Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “data landscape”

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 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: First Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2021 (Q1). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the target infrastructure volume for 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the fifth report in a series. Previous reports from 2020 can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Second Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the second calendar quarter of 2021 (Q2). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the target infrastructure volume for 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the sixth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Third Quarter 2021)

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the third calendar quarter of 2021 (Q3). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the seventh report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Fourth Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the fourth calendar quarter of 2021 (Q4). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the eighth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Multiscale maps of Active Layer Depth for Teller site Mile Marker 27 and Kougarok Mile Marker 80, Seward Peninsula, AK

Remote sensing maps of active layer depth derived from Unmanned Areal System (UAS) data. The UAS datasets were stepwise scaled until matching the AVIRIS-NG (Airborne Visible / Infrared Imaging Spectrometer - Next Generation) and Sentinel-2 spatial resolutions. Using the field observed Active Layer Depth (ALD) measurement in combination with spectral and topographic predictors derivatives from DJI UAS imagery, we used a spatially explicit RF regression model to predict and map ALD across our study landscapes. This package includes maps for Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiment Arctic (NGEE Arctic)’s Teller Mile Marker (MM) 27, and Kougarok MM80 (aka Mile 80) watersheds. The field, map data, and metadata are provided as geoTIF and text (*.csv) formats. These datasets are provided in support of Hantson et al., 2024 (accepted) “Scaling Arctic landscape and permafrost features improves active layer depth modeling”

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Quantified limits of the nuclear landscape

The chart of the nuclides is limited by particle drip lines beyond which nuclear stability to proton or neutron emission is lost. Predicting the range of particle-bound isotopes poses an appreciable challenge for nuclear theory as it involves extreme extrapolations of nuclear masses well beyond the regions where experimental information is available. Still, quantified extrapolations are crucial for a wide variety of applications, including the modeling of stellar nucleosynthesis. We use microscopic nuclear global mass models, current mass data, and Bayesian methodology to provide quantified predictions of proton and neutron separation energies as well as Bayesian probabilities of existence throughout the nuclear landscape all the way to the particle drip lines. Here, we apply nuclear density functional theory with several energy density functionals. We also consider two global mass models often used in astrophysical nucleosynthesis simulations. To account for uncertainties, Bayesian Gaussian processes are trained on the separation-energy residuals for each individual model, and the resulting predictions are combined via Bayesian model averaging. This framework allows to account for systematic and statistical uncertainties and propagate them to extrapolative predictions. We establish and characterize the drip-line regions where the probability that the nucleus is particle- bound decreases from 1 to 0. In these regions, we provide quantified predictions for one- and two-nucleon separation energies. According to our Bayesian model averaging analysis, 7759 nuclei with Z ≤ 119 have a probability of existence ≥ 0.5. The extrapolation results obtained in this study will be put through stringent tests when new experimental information on existence and masses of exotic nuclei becomes available. In this respect, the quantified landscape of nuclear existence obtained in this study should be viewed as a dynamical prediction that will be fine-tuned when new experimental information and improved global mass models become available.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2026

CHESS 2025: Field-collected vegetation attributes and site photos

This dataset represents field observations of vegetation samples collected as part of the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) during June and July of 2025. Samples were collected in the field using tablet computers and digital forms, with target data differing by sample type (individual trees, individual shrubs, or 1-meter square plots of meadow and subshrub vegetation). Field samples were collected within 72 hours of airborne data collection using the National Ecological Observatory Network’s Aerial Observation Platform (NEON AOP). The NEON AOP collected waveform LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and imaging spectrometer data in 426 spectral bands from the visible to shortwave infrared. Remote sensing data for the project is available on ESS-DIVE (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). Field data collected included canopy height and per-species horizontal proportional cover for meadow plots, species identity and height information for shrubs, as well as species identity, height, diameter at breast height, and health assessment information for trees. Photos of the focal site and surrounding landscape were taken for all sampling sites and are included in this archive. Green leaves or needles were collected for plant trait and foliar chemistry analysis. This data is archived separately (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). High-precision geospatial data for each sample (crown perimeter polygons for trees and shrubs, plot boundaries for meadow plots) is available here (Henderson et al., 2026). Field and remote sensing protocols largely followed those of a previous field and airborne imaging campaign performed in 2018 (described in Chadwick et al. 2020). Field data from the 2018 campaign can be found here (Chadwick et al., 2020 doi:10.15485/1618130). Because different field measurements were taken for meadow, shrub, and tree sites, data from these three sample types are archived as separate tables (chess_meadow_site_cleaned.csv, chess_shrub_site_cleaned.csv, chess_tree_site_cleaned.csv). Meadow proportional cover data is stored in a separate table (chess_meadow_cover_cleaned.csv). Taxonomy was treated identically between sample types, and the dataset shares a common set of voucher specimens (chess_voucher_IDs_cleaned.csv), as well as a single species list (chess_species_list_cleaned.csv). All taxonomic determinations were performed to the species level, and adhere to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) backbone taxonomy as of January 10th, 2026 (GBIF Secretariat 2023). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: Field and remote-sensing data acquisition was performed under a grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC24K1005). This work was also supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2026

