Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “source location”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Tradeoffs among indoor air quality, financial costs, and CO 2 emissions for HVAC operation strategies to mitigate indoor virus in U.S. office buildings

Adapting building operation during the COVID-19 pandemic to improve indoor air quality (IAQ) while ensuring sustainable solutions in terms of costs and CO 2 emissions is challenging and limited in literature. Our previous study investigated different HVAC operation strategies, including increased filtration using MERV 10, MERV 13, or HEPA filters, as well as supplying 100% outdoor air into buildings for a system initially sized for MERV 10 filtration. This paper significantly extends that research by systematically analyzing the potential financial and environmental impact for different locations in the U.S. The previous medium office building system model is improved to account for operation in different climates. New evaluation metrics are created to consider the comprehensive impact of improving IAQ on costs and CO 2 emissions, using dynamic emission factors for electricity generation depending on the location. HVAC operation strategies are studied in five different locations across the United States, with distinct climates and electricity sources. In four of the five locations, MERV 13 filtration offers the best improvement in IAQ per increase in costs and emissions relative to MERV 10. The exception is the mildest climate of San Diego, where use of 100% outdoor air provides the best IAQ with a limited increase in costs and emissions. Finally, a system not sized for HEPA filtration can lead to increased costs and emissions without much improvement in IAQ.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Earthquake Phase Association Using a Bayesian Gaussian Mixture Model

Earthquake phase association algorithms aggregate picked seismic phases from a network of seismometers into individual seismic events and play an important role in earthquake monitoring and research. Dense seismic networks and improved phase picking methods produce massive seismic phase datasets, particularly for earthquake swarms and aftershocks occurring closely in time and space, making phase association a challenging problem. Here, we present a new association method, the Gaussian Mixture Model Association (GaMMA), that combines the Gaussian mixture model with earthquake location, origin time, and magnitude estimation. We treat earthquake phase association as an unsupervised clustering problem in a probabilistic framework, where each earthquake corresponds to a cluster of P and S phases with a hyperbolic moveout of arrival times and a decay of amplitude with distance. We use the multivariate Gaussian distribution to model the collection of phase picks of an event; and the mean of the multivariate Gaussian distribution is given by the predicted arrival time and amplitude from the causative event. We carry out the pick assignment to each earthquake and determine earthquake source parameters (i.e., earthquake location, origin time, and magnitude) under the maximum likelihood criterion using the Expectation-Maximization algorithm. The GaMMA method does not require typical association steps of other algorithms, such as grid-search or supervised training. The results for both synthetic tests and for the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence show that GaMMA effectively associates phases from a temporally and spatially dense earthquake sequence while producing useful estimates of earthquake location and magnitude.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Carbon dioxide pipeline network transportation cost model: evaluating economic and geographic factors for efficient carbon capture, storage, and utilization

This study presents a comprehensive pipeline network modeling framework to estimate the CO 2 delivery cost for CO 2 utilization and geologic CO 2 storage across the United States. We developed a Python-based CO 2 pipeline transportation cost model leveraging Argonne National Laboratory’s pipeline engineering expertise and detailed natural gas transmission pipeline cost data across U.S. regions. Using existing road corridors as practical routing guides, the model designs pipeline networks that aggregate CO 2 from one or multiple sources and deliver it to selected destinations. It then minimizes the total transportation cost by optimizing pipeline diameters and incorporating booster pumps. A key contribution is the incorporation of up-to-date, region-specific cost factors with itemized components for materials, labor, miscellaneous construction expenses, and right-of-way acquisition. Results emphasize that regional variation and economies of scale associated with CO 2 pipeline costs are significant and should be explicitly accounted for in screening and planning studies. By combining realistic routing constraints with regionalized cost inputs, the model provides transparent design methodology and location-specific insights into source–destination delivery costs, including the effects of routing complexity along existing road networks. We demonstrate the model with two illustrative case studies – one for CO 2 storage and one for CO 2 utilization – in which the model designs pipeline networks spanning hundreds of miles across the states, collecting CO 2 from multiple sources and delivering it to designated endpoints while minimizing levelized cost of delivery via diameter and compression optimization. The model offers a practical, scalable approach for alternative design option screening and early-stage CO 2 transportation planning.

