Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “environmental modeling”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Global Corn Heat Stress: Mean and SD of Degree Days Above 29°C based on NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 Climate Projections

Description This global dataset provides the estimated mean and standard deviation (SD) of corn heat stress (degree days above 29°C) for a set of climate models in NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 at 0.25-degree resolution. The NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 dataset is comprised of global downscaled climate scenarios derived from the General Circulation Model (GCM) runs conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The current dataset includes: Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 The mean and SD are calculated over 1985-2014 for the historical period and over 2035-2064 for future projections. A full description of methods, including growing season, daily temperature distribution, and statistical coefficients, can be found in Haqiqi (2024). The source climate data are obtained from https://ds.nccs.nasa.gov/thredds2/catalog/catalog.html and are described in Thrasher et al (2022). The codes used to create this dataset are available at https://github.com/ihaqiqi/dd29c_nex_cmip6. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics under Cooperative Agreement DE-SC0022141. The data processing, computation, and storage were completed on Purdue Anvil supercomputer and cyberinfrastructure supported by the National Science Foundation HDR award # 2118329: "NSF Institute for Geospatial Understanding through an Integrative Discovery Environment (I-GUIDE)". References Haqiqi. I. (2024). Trade can buffer climate-induced risks and volatilities in crop supply. Environmental Research: Food Systems. https://doi.org/10.1088/2976-601X/ad7d12 Thrasher, B., Wang, W., Michaelis, A., Melton, F., Lee, T., & Nemani, R. (2022). NASA global daily downscaled projections, CMIP6. Scientific Data, 9(1), 262. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01393-4

Climate Change↗
DOE OSTI2024

Large-scale spatially explicit analysis of carbon capture at cellulosic biorefineries

The large-scale production of cellulosic biofuels would involve spatially distributed systems including biomass fields, logistics networks and biorefineries. Better understanding of the interactions between landscape-related decisions and the design of biorefineries with carbon capture and storage (CCS) in a supply chain context is needed to enable efficient systems. Here we analyse the cost and greenhouse gas mitigation potential for cellulosic biofuel supply chains in the US Midwest using realistic spatially explicit land availability and crop productivity data and consider fuel conversion technologies with detailed CCS design for their associated CO 2 streams. Optimization methods identify trade-offs and design strategies leading to systems with attractive environmental and economic performance. Strategic and operational decisions depend on underlying spatial features and are sensitive to biofuel demand and CCS incentives. US CCS incentives neglect to motivate greenhouse gas mitigation from all supply chain emission sources, which leverage spatial interactions between CCS, electricity prices and the biomass landscape.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Thermal Cooling Water Datasets for Electric Sector Modeling

This spreadsheet contains data inputs associated with representations of water (i.e., use, supply, costs) for thermo-electric based production. Values in this spreadsheet have been used to support multiple transmission-related planning studies, using models such as Regional Energy Deployment System Model (ReEDS). More information about associated studies can be found in Miara et al., 2019 (DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.9b03037); Cohen et al., 2022 (DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119193); and Cohen et al., 2024 (DOI TBD). Within these transmission-related studies, the values present in this spreadsheet are assigned for simulation of both existing units as well as new capacity build-outs. A summary of worksheets' content as well as associated sources are captured below.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Nuclear Waste Tank Emission Contributions to Particle Size Distribution