Topsoil bulk geochemical compositions - An updated harmonized global dataset

Mineral weathering is a key biogeochemical process because of the capacity of minerals to stabilize organic matter. However, predicting soil weathering status across large spatial areas still isn’t possible due to a lack of global data and theoretical frameworks. To address this knowledge gap, multiple global datasets of bulk topsoil geochemical compositions have been harmonized using R. These datasets document topsoil bulk geochemical compositions across five continents (n = ~16,000 observations). Source data for these observations include the EuroGEOSurveys Geochemical Baseline Database (FOREGS), the US Geological Survey National Geochemical Database (NASGLP), the Geochemical Atlas of Australia (GAA), the US Geological Survey Alaska Geochemical Database (AGD84), the National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS), the European Geochemical Mapping of Agricultural Soil (GEMAS), Ecorespira-Amazon (ERA), the New Zealand Geochemical Baseline Survey (NZ_GBS), and the African Soil Information Service (AFSIS). Major elements observed include Aluminum (Al), Calcium (Ca), Iron (Fe), Potassium (K), Magnesium (Mg), Sodium (Na), Titanium (Ti), Manganese (Mn), Phosphorus (P), Carbon (C), and Sulfur (S). This data package includes the harmonized dataset itself, and the R scripts necessary to harmonize these datasets, in addition to metadata that describes all columns, files, and databases used in this project. Methods & Sampling Step 1 – Databases of geochemical data identified This study aimed to leverage existing measurements of topsoil geochemical data. Databases were first identified and deemed appropriate for inclusion if they were measuring soils and performed these measurements on the <2mm soil fraction. Databases such as NCSS and AGD84 needed more post processing to include in the database and this was done using the NCSS_datamerge_031626 R file and Alaska_USGSmerge_031626 R file, respectively. Step 2 – Database harmonization Once appropriate databases were identified, they were harmonized for ease of analysis using the R script Database_Harmonization_031826. This included removing columns from original datasets that would not be used in analysis (removed columns are noted in the code). Then, data cleaning procedures specific to each dataset were undertaken. This includes standardizing columns to include units and adding metadata columns regarding procedures for analyzing specific elements. Functions for standardizing measurements and units are outline in R files: calculate element_mg_kg_031626, calculate_oxide_wt_perc_031626, change_oxide_caps_031626, and conv_2_numeric_031626. This also included adding a unique identifier for each sample to identify it with its respective database (see CD_ID in data dictionary). Geographic information: Data reflect a compilation of datasets collected globally. Geographic areas covered by each of the datasets include: - EuroGEOSurveys Geochemical Baseline Database (FOREGS) - European continent - North American Soil Geochemical Landscapes (NASGLP) - continental United States and limited parts of Canada (see database key for more details) - National Geochemical Survey of Australia (GAA) - Australia - Alaska geochemical database (AGDB4) - Alaska - National Cooperative Soil Survey (NCSS) - Global measurements, but concentrated in the continental United States - Geochemical data for arable land and land under permanent grass cover in continental Europe (GEMAS) - continental Europe - Ecorespira-Amazon (ERA) - Geochemical data from the Amazon basin - Geochemical baseline data for New Zealand (NZGBS) - New Zealand - Geochemical data collected across continental Africa (AfSIS) - Measurements across Africa

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Pan-cancer proteogenomics characterization of tumor immunity

Despite the successes of immunotherapy in cancer treatment over recent decades, less than <10%–20% cancer cases have demonstrated durable responses from immune checkpoint blockade. To enhance the efficacy of immunotherapies, combination therapies suppressing multiple immune evasion mechanisms are increasingly contemplated. To better understand immune cell surveillance and diverse immune evasion responses in tumor tissues, we comprehensively characterized the immune landscape of more than 1,000 tumors across ten different cancers using CPTAC pan-cancer proteogenomic data. We identified seven distinct immune subtypes based on integrative learning of cell type compositions and pathway activities. We then thoroughly categorized unique genomic, epigenetic, transcriptomic, and proteomic changes associated with each subtype. Further leveraging the deep phosphoproteomic data, we studied kinase activities in different immune subtypes, which revealed potential subtype-specific therapeutic targets. Insights from this work will facilitate the development of future immunotherapy strategies and enhance precision targeting with existing agents.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Fundamental data for modeling electron-induced processes in plasma remediation of perfluoroalkyl substances

