Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “data downscaling”

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.

297 records · Page 17
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2001

Ensemble Cannonical Correlation Prediction of Seasonal Precipitation Over the US

This paper presents preliminary results of an ensemble cannonical correlation (ECC) prediction scheme developed at the Climate and Radiation Branch, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center for determining the potential predictability of regional precipitation, and for climate downscaling studies. The scheme is tested on seasonal hindcasts of anomalous precipitation over the continental United States using global sea surface temperature (SST) for 1951-2000. To maximize the forecast skill derived from SST, the world ocean is divided into nonoverlapping sectors. The cannonical SST modes for each sector are used as the predictor for the ensemble hindcasts. Results show that the ECC yields a substantial (10-25%) increase in prediction skills for all regions of the US and for all seasonal compared to traditional CCA prediction schemes. For the boreal winter, the tropical Pacific contributes the largest potential predictability to precipitation in the southwestern and southeastern regions, while the North Pacific and the North Atlantic are responsible for enhanced forecast skills in the Pacific Northwest, the northern Great Plains and Ohio Valley. Most importantly, the ECC increases skill for summertime precipitation prediction and substantially reduced the spring predictability barrier over all regions of the US continent. Besides SST, the ECC is designed with the flexibility to include any number of predictor fields, such as soil moisture, snow cover and regional regional data. Moreover, the ECC forecasts can be applied to other climate subsystems and, in conjunction with further diagnostic or model studies will enables a better understanding of the dynamic links between climate variations and precipitation, not only for the US, but also for other regions of the world.

Lau, William K. M.↗
DOE OSTI2023

High-resolution (30-m) urban land cover projections for Los Angeles California Urban Area: 2010 to 2100 under SSP5

These data represent simulations of future land use and land cover (LULCC) for Los Angeles urban area (U.S. Census Bureau defined area) as raster tiff images at a 30-m pixel resolution and at decadal time steps from 2010 to 2100. LULCC classes in this product follow the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) classification. NLCD 21-24 correspond to open developed, low developed, medium developed, and high developed urban land classes, respectively. Only urban land cover classes (NLCD class 21, 22, 23, and 24) are dynamic over time; however, all NLCD classes are included in the final product. Therefore, NLCD classes that do not convert to an urban class will be similar to year 2000. The products were developed using a hybridized statistical and cellular automata approach. Linear mixed models (LMMs) were used to estimate future urban land budgets based on 1-km urban land fraction projections from Gao and Pesaresi (2021), whereas separate generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) were used to estimate shifts in urban land intensities based on retrospective shifts in NLCD urban class intensities over a 20- year period. Based on urban land allocations from the statistical models, a cellular-automata and downscaling routine was used to simulate dynamic urban land expansion at a 30-m resolution based on suitability criteria. Scenarios of future urban landcover change projections include variant solutions for the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5 (SSP5) based on different population assumptions, different land use intensification assumptions, variable land zoning constraints, and iterative adjustments to correct for over allocation of urban expansion across decadal time periods from 2010 to 2100. This results in 320 raster products.

Land↗
DOE OSTI2023

High-resolution (30-m) urban land cover projections for Los Angeles California Urban Area: 2010 to 2100 under SSP3 and SSP5 [Updated simulations based on population-driven urban intensity transitions]

These data (v3) are updated from previous versions (1 and 2) in that they include consider the effects of population on transitions in urban land intensity. This leads to more reasonable differences in urban land projections under variant SSPs. For the present dataset, both SSP3 and SSP5 are provided. These data represent simulations of future land use and land cover (LULCC) for Los Angeles urban area (U.S. Census Bureau defined area) as raster tiff images at a 30-m pixel resolution and at decadal time steps from 2010 to 2100. LULCC classes in this product follow the National Land Cover Dataset (NLCD) classification. NLCD 21-24 correspond to open developed, low developed, medium developed, and high developed urban land classes, respectively. Only urban land cover classes (NLCD class 21, 22, 23, and 24) are dynamic over time; however, all NLCD classes are included in the final product. Therefore, NLCD classes that do not convert to an urban class will be similar to year 2000. The products were developed using a hybridized statistical and cellular automata approach. Linear mixed models (LMMs) were used to estimate future urban land budgets based on 1-km urban land fraction projections from Gao and Pesaresi (2021), whereas separate generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) were used to estimate shifts in urban land intensities based on retrospective shifts in NLCD urban class intensities over a 20- year period. Based on urban land allocations from the statistical models, a cellular-automata and downscaling routine was used to simulate dynamic urban land expansion at a 30-m resolution based on suitability criteria. Scenarios of future urban landcover change projections include variant solutions for the Shared Socioeconomic Pathway 5 (SSP5) and SSP 3 based on different population assumptions, different land use intensification assumptions, variable land zoning constraints, and iterative adjustments to correct for over allocation of urban expansion across decadal time periods from 2010 to 2100. This results in 320 raster products.