Pollutants from anthropogenic activities including industrial processes are ubiquitous to the environment. To understand the impact from industrial aerosol on climate and human health, industrial aerosol needs to be better characterized. Here, in this study, particle number concentrations were used as a proxy for atmospheric pollutants, which include both particles and gases. Particle concentration and size distribution were measured using a scanning mobility particle sizer (SMPS) approximately 4.5 km from primary industrial areas at the Savannah River Site in Aiken, SC. Industrial areas include numerous nuclear waste storage and processing tanks. The SMPS data were divided into two groups depending on the wind direction measured onsite to categorize transport from the industrial area or from elsewhere. Industrial contributions were found to have a higher concentration of particles with sizes less than 200 nm, 859 ± 564 cm -3 , in comparison to non-industrial attributed particles, 733 ± 495 cm -3 on average from March-July 2021. For sizes larger than 200 nm, industrial and non-industrial particles have a similar concentration, 89 ± 59 cm -3 and 99 ± 61 cm -3 , with non-industrial concentrations being slightly larger. To confirm that industrial particles could travel to the sampling location, air dispersion modeling was completed for specific case studies during the sampling period. The atmospheric dispersion modeling results confirmed that particles released at the industrial areas reached the sampling location when the wind direction was favorable for transport from the industrial areas. The greater concentration of smaller-sized particles in industrial emissions has implications for typical particulate measurements (PM2.5), heath impacts, and climatological influences.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Coal-Biomass Co-Firing Power Plants with Carbon Capture and Storage

The United States has set a target to achieve the net-zero economy by 2050. Bioenergy with Carbon Capture and Sequestration (BECCS) is one of the promising negative-emission routes in the mitigation portfolio to help meet this goal. Coal-biomass co-firing with carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a key BECCS technology to realize the carbon mitigation at fossil-fuel power plants. The mitigation potential of co-firing option is affected by numerous critical factors, such as biomass properties, co-firing level, and carbon capture rate. The objectives of the study are to characterize and estimate the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and performance of coal-biomass co-firing power plants with CCS, determine the breakeven co-firing level at power plants necessary to achieve net-zero life cycle emissions, and quantify the variabilities and uncertainties in life cycle emissions. The scope of the life cycle assessment includes the fuel supply, combustion-based power generation, and CO2 transport and storage. A fuel-based life cycle module is developed and embedded in the Integrated Environmental Control Model (IECM), a fossil-fuel power plant modeling tool. This study then applies the enhanced IECM to conduct the process-based life cycle assessment for an array of biomass co-firing scenarios. Deterministic analysis indicates that reaching net-zero life cycle emissions in a biomass co-firing plant without CCS deployment is challenging. Combining biomass co-firing and CCS deployment can significantly lower the overall life cycle emissions of power plants. Net-zero life cycle emissions can be achieved with a 20 wt.% co-firing level and 90% CCS when the Powder River Basin coal is co-fired with energy crops or forestry residues. However, the breakeven co-firing level for net-zero emissions depend on the selected fuel properties. Fuel supply and plant operation are the critical stages influencing the life cycle emissions of power plants with 90% CCS. Deployment of deep CCS beyond 90% CO2 capture can remarkably reduce operational emissions and the breakeven co-firing level. With 99% CCS, the breakeven co-firing rate can be reduced to 12% on average. These findings highlight the trade-offs between technical performance and environmental impact of biomass co-firing at coal-fired power plants and emphasize the role of deep CCS in achieving a net-zero emissions future.

Wu, Wanying↗
DOE OSTI2024

Refining Planetary Boundary Layer Height Retrievals From Micropulse‐Lidar at Multiple ARM Sites Around the World

Abstract Knowledge of the planetary boundary layer height (PBLH) is crucial for various applications in atmospheric and environmental sciences. Lidar measurements are frequently used to monitor the evolution of the PBLH, providing more frequent observations than traditional radiosonde‐based methods. However, lidar‐derived PBLH estimates have substantial uncertainties, contingent upon the retrieval algorithm used. In addressing this, we applied the Different Thermo‐Dynamic Stabilities (DTDS) algorithm to establish a PBLH data set at five separate Department of Energy's Atmospheric Radiation Measurement sites across the globe. Both the PBLH methodology and the products are subject to rigorous assessments in terms of their uncertainties and constraints, juxtaposing them with other products. The DTDS‐derived product consistently aligns with radiosonde PBLH estimates, with correlation coefficients exceeding 0.77 across all sites. This study delves into a detailed examination of the strengths and limitations of PBLH data sets with respect to both radiosonde‐derived and other lidar‐based estimates of the PBLH by exploring their respective errors and uncertainties. It is found that varying techniques and definitions can lead to diverse PBLH retrievals due to the inherent intricacy and variability of the boundary layer. Our DTDS‐derived PBLH data set outperforms existing products derived from ceilometer data, offering a more precise representation of the PBLH. This extensive data set paves the way for advanced studies and an improved understanding of boundary‐layer dynamics, with valuable applications in weather forecasting, climate modeling, and environmental studies.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) 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.