Plasma treatment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contaminated water is a potentially energy efficient remediation method. In this treatment, an atmospheric pressure plasma interacts with surface-resident PFAS molecules. Developing a reaction mechanism and modeling of plasma–PFAS interactions requires fundamental data for electron–molecule reactions. In this paper, we present results of electron scattering calculations, potential energy landscapes and their implications for plasma modelling of a dielectric barrier discharge in PFAS contaminated gases, a first step towards modelling of plasma–water–PFAS intereactions. It is found that the plasma degradation of PFAS is dominated by dissociative electron attachment with the importance of other contributing processes varying depending on the molecule. All molecules posses a large number of shape resonances – transient negative ion states – from near-threshold up to ionization threshold. These states lie in the region of the most probable electron energies in the plasma (4–5 eV) and consequently are expected to further enhance the fragmentation dynamics in both dissociative attachment and dissociative excitation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Electronic structure orientation as a map of in-plane antiferroelectricity in β'-In 2 Se 3

Antiferroelectric (AFE) materials are excellent candidates for sensors, capacitors, and data storage due to their electrical switchability and high-energy storage capacity. However, imaging the nanoscale landscape of AFE domains is notoriously inaccessible, which has hindered development and intentional tuning of AFE materials. Here, we demonstrate that polarization-dependent photoemission electron microscopy can resolve the arrangement and orientation of in-plane AFE domains on the nanoscale, despite the absence of a net lattice polarization. Through direct determination of electronic transition orientations and analysis of domain boundary constraints, we establish that antiferroelectricity in β'-In 2 Se 3 is a robust property from the scale of tens of nanometers to tens of micrometers. Ultimately, the method for imaging AFE domain organization presented here opens the door to investigations of the influence of domain formation and orientation on charge transport and dynamics.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Introducing PRIMRE’s MRE Software Knowledge Hub

This paper focuses on the role of the Marine Renewable Energy (MRE) Software Knowledge Hub on the Portal and Repository for Information on Marine Renewable Energy (PRIMRE). The MRE Software Knowledge Hub provides online services for MRE software users and developers, and seeks to develop assessments and recommendations for improving MRE software in the future. Online software discovery platforms, known as the Code Hub and the Code Catalog, are provided. The Code Hub is a collection of open-source MRE software that includes a landing page with search functionality, linked to files hosted on the MRE Code Hub GitHub organization. The Code Catalog is a searchable online platform for discovery of useful (open-source or commercial) software packages, tools, codes, and other software products. To gather information about the existing MRE software landscape, a software survey is being performed, the preliminary results of which are presented herein. Initially, the data collected in the MRE software survey will be used to populate the MRE Software knowledge hub on PRIMRE, and future work will use data from the survey to perform a gap analysis and develop a vision for future software development. Additionally, as one of PRIMRE’s roles is to support development of MRE software within project partners, a silo of knowledge relating to best practices has been gathered.

marine, energy, open source software, MHKiT, MRE C↗
DOE OSTI2021

Introducing PRIMRE's MRE Software Knowledge Hub (February 2021)

This paper focuses on the role of the Marine Renewable Energy (MRE) Software Knowledge Hub on the Portal and Repository for Information on Marine Renewable Energy (PRIMRE). The MRE Software Knowledge Hub provides online services for MRE software users and developers, and seeks to develop assessments and recommendations for improving MRE software in the future. Online software discovery platforms, known as the Code Hub and the Code Catalog, are provided. The Code Hub is a collection of open-source MRE software that includes a landing page with search functionality, linked to files hosted on the MRE Code Hub GitHub organization. The Code Catalog is a searchable online platform for discovery of useful (open-source or commercial) software packages, tools, codes, and other software products. To gather information about the existing MRE software landscape, a software survey is being performed, the preliminary results of which are presented herein. Initially, the data collected in the MRE software survey will be used to populate the MRE Software knowledge hub on PRIMRE, and future work will use data from the survey to perform a gap analysis and develop a vision for future software development. Additionally, as one of PRIMRE's roles is to support development of MRE software within project partners, a silo of knowledge relating to best practices has been gathered. An early draft of new guidance developed from this knowledge is presented.