Land↗
NASA NTRS2014

Climate Scenarios for the NASA / USAID SERVIR Project: Challenges for Multiple Planning Horizons

SERVIR, an acronym meaning "to serve" in Spanish, is a joint venture between NASA and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) which provides satellite-based Earth observation data, modeling, and science applications to help developing nations in Central America, East Africa and the Himalayas improve environmental decision making. Anticipating climate variability / climate change impacts has now become an important component of the SERVIR efforts to build capacity in these regions. Uncertainty in hydrometeorological components of climate variations and exposure to extreme events across scales from weather to climate are of particular concern. We report here on work to construct scenarios or outlooks that are being developed as input drivers for decision support systems (DSSs) in a variety of settings. These DSSs are being developed jointly by a broad array NASA Applied Science Team (AST) Investigations and user communities in the three SERVIR Hub Regions, Central America, East Africa and the Himalayas. Issues span hydrologic / water resources modeling, agricultural productivity, and forest carbon reserves. The scenarios needed for these efforts encompass seasonal forecasts, interannual outlooks, and likely decadal / multi-decadal trends. Providing these scenarios across the different AST efforts enables some level of integration in considering regional responses to climate events. We will discuss a number of challenges in developing this continuum of scenarios including the identification and "mining" of predictability, addressing multiple continental regions, issues of downscaling global model integrations to regional / local applications (i.e. hydrologic and crop modeling). We compare / contrast the role of the U.S. National Multi- Model Experiment initiative in seasonal forecasts and the CMIP-5 climate model experiments in supporting these efforts. Examples of these scenarios, their use, and an assessment of their utility as well as limitations will be presented.

Robertson, Franklin R.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Projecting Future Energy Production from Operating Wind Farms in North America. Part I: Dynamical Downscaling

Abstract New simulations at 12-km grid spacing with the Weather and Research Forecasting (WRF) Model nested in the MPI Earth System Model (ESM) are used to quantify possible changes in wind power generation potential as a result of global warming. Annual capacity factors (CF; measures of electrical power production) computed by applying a power curve to hourly wind speeds at wind turbine hub height from this simulation are also used to illustrate the pitfalls in seeking to infer changes in wind power generation directly from low-spatial-resolution and time-averaged ESM output. WRF-derived CF are evaluated using observed daily CF from operating wind farms. The spatial correlation coefficient between modeled and observed mean CF is 0.65, and the root-mean-square error is 5.4 percentage points. Output from the MPI-WRF Model chain also captures some of the seasonal variability and the probability distribution of daily CF at operating wind farms. Projections of mean annual CF (CF A ) indicate no change to 2050 in the southern Great Plains and Northeast. Interannual variability of CF A increases in the Midwest, and CF A declines by up to 2 percentage points in the northern Great Plains. The probability of wind droughts (extended periods with anomalously low production) and wind bonus periods (high production) remains unchanged over most of the eastern United States. The probability of wind bonus periods exhibits some evidence of higher values over the Midwest in the 2040s, whereas the converse is true over the northern Great Plains. Significance Statement Wind energy is playing an increasingly important role in low-carbon-emission electricity generation. It is a “weather dependent” renewable energy source, and thus changes in the global atmosphere may cause changes in regional wind power production (PP) potential. We use PP data from operating wind farms to demonstrate that regional simulations exhibit skill in capturing actual power production. Projections to the middle of this century indicate that over most of North America east of the Rocky Mountains annual expected PP is largely unchanged, as is the probability of extended periods of anomalously high or low production. Any small declines in annual PP are of much smaller magnitude than changes due to technological innovation over the last two decades.