CCS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Carbon Capture from ArcelorMittal Hot Briquetted Iron Plant Using Air Liquide Cryocap™ FG Technology – FEED Study

The process of steel production is energy and carbon intensive with global average energy consumption of 5.5 MWh/tonne of steel and CO2 emission intensity of 1.83 tonne CO2/tonne of steel. The steel making process has inherent CO2 emissions from mineral conversion and is considered major contributors to the global carbon emissions. The steel industry is responsible for 8% of global carbon emissions. The main objective of this research project is to execute and complete a front-end engineering and design (FEED) study for a commercial-scale, carbon capture project that separates 95% of the total CO2 emissions at the ArcelorMittal’s Hot Briquetted Iron (HBI) plant in Portland, TX (Figure 1). The HBI is an ore-based metallic that is used as high-grade feedstock for high-quality steel via an Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) route. The HBI plant produces 2.0 million metric tonnes of high-quality HBI and emits approximately 1 million tonnes CO2/yr. The capture system is a Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) system assisted Cryocap™ FG technology (Figure 2). The captured CO2 will be pipeline grade and will be geologically stored in a facility within 10 miles of the CO2 source. The Host Site location in Corpus Christi, TX, is near hydrocarbon processing facilities and near Environmental Justice (EJ) and Qualified Opportunity Zone (QOZ) communities. Due to the location of the Host Site, the retrofit project offers the ability to demonstrate how a workforce focused on the fossil energy sector can be redirected to the clean- energy sector. The Air Liquide Cryocap™ capture technology is a proven technology and has been extensively examined for large industrial applications. It has been shown to be applicable to a variety of industrial applications including the steel industry. Cryocap™ FG (specific setup for Flue Gas application) consists of a Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) unit coupled with a Cryogenic System. The PSA pre-concentrates the CO2 from the flue gas, while the cryogenic unit enables the CO2 purity to be increased to the desired level. The scope of this study incorporates completing FEED study of the CO2 capture system which includes point-source CO2 capture and balance-of-plant; Business Case Analysis (BCA) outlining the current and projected volumes of the steel plant’s point sources of CO2 and the potential utilization of tax credits, including its projected revenue and duration; Life Cycle Analysis (LCA); Environmental Justice Analysis; Economic Revitalization and Job Creation Outcomes Analysis; and Workforce Readiness Plan. The plant design work was divided into two components: Inside Battery Limits (ISBL) and Outside Battery Limits (OSBL). The ISBL focuses on the capture system, while the OSBL focuses on the utility feeds and ducting from the plant to the capture system. Various design and engineering deliverables will be developed to define commodity quantities, equipment specifications, and labour effort required to execute the project. These FEED study deliverables will be prepared with the intent to develop an overall project capital cost estimate consistent with an AACE Class 3 estimate. The modular approach for the Cryocap™ FG that is being designed for this study integrates compression, PSA, and cryogenic “bricks” to achieve the desired CO2 capture rates. This carbon capture system integrates easily with the existing plant, thus reducing project costs and risks. It is also capable of managing impurities such as nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur oxides (SOx), mercury, hydrocarbons, and particulate matter. The capture system has a smaller footprint than amine-based systems. The two-step process uses PSA to preconcentrate the CO2 in the feedstream and then uses the cryogenic portion to purify and compress the resulting high purity CO2 product. This combination of purification and compression (i.e., process intensification) significantly reduces the CAPEX associated with use of a separate compressor commonly utilized for amine solvent-based systems. Successful completion of the FEED study will provide DOE with a detailed understanding of the costs for scaling up this proven capture technology for commercial applications at industrial facilities.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Gamma Ray Source Localization for Time Projection Chamber Telescopes Using Convolutional Neural Networks

Diverse phenomena such as positron annihilation in the Milky Way, merging binary neutron stars, and dark matter can be better understood by studying their gamma ray emission. Despite their importance, MeV gamma rays have been poorly explored at sensitivities that would allow for deeper insight into the nature of the gamma emitting objects. In response, a liquid argon time projection chamber (TPC) gamma ray instrument concept called GammaTPC has been proposed and promises exploration of the entire sky with a large field of view, large effective area, and high polarization sensitivity. Optimizing the pointing capability of this instrument is crucial and can be accomplished by leveraging convolutional neural networks to reconstruct electron recoil paths from Compton scattering events within the detector. In this investigation, we develop a machine learning model architecture to accommodate a large data set of high fidelity simulated electron tracks and reconstruct paths. We create two model architectures: one to predict the electron recoil track origin and one for the initial scattering direction. We find that these models predict the true origin and direction with extremely high accuracy, thereby optimizing the observatory’s estimates of the sky location of gamma ray sources.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Characteristics of the IBEX Ribbon and Their Implications for a Source Region Outside the Heliopause