CERF↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License 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 (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License 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 (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

Hourly PM 2.5 Estimates across California from 2018 to 2023

This study presents a new data set of hourly PM 2.5 concentrations across California from 2018 to 2023 at a three-kilometer resolution. This data set was developed by assimilating observations from PurpleAir and the U.S. EPA Air Quality System monitors into wildfire smoke forecasts from the High-Resolution Rapid Refresh Smoke (HRRR-Smoke) model using the Gridpoint Statistical Interpolation (GSI) three-dimensional variational data assimilation framework. Archived forecasts of modeled wildfire smoke PM 2.5 from HRRR-Smoke create the background field for assimilation, which is then corrected using surface observations of total PM 2.5 . The resulting reanalysis from GSI provides an estimate of total PM 2.5 that minimizes error from both the observational and the model data. Validation results indicate strong performance, with monthly R 2 values ranging from 0.73 to 0.91 across the six-year data set, comparable to other PM 2.5 data sets. Case studies are presented for three major fire events, the 2018 Camp Fire, 2019 Kincade Fire, and 2020 Lightning Complex Fires to demonstrate the data set’s fidelity in resolving plume dynamics and local exposure patterns. Root-mean-squared error averaged over each month scales with average PM 2.5 concentrations, resulting in a low error under typical conditions but higher absolute errors during extreme smoke events. This is the first long-term, hourly PM 2.5 data set of its kind for California and enables the generation of subdaily exposure metrics, such as peak hourly concentrations, exceedance durations, and time-of-day exposure peaks. The novelty and strong validation of this data set make it a compelling resource for future studies on the impact and significance of subdaily PM 2.5 exposure.

PM2.5↗
DOE OSTI2025

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds Developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License 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↗
DOE OSTI2026

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 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 This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License 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↗
DOE OSTI2025

Zooming in on virtual commutes: Telecommuting impacts on mobility and sustainability

Motivated by a societal shift towards remote work and rapid advancement in information and communication technologies, this study examines the impact of telecommuting on urban mobility across the nine counties of the San Francisco Bay Area, California. Utilizing a behaviorally realistic integrated agent-based transportation model and recent data on telecommuting patterns, we simulate the impact of multiple telecommuting scenarios on transportation system outcomes. This provides a comprehensive picture of the impact of remote work on travel costs and accessibility of all travelers, factoring in changes in mode use and congestion. We analyze how telecommuting influences broader societal factors such as transportation energy consumption. Our findings indicate that increased telecommuting reduces overall person miles traveled and transportation energy consumption. Furthermore, telecommuting results in externality benefits by improving accessibility and reducing commute times for non-telecommuters.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2025

Determining hexavalent chromium transport properties in alkaline nuclear waste using nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy

This study focuses on the transport properties of hexavalent chromium, specifically the chromate anion, to improve predictive models and environmental remediation strategies for Cr(VI) migration. Using 53 Cr Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, the research quantifies chromate in multicomponent electrolytes replicating nuclear waste conditions at the Hanford Site in Washington State. The consistency of the 53 Cr NMR signal integral with chromate concentration, despite varying matrix compositions, establishes it as a reliable concentration indicator. The transport properties of chromate in an alkaline solution were assessed using relaxation-based measurements via saturation recovery and Carr-Purcell-Meiboom-Gill experiments, determining spin-lattice and spin-spin relaxation times. These measurements, combined with the Bloembergen-Purcell-Pound equation, helped estimate the rotational correlation time and the 53 Cr self-diffusion coefficient using Stokes-Einstein-Debye and Stokes-Einstein equations. Direct measurements were obtained through pulsed field gradient stimulated echo 53 Cr NMR spectroscopy. Monte Carlo simulations further estimated uncertainty propagation. The results enhance comprehension of chromate transport and highlight prospects for identifying transport properties of NMR-active nuclei, traditionally considered unreachable.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