Meteorology & Atmospheric Sciences↗
NASA NTRS2014

Reply to Comment by Laprise on 'the Added Value to Global Model Projections of Climate Change by Dynamical Downscaling: a Case Study over the Continental U.S. Using the GISS-ModelE2 and WRF Models'

In his comment, Laprise raises several points that we agree merit consideration. His primary critique is that our study [Racherla et al., 2012] tested the ability of the WRF regional climate model to reproduce historical temperature and precipitation change relative to the driving global climate model (GCM) using only a single simulation rather than an ensemble. He asserts that the observed changes are smaller than the internal variability in the climate system (i.e., not statistically significant) and that thus a single simulation should not necessarily be able to capture the observations. Laprise points out that the statistical signal is reduced for a multi-decadal trend such as the one we analyzed in comparison with mean climatology and cites two studies showing that for particular climate parameters it can take any years for a signal to be discerned over internal variability. He states that The results of theexperiment as designed were strongly influenced by the presence of internal variability and sampling errors,which masked the rather small climate changes that may have occurred as a consequence of changes inforcing during the period considered. While Laprise discusses statistics in general terms at some length, for the actual climate trends examined in our study, he offers no evidence that the forced signal was smallcompared with internal variability. The two studies he cites [de Ela et al., 2013; Maraun, 2013] do not provide convincing evidence as they concern climate variables averaged over different times and areas. One in fact examines extreme precipitation events, which by definition are rare and thus have a lower significance level. We accept the general point that it is important to consider internal variability, and as noted in our paper we agree that an ensemble of simulations is in principle an optimal, though computationally expensive, approach. While we did not present the statistical significance of the observations in our original paper, we have now evaluated those for the regional temperature trends used in our study to evaluate the added value of WRF and thus can analyze data as to the magnitude of the trends with respect to internal variability.

climate↗
DOE OSTI2026

An Analysis of Future Wind Energy Resources and Cost Uncertainties Across the United States

Wind power is a growing source of energy generation that relies on complex global atmospheric and earth system processes. There has been evidence of reductions in average wind speeds over land in North America since the 1980s, and several models project that average wind speeds will continue to decrease. Concurrently, the cost of wind energy systems in the United States has been decreasing since around 2010, a trend also projected to continue. There is considerable uncertainty in these future projections, with quantitative estimates of future wind resource and system costs varying widely. To study this, we run wind energy models with possible future system costs, turbine designs, and meteorological inputs from multiple downscaled earth system models over the contiguous United States. Changes in mean annual energy production from 2000-2019 to 2040-2059 can be as high as +10% in South Texas or as low as -20% in Iowa. Larger turbines and moderate reductions in system costs can offset the largest projected decreases in wind resource, but much uncertainty remains in the extent to which wind resources will change and to what extent system costs can be reduced. An analysis of variance shows, in several states in the Midwest, uncertainty in future wind resources can influence the cost of wind energy nearly as much as uncertainty in future system costs.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Outcomes of the DOE Workshop on Atmospheric Challenges for the Wind Energy Industry