This paper presents a comprehensive exploration of the Interstellar Boundary Explorer energetic neutral atom (ENA) ribbon, focusing on its spatial and temporal variations over 14 yr. Methodological advancements, including a refined map modeling procedure and a new ribbon separation technique with appropriate error propagation, enable a detailed investigation of the ribbon’s features. Utilizing statistically robust metrics, this study reveals details of the ribbon across energy and time. Key findings include energy- and time-dependent variations in flux, angular radius, ribbon profile width, and higher moments. By applying these metrics, we reveal new complexity to the evolution of the ribbon over time, highlighting the nuanced relationship between it and the solar wind. Furthermore, the study examines for the first time the ribbon as it passes through the starboard/heliotail region (Lon EC 120°–180°), revealing properties distinct from other portions of the ribbon. The analysis uncovers an anticorrelation between ribbon width and flux, which provides quantitative support for a multisource ribbon created by a combination of solar wind neutrals that generate a spatiall narrow ribbon component and heliosheath neutrals giving rise to a broad component. Finally, differences in the temporal evolution of the ENA flux at different energies provide additional support that the location of the ribbon source region is beyond the heliopause.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Machine Learning‐Assisted Microearthquake Location Workflow for Monitoring the Newberry Enhanced Geothermal System

Abstract Enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) offer a sustainable energy source but face challenges in accurately locating microearthquakes induced during reservoir stimulation. Locating these microearthquakes provides reliable feedback on the stimulation progress. Current deep learning methods for locating earthquakes require extensive data sets for training, which is problematic as detected microearthquakes are often limited. To address the scarcity of training data, we propose a practical workflow using probabilistic multilayer perceptron (PMLP) which predicts microearthquake locations from cross‐correlation time lags in waveforms. Utilizing a 3D velocity model of Newberry site derived from ambient noise interferometry, we generate numerous synthetic microearthquakes and 3D acoustic waveforms for PMLP training. Accurate synthetic tests prompt us to apply the trained network to the 2012 and 2014 stimulation field waveforms. To enhance the accuracy of source localization, we carefully handpick the P‐arrival times. Predictions on the 2012 stimulation data set show major microseismic activity at depths of 0.5–1.2 km, correlating with a known casing leakage scenario. In the 2014 data set, the majority of predictions concentrate at 2.0–2.9 km depths, consistent with results obtained from conventional physics‐based inversion, and align with the presence of natural fractures from 2.0 to 2.7 km. We validate our findings by comparing the synthetic and field picks, demonstrating a satisfactory match for the first arrivals. By combining the benefits of quick inference speeds and accurate location predictions, we demonstrate the feasibility of using realistic synthetic data set to locate microseismicity for EGS monitoring.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Resonance ultrasound prediction of residual stress within a hybrid layer for additively manufactured samples

Hybrid additive manufacturing (AM) involves secondary processes or energy sources to alter specified locations within the build volume. Each hybrid step can refine the grain size, increase dislocation density, or modify residual stresses. Typically, the changes in mechanical properties are not confined within a single layer but have a compounding effect on preceding layers. Existing methods of measuring AM residual stress are limited in terms of their sensitivity, or they are destructive measurements. We propose using resonant ultrasound spectroscopy (RUS) to measure the residual stress in hybrid-AM components noninvasively, based on changes to the resonances, compared to a stress-free component. In this paper, we use finite element models to simulate residual stress in hybrid-AM components and to examine the sensitivity of RUS measurements in terms of frequency shifts and mode shapes with respect to single hybrid layers. Then, the RUS results are used to predict stress for a layer at a known location with unknown stress. Here, the approach highlights the capabilities of RUS to address an AM characterization challenge.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Wasatch Fault Structure from Machine Learning Arrival Times and High-Precision Earthquake Locations

Abstract On 18 March 2020, a magnitude 5.7 earthquake hit the Salt Lake valley in the state of Utah, United States. Using a dense geophone deployment and machine learning (ML), an additional several thousand events were detected and located. Currently, both the mainshock and the majority of the aftershocks are suspected to have occurred on or near a deeper portion of the Salt Lake segment of the Wasatch fault—part of a large range-bounding fault system thought to be capable of generating an Mw 7.2 earthquake. However, a small subset of aftershocks may have occurred on a portion of the more steeply, eastward dipping, and poorly understood West Valley fault. Unfortunately, the catalog locations and lack of focal mechanisms for this subset of aftershocks provide only a crude constraint on the true fault structure. To better illuminate fault structure, we relocate the ML-generated catalog with a range of magnitudes from −2 to 4.6, using: (1) NonLinLoc, a nonlinear location algorithm, (2) source-specific station terms, and (3) waveform coherence. We further compute first-motion focal mechanisms for 68 events. Results of the relocation suggest a simpler, minimally listric Wasatch fault geometry, contrary to what has been previously proposed. We also find that analysis of the focal mechanisms and waveform similarity indicates minimal event similarity throughout the Magna sequence, suggesting a highly complex and heterogeneous rupture zone, as opposed to rupture on a single plane. These findings suggest an increased seismic hazard due to the overall shallowness of the earthquake sequence and highly varied rupture mechanisms.

