPPs have in fact benefited Sub-Saharan Africa, and how they might be improved.

The latest edition of Electricity Profiles contains comprehensive electricity profiles for about 200 countries and territories around the world, providing detailed information on production, trade and consumption of electricity, net installed capacity and thermal power plant input and efficiency for most countries.

The state of the Indian power sector today is an acknowledged constraint to the country s growth aspirations. This book examines the home-grown Indian experience with private sector participation in power, identifies emerging risks, and proposes specific actions for government consideration, so that the power sector may fulfill its important role in India s growth story. Seeking financing, efficiency, and project management skills from the private sector to complement public sector efforts, the state governments and the central government have invited private participation in power for the past two decades. They have followed a continuously evolving process starting with the independent power producer policy of the early 1990s, which sought only to attract new investment in generation. Despite these efforts, the rate of growth in energy supply has not kept pace with the growth in demand. Much more private sector investment and engagement in the sector is likely to be required to complement the government s own efforts to improve supply, quality, and reliability of power. The passage of the Electricity Act of 2003 was a signature achievement, moving the sector away from the previous route of negotiated Memoranda of Understanding with investors to a market-driven approach that forced potential investors to compete aggressively for generation, and later also transmission, contracts. Removal of generation licensing requirements and the introduction of competition under the Electricity Act elicited a significant private sector response in generation, a limited but respectable response in transmission (few transmission lines were tendered in the first place), and a varied but limited response in distribution. The quality of baseline data provided to the distribution franchisee about the state of the network and the customer base is a perennial problem. Lessons learned about methods for successful distribution franchising, including specified loss reduction trajectories, are gradually finding their way into standardized bidding documents. Different qualification requirements for bidders are emerging for different locations. In the future, franchisees may also need greater independent access to power supply for their service areas, for example, by combining generation and distribution through private players."

This book highlights recent advances in energy research. The chapters included in this volume include research on nuclear power reactors, specifically small modular reactors (SMRs) for electricity generation; stakeholder participation in local energy-planning and the possible ways of integrating stakeholder participation in current energy planning practices; a comprehensive review of energy sources, and the development of sustainable technologies to explore these energy sources; the modeling and analysis of a liquefied natural gas (LNG) fired CCHP system, compared to the conventional method of generating useful energy, which is assumed to be a centralized electricity-only power plant; electrospray deposition method for fabricating organic photovoltaic cells; the application of energy-saving, passive strategies in occupied school building spaces; an evaluation of energy consumption in buildings with complex topology equipped with a HVAC system; and an evaluation of solar thermal technologies and applications.