The U.S. Department of Energy-funded Mesoscale-to-Microscale Coupling (MMC) project team planned and conducted a virtual Workshop on Atmospheric Challenges for the Wind Energy Industry on October 19 and 20, 2020. The goal of the workshop was to forge a dialog with the community, including industry representatives, on how modeling tools are currently being used, the present active atmospheric modeling research in support of wind energy, and required advancements in capabilities and technology to continue to advance wind energy deployment. The workshop was planned in collaboration with an industry advisory panel that included representatives from wind power plant developers, turbine manufacturers, and companies that provide resource assessment and forecasting services. The format of the workshop included panels from government research sponsors, visionaries from industry, and mixed panels of researchers discussing research status and needs. A shared keynote presentation from the Technical University of Denmark experts anchored the second day of the workshop. An emphasis was placed on understanding the research needs in the offshore environment. In addition, breakout opportunities were provided each day. On the first day, the breakout discussions addressed predesigned questions configured to elicit participants’ thoughts on needed research directions. The second-day breakouts treated three important technical topics through a combination of presentations and group conversations. Each workshop participant chose their breakout preference from among downscaling details, modeling for turbines, and using artificial intelligence for atmospheric modeling. The discussions were robust and productive. The outcomes of the workshop include archiving a series of recommendations from industry and the research community on research directions required to further advance wind energy deployment. Discussions confirmed the need for high-fidelity modeling but that there are specific areas of applicability and other areas where the time and cost of computation is prohibitive. In those cases, the high-fidelity models can inform low-order models that are more practical for real-time or widely deployed applications. Industry must consider the financial cost of performing more expensive modeling approaches, but industry engineers and researchers are using these approaches where there appears to be a return on investment. An emerging type of low-order model is based on machine learning (ML). Participants confirmed that there are many atmospheric phenomena that need to be modeled better, including low-level jets, cold air outbreaks, land-sea induced circulations, diurnal variability, thin stable boundary layers, dynamic changes such as from frontal passage, interaction of wakes and blockage, and more. For the offshore environment, there is wide agreement that some level of ocean-wave-atmospheric coupling is necessary to capture variations in rotor-level winds needed to plan and operate offshore wind plants. Another recurring recommendation is that more observations are needed, particularly for the offshore environment. Those observations should consider the needs for model improvement, both for physically based models and for ML models. Observations must capture atmospheric profiles of variables that are important to understanding and modeling atmospheric and oceanic phenomena that impact boundary layer winds. Models must be validated with data and the uncertainty quantified, particularly those that are sensitive to initial and boundary conditions. Finally, a repeated request was to consider the holistic needs of hybrid plants of wind, solar, and storage resources because those types of plants are likely to be the wave of the future. In addition, industry wishes to understand impacts of the resource under a changing climate for long-term planning.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Energy Exascale Earth System Model v2.1.0

First release of version 2.1 of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model. [ATM] The atmosphere component remains EAM. There are no major changes in the default configuration since 2.0. New features include: A semi-lagrangian tracer transport for theta-l dycore, a new algorithm for finding the tropopause, new RRM mesh configurations. Add and update SSP370 and SSP585 cases. Restore the FIDEAL case. [LAND] The land component is ELM. There are no major changes in the default configuration since 2.0. Several option features have been added including: implementation of topography-based subgrid structure (topounits) and accompanying parameterizations and atmospheric forcing downscaling methods; a new plant hydraulics scheme; two-way land-river hydrological coupling through the infiltration of floodplain water; an implementation of perennial crops; updates to the SNICAR-AD snow radiative transfer model; and implementation of soil erosion and sediment yield in ELM-Erosion. Each of these new changes is modular in design and can be turned on or off as the user specifies; they are currently being tested in different “BGC” configurations. [OCEAN] The ocean component remains MPAS-Ocean. Major change since version 2.0 include the addition of the Fox-Kemper et al. 2011 parameterization for submesocale eddies, a correction for barotropic thickness consistency that reduces divergence noise, and the addition of an ocean carbon conservation analysis member. [SEAICE] The sea-ice component remains MPAS-Seaice. Major changes since version 2.0 include: A correction to how shortwave parameters are interpolated in the snicar-ad 5-band radiation scheme, the addition of a sea ice carbon conservation analysis member, updates to the default sea ice biogeochemistry namelist parameters to be consistent with version 2.0 improvements to nitrogen cycling and a correction in the ice-ocean dissolved organic nitrogen coupling. [LAND ICE] The land-ice component remains MPAS-Albany-landIce (MALI). Major changes since 2.0 include an update to the MALI version and the Greenland mesh.[RIVER] The river model is MOSART. There are no major changes in the default configuration since 2.0. A major new optional feature is two-way river-ocean hydrological coupling between MOSART and MPAS-O. This change can be turned on or off as the user specifies, and is being tested in different configurations. [COUPLER] The coupler remains cpl7/MCT. Major changes since version 2.0 include: Carbon budget calculated when heat/water budgets active. Fix a bug in land-atm fluxes for tri-grid configurations. [OTHER] a small bug in the zenith angle calculation was fixed in the data models.

ECP↗