Geochemistry & Geophysics↗
DOE OSTI2026

Reply to “Comment on ‘The Reduced Detection Rate of Signals That Are Hidden by Earthquakes: Case Studies with Spotlight Detectors That Operate at Seismic Arrays,’ by Joshua D. Carmichael, Brent G. Delbridge, and Richard Alfaro-Diaz” by Paul G. Richards

We reply to a comment that Paul G. Richards (Richards, 2026) directed to an article by Carmichael et al. (2025). Richards expressed concern over two issues. The first issue relates to the size of the explosions discussed in the article. The second relates to the probability that earthquakes and explosions sourced near the same location coincide in time, by chance. We do not address the first issue because the original article does not assign significance to the size of the explosions from the point of view of an experimental party. We do respond to Richards’ comment on the second issue and claim that it can be explained through a clarification about conditional versus joint probabilities. Our present discussion, therefore, describes the difference between the conditional probability that a correlator fails, given that an explosion and earthquake coincidently occur in the same place, and the joint probability that a correlator fails while an earthquake and explosion also coincidentally occur in the same place. This latter, joint probability appears to be rare. We clarify that our original article did not treat the joint probability, only the conditional probability.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2022

Batteries Included: Top 10 Findings from Berkeley Lab Research on the Growth of Hybrid Power Plants in the United States

One of the most important electric power system trends of the 2010s was the rapid deployment of wind turbines and photovoltaic arrays, but a twist for the 2020s may be the rapid deployment of ‘hybrid’ generation resources. Hybrid power plants typically combine solar or wind (or other energy sources) with co-located storage. While hybridization helps to ease the challenge of balancing variable supply and demand, its relative novelty means that research is needed to facilitate integration and promote innovation. Combining the characteristics of multiple energy, storage, and conversion technologies poses complex questions for grid operations and economics. Project developers, system operators, planners, and regulators would benefit from better data, methods, and tools to estimate the costs, values, and system impacts of hybrid projects. This publication showcases some of Berkeley Lab’s robust research program intended to support private- and public-sector decision-making about hybrid plants in the United States. Our short briefing summarizes articles that we published between 2020 and 2022, links to the in-depth reports, and provides contact details for further engagement on the specific research topics: Growth: Developer interest in hybrid power plants is strong and growing Price vs. Value: PV+storage hybrids have low PPA prices and high value in some regions Market Drivers: Solar hybridization is driven by tax credits and other benefits Configuration Choices: Market prices have incentivized shorter duration batteries with PV Capacity Value: The capacity contribution of a hybrid is less than the sum of its parts Ancillary Services: AS markets are a valuable yet fleeting option for hybrids Market Participation: Hybrids can more flexibly engage with electricity markets Operations: The power system value of hybrids depends on how they are operated Distributed Hybrids: Growth of customer-sited PV+storage hybrids offers new opportunities Future Research: Where next? Priority areas for hybrid power research.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Benefit Analysis of CO 2 Delivery Options for Offshore Storage or Enhanced Oil Recovery

The analysis presented in this report evaluates the benefits of CO₂ offshore transport via pipeline or ship within the GOM. It takes a top-down framework to estimate the costs. First, this analysis designed a reduced-order model (ROM) based on the cash flows in the FECM/NETL CO₂ Transport Cost Model (also known as CO2_T_COM). The ROM takes capital expenses (CAPEX) and operating expenses (OPEX) to calculate the CO₂ breakeven price based on the cash flows. Second, this analysis developed regression models utilizing published data from other analyses to estimate CAPEX and OPEX. Since the ROM is a simplified cash flow calculation, it is easy to exchange the core regression models to estimate various costs. The ROM and regression models provided a framework that can be easily used by other researchers, decision-makers, operators, and regulators. The objective of this analysis is to assess the CO₂ breakeven cost range for pipeline and ship transport of captured CO₂ given the CO₂ source and storage reservoir located in the GOM.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Optimizing Geospatial Assessments for Nuclear Safeguards Applications with Large Language Models