gap analysis↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: First Q2022

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2022 (Q1). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the ninth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Second Quarter 2022)

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the second calendar quarter of 2022 (Q2). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the tenth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Toward a Resilient Cybersecure Hydropower Fleet: Cybersecurity Landscape and Roadmap 2021

With this roadmap, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) hopes to assist the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Water Power Technologies Office (WPTO) in improving the cybersecurity of hydropower plants across the nation. This effort draws upon collected data from the dams sector, from industrial control system cybersecurity threat reports, from similar work focused on neighboring sectors, and from frank discussions with owners, operators, and vendors. While remaining tightly focused on the needs of hydropower projects, during this landscape study and development of the resulting roadmap, the research team sought to remain informed by the larger energy sector’s vision and direction so that the topics and milestones may fit within a larger vision common to the whole.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Increased Arctic NO3− Availability as a Hydrogeomorphic Consequence of Permafrost Degradation and Landscape Drying

Climate-driven permafrost thaw alters the strongly coupled carbon and nitrogen cycles within the Arctic tundra, influencing the availability of limiting nutrients including nitrate (NO3−). Researchers have identified two primary mechanisms that increase nitrogen and NO3− availability within permafrost soils: (1) the ‘frozen feast’, where previously frozen organic material becomes available as it thaws, and (2) ‘shrubification’, where expansion of nitrogen-fixing shrubs promotes increased soil nitrogen. Through the synthesis of original and previously published observational data, and the application of multiple geospatial approaches, this study investigates and highlights a third mechanism that increases NO3− availability: the hydrogeomorphic evolution of polygonal permafrost landscapes. Permafrost thaw drives changes in microtopography, increasing the drainage of topographic highs, thus increasing oxic conditions that promote NO3− production and accumulation. We extrapolate relationships between NO3− and soil moisture in elevated topographic features within our study area and the broader Alaskan Coastal Plain and investigate potential changes in NO3− availability in response to possible hydrogeomorphic evolution scenarios of permafrost landscapes. These approximations indicate that such changes could increase Arctic tundra NO3− availability by ~250–1000%. Thus, hydrogeomorphic changes that accompany continued permafrost degradation in polygonal permafrost landscapes will substantially increase soil pore water NO3− availability and boost future fertilization and productivity in the Arctic.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Global 10 m Land Use Land Cover Datasets: A Comparison of Dynamic World, World Cover and Esri Land Cover

The European Space Agency’s Sentinel satellites have laid the foundation for global land use land cover (LULC) mapping with unprecedented detail at 10 m resolution. We present a cross-comparison and accuracy assessment of Google’s Dynamic World (DW), ESA’s World Cover (WC) and Esri’s Land Cover (Esri) products for the first time in order to inform the adoption and application of these maps going forward. For the year 2020, the three global LULC maps show strong spatial correspondence (i.e., near-equal area estimates) for water, built area, trees and crop LULC classes. However, relative to one another, WC is biased towards over-estimating grass cover, Esri towards shrub and scrub cover and DW towards snow and ice. Using global ground truth data with a minimum mapping unit of 250 m 2 , we found that Esri had the highest overall accuracy (75%) compared to DW (72%) and WC (65%). Across all global maps, water was the most accurately mapped class (92%), followed by built area (83%), tree cover (81%) and crops (78%), particularly in biomes characterized by temperate and boreal forests. The classes with the lowest accuracies, particularly in the tundra biome, included shrub and scrub (47%), grass (34%), bare ground (57%) and flooded vegetation (53%). When using European ground truth data from LUCAS (Land Use/Cover Area Frame Survey) with a minimum mapping unit of <100 m 2 , we found that WC had the highest accuracy (71%) compared to DW (66%) and Esri (63%), highlighting the ability of WC to resolve landscape elements with more detail compared to DW and Esri. Although not analyzed in our study, we discuss the relative advantages of DW due to its frequent and near real-time data delivery of both categorical predictions and class probability scores. We recommend that the use of global LULC products should involve critical evaluation of their suitability with respect to the application purpose, such as aggregate changes in ecosystem accounting versus site-specific change detection in monitoring, considering trade-offs between thematic resolution, global versus. local accuracy, class-specific biases and whether change analysis is necessary. We also emphasize the importance of not estimating areas from pixel-counting alone but adopting best practices in design-based inference and area estimation that quantify uncertainty for a given study area.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