American WAKE Experiment (AWAKEN) Field Campaign Report

The American WAKE experimeNt (AWAKEN) was a large-scale, international collaborative field campaign funded primarily by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Wind Energy Technologies Office. Its main purpose was to gather detailed observations of wind farm-atmosphere interactions to improve understanding of wind farm physics, validate and improve simulation tools, lower uncertainties in wind farm modeling, understand environmental impacts, and ultimately reduce the cost and increase the reliability of wind energy systems. The campaign specifically focused on seven testable hypotheses that include characterizing wind turbine and wind farm wake effects, wind farm blockage, turbulent mixing, structural loading impacts, local environmental impacts, and testing wind farm control technologies. AWAKEN was a highly collaborative effort involving numerous agencies, including: DOE, through the Wind Energy Technologies Office and the Office of Science Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) User Facility, the U.S. Department of Commerce through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, many American universities, and internationally funded collaborators from Germany and Brazil.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling to Facilitate Qualification of Stack Sampling Probe Location

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling was used to help evaluate modifications to a radiological effluent stack and assist with establishing a stack sampling location that met the mixing criteria for qualification. Requirements for stack sampling location are listed in the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-2021 standard. Modeling was performed to help develop a suitable design for increasing building ventilation for the radiological effluent stack. The ANSI/HPS N13.1-2021 criteria for the air monitoring probe location are that the coefficient of variation of velocity uniformity, gaseous tracer uniformity, and particulate tracer uniformity must be less than or equal to 20%. Furthermore, no point in the sampling location may have a gaseous tracer concentration that varies from the mean concentration by more than 30%. Additionally, the flow angle at the sampling location must not be more than 20 degrees. The ANSI/HPS N13.1-2021 standard allows for models (physical or computational) to be employed to perform the full suite of qualification tests, followed by a more limited set of verification tests on the actual stack to qualify the stack sampling location. Here, a series of computational model simulations were employed to evaluate the stack qualification criteria. Significant time and re-source savings are achieved using CFD modeling. CFD modeling demonstrated that the stack meets the criteria at the sample probe location. Verification tests were performed on the modified stack to measure the velocity uniformity and flow angle at the stack sampling location, and results demonstrated that the CFD model results may be used to support the qualification of the stack sampling location.

Air Monitoring↗
DOE OSTI2024

Impacts of Climate Change on the Generation Potential of Solar and Wind Energy Systems in India

Low-carbon energy sources like wind and solar are essential for decarbonizing the electricity sector. In addition, the cost of electricity generated from these sources has plummeted over the last decade. Therefore, these energy sources are poised to take a significant share of the total installed capacity soon. However, they are susceptible to the impacts of climate change as their generation potential depends on the weather conditions. Estimating the installed capacity requirements of solar and wind energy to decarbonize the power sector without accounting for these possible changes in generation potential could lead to missing out on the set climate goals and meeting future electricity demand. This study evaluates the effect of climate change on the generation potential of wind and solar energy systems in India for two future periods, 2050 and 2070, under two climate scenarios or Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP): SSP245 and SSP585. Almost all regions show a decrease, and most regions show a significant decline (>5%) in the generation potential of solar Photovoltaic (PV) as compared to 2010 levels under both climate scenarios and future periods. The changes in the generation potential of wind energy are more significant (>10%), and the majority of regions show a decline in generation potential. Southwestern and central regions show an increase in wind generation potential for 2070 as compared to 2050 levels under the SSP245 scenario and the SSP585 scenario, respectively.

climate change↗