A multidisciplinary team at Argonne National Laboratory evaluated the ability of large language models (LLMs) to identify geographic locations from open-source text and assessed post-processing measures to strengthen the reliability of those extractions in support of international nuclear safeguards. The study focused on addressing challenges such as toponym ambiguity, imprecise descriptions, and misinformation, which often undermine the accuracy of LLM-derived geospatial assessments. By integrating authoritative geospatial datasets, employing rigorous validation techniques, and leveraging human-in-the-loop processes, the project aimed to enhance the precision, transparency, and reproducibility of geospatial localization workflows. The findings demonstrate that while LLMs exhibit significant potential for accelerating geospatial analysis, their outputs require systematic grounding and verification to ensure reliability in high-stakes applications. This work contributes to the broader field of geospatial intelligence and supports strategic objectives of international organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

CarbonSAFE Phase II: Optimizing Alabama’s CO 2 Storage in Shelby County, Alabama (Project OASIS), Milestone M3 - Site Specific Drilling Report

The Phase II Storage Complex Feasibility project, entitled "Optimizing Alabama's CO 2 Storage in Shelby County, Alabama (Project OASIS)," is a part of the DOE/NETL's CarbonSAFE initiative. The Project is managed by the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB), and includes participation from Advanced Resources International, Inc. (ARI), Crescent Resource Innovation, Southern Company, Alabama A&M University, Auburn University, and Oklahoma State University. Project OASIS is working to establish the foundation for a commercial-scale geologic storage complex for CO 2 captured from Plant Gaston (home of the National Carbon Capture Center) and surrounding industrial sources of CO 2 located in Shelby County, Alabama. The Project objectives are: • Demonstrate that the subsurface saline formations at the storage complex can store commercial volumes of CO 2 safely and permanently. • Develop a comprehensive Community Benefits Plan. • Develop the infrastructure framework for a CO 2 storage hub. • Develop a rigorous risk registry and to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment. • Develop a monitoring plan. • Develop a comprehensive site characterization plan to support an Underground Injection Control Class VI Permit in a future Phase III program. • Evaluate the commercial viability of the project. Project OASIS is about 30 miles southeast of Birmingham, Alabama within a geologic province called the Valley and Ridge (Figure 1.1). The Valley and Ridge Province comprises a sequence of Paleozoic carbonate and clastic rocks that underwent structural deformation during the Alleghanian Orogeny. Storage prospects occur in relatively flat lying structural panels located between thrust faults. Available geologic studies related to hydrocarbon exploration suggest that Cambro-Ordovician carbonates and Cambrian clastic units offer multiple potential storage intervals, and that regional confining systems are present, such as the tectonically thickened Floyd-Parkwood Shale. The surface property is owned by a timber and land stewardship company, The Westervelt Company, Inc., who worked with the Project Team to select and prepare adequate sites for geologic assessment. The purpose of drilling the Westover Stratigraphic Test Well #2 was to collect geologic data to model the feasibility of commercial scale CO 2 injection and storage. This includes geological and geophysical evaluations, reservoir engineering analyses, and risk assessments.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

PCOR Partnership Atlas 6th Edition, Revised

The Plains CO 2 Reduction (PCOR) Partnership Atlas provides a profile of CO 2 sources and potential storage locations across the PCOR Partnership region. The revised sixth edition of the Atlas provides an up-to-date look at PCOR Partnership initiative activities, including additional regional characterization and updates on commercial projects. Additional background information on carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) is included to give a better understanding of how CCUS addresses concerns about climate change while allowing future energy needs to be met.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2023

Quantitative Characterization of Hyper-Local Atmospheric Greenhouse Gas Sources

Atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are often characterized using stationary, tower-based sensors. Ground based sensors reside in the turbulent boundary layer and are subject to intense concentration impulses from hyper-local (<100m) point sources of emissions. These high frequency spikes are often filtered out in broader emission flux studies, losing valuable information about how hyper-local sources influence receptors. In this study, we investigated how empirical atmospheric data can be used to locate and quantify a concurrently measured hyper-local point source in a dense urban setting. An eddy covariance style tower and a low-cost sensor tower were deployed in various locations around an urban, hyper-local CO2/CH4 emissions source (a continuously measured restaurant exhaust vent). A model using different processing and statistical techniques was built to examine the most effective procedures for source isolation, directional location, and emission quantification. Using excess concentrations above a minimum baseline, we identify the source using bivariate polar plots and quantify the relationship between source size, receptor distance, and statistical proxies. Furthermore, we find that varying statistical thresholds allows for identification of less influential sources which are drowned out by larger or closer sources. Finally, we show that large sources can be effectively characterized using low-cost sensors, a valuable outcome informing how networks for monitoring larger areas could be implemented. This work may provide a basis for source identification and monitoring protocols for networks that feature sensors influenced by hyper-local point sources, subject to site-specific assumptions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, 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, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, 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, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