Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “FARMS”

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 631 records · Page 35
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

FLASC (FLORIS-based Analysis for SCADA data)

FLASC provides a rich suite of analysis tools for SCADA data filtering & analysis, wind farm model validation, field experiment design, and field experiment monitoring. The repository is centrally built around NRELs in-house floris wind farm model, available at https://github.com/nrel/floris. FLASC also largely relies on the energy ratio to, among others, quantify wake losses in synthetic and historical data, to perform turbine northing calibrations, and for model parameter estimation.

Fleming, Paul↗
DOE OSTI2025

WHOC (Wind Hybrid Open Controller) [SWR-25-54]

The Wind Hybrid Open Controller (WHOC) is a python-based tool for real-time plant-level wind farm control and wind-based hybrid plant control. WHOC is primarily run in simulation, although we intend that it could be used for physical plants in future. WHOC provides simple farm-level (and hybrid plant-level) controls such as wake steering control, spatial filtering/consensus, active power control, and coordinated control of hybrid power plant assets; and creates an entry point for the development of more advanced controllers.

Sinner, Michael (Misha) [National Renewable Energy↗
DOE OSTI2025

AeroMesh [SWR-25-14]

AeroMesh is a mesher that makes generating finite elements meshes easy. It can accept farm specifications from either a properly formatted YAML file or from an external API call made by another process. It currently supports refinement specifications at the domain, farm, and turbine level in both two and three dimensions.

Allen, Jeffery [National Renewable Energy Laborato↗
DOE OSTI2024

Definition of the IEA Wind 22-Megawatt Offshore Reference Wind Turbine

This technical report describes the design of a new 22 Megawatt reference wind turbine (RWT). The turbine model was designed collaboratively by two teams at the Denmark Technical University and at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory within the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Technology Commercialization Programme (TCP) Task 55 on Reference Wind Turbines and Farms. RWTs serve an important purpose in the wind energy community, since they provide openly available data for models representative of current wind turbine technology, which can be used by practitioners for a variety of modeling purposes, ranging from aerodynamic, structural, and aeroelastic turbine modeling to wind farm flow modeling, across a range of fidelities. The IEA 22 RWT aims to model machines with projected installation in the 2025-2030 time frame. The turbine has a rotor diameter of 284 meters and a hub height of 170 meters. It is a class 1-B machine with a rotor specific power nearing 350 W m -2 and it is mounted on either a fixed-bottom offshore foundation or a semi-submersible floating platform.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Farmers’ Perceptions of Marginal Land for Biofuel Crops

The dataset includes the survey results about farmers’ perceptions of marginal land availability and the likelihood of a land pixel being marginal based on a machine learning model trained from the survey. Two spreadsheet files are the farmer and farm characteristics (marginal_land_survey_data_shared.xlsx), and the existing land use of marginal lands (land_use_info_sharing.xlsx). Note: the blank cells in these two spreadsheets mean missing values in the survey response. The GeoTiff file includes two bands, one the marginal land likelihood in the Midwestern states (0-1), the other the dominant reason of land marginality (0-5; 0 for farm size, 1 for growing season precipitation, 2 for root zone soil water capacity, 3 for average slope, 4 for growing season mean temperature, and 5 for growing season diurnal range of temperature). To read the data, please use a GIS software such as ArcGIS or QGIS.

marginal land↗
DOE OSTI2023

SoyFACE Fumigation Data Files

This data set is related to the SoyFACE experiments, which are open-air agricultural climate change experiments that have been conducted since 2001. The fumigation experiments take place at the SoyFACE farm and facility in Champaign County, Illinois during the growing season of each year, typically between June and October. - The "SoyFACE Plot Information 2001 to 2021" file contains information about each year of the SoyFACE experiments, including the fumigation treatment type (CO2, O3, or a combination treatment), the crop species, the plots (also referred to as 'rings' and labeled with numbers between 2 and 31) used in each experiment, important experiment dates, and the target concentration levels or 'setpoints' for CO2 and O3 in each experiment. - This data set includes files with minute readings of the fumigation levels ( "SoyFACE 1-Minute Fumigation Data Files" folder) from the SoyFACE experiments. The "Soyface 1-Minute Fumigation Data Files" folder contains sub-folders for each year of the experiments, each of which contains sub-folders for each ring used in that year's experiments. This data set also includes hourly data files for the fumigation experiments ( "SoyFACE Hourly Fumigation Data Files" folder) created from the 1-minute files, and hourly ambient/weather data files for each year of the experiments ( "Hourly Weather and Ambient Data Files" folder). The ambient CO2 and O3 data are collected at SoyFACE, and the weather data are collected from the SURFRAD and WARM weather stations located near the SoyFACE farm. - The "Fumigation Target Percentages" file shows how much of the time the CO2 and O3 fumigation levels are within a 10 or 20 percent margin of the target levels when the fumigation system is turned on. - The "Matlab Files" folder contains custom code (Aspray, E.K.) that was used to clean the "SoyFACE 1-Minute Fumigation Data" files and to generate the "SoyFACE Hourly Fumigation Data" and "Fumigation Target Percentages" files. Code information can be found in the "SoyFACE Hourly Fumigation Data Explanation" file. - Finally, the " * Explanation" files contain information about the column names, units of measurement, and other pertinent information for each data file. * NOTE: We have identified some files in the “SoyFACE 1-Minute Fumigation Data Files” folder in our SoyFACE data set submission that were not downloaded properly - the files were present in the folder, but the actual files were empty. V3 ensures that there are no longer any empty files in the data set.

agricultural↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data for Greenhouse Gas Accounting Procedures in Low Carbon Fuel Policies Overlook the Spatial Variability of Miscanthus-Derived Sustainable Aviation Fuel

Low carbon fuel policies such as the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), Canada Clean Fuel Regulations (CFR), and California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) as well as the 45Z tax credit are intended to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation. Cellulosic feedstocks, optimized biorefineries, and favorable farming locations can significantly reduce biofuel carbon intensity (CI). Despite advances in field-to-fuel GHG monitoring and flexibility in resource allocation within biorefineries (e.g., governing net electricity production), rigid CI accounting procedures in current policies may limit CI responsiveness across candidate sites and processing facilities. This work examines a hypothetical biomass-to-sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) pathway using miscanthus and alcohol-to-jet (i) to demonstrate how GHG accounting requirements drive estimates of biofuel CIs and (ii) to explore potential CI and financial implications of scenario-specific life cycle assessment (LCA). Results demonstrate that GHG accounting using the CFR/LCFS can reasonably account for distinct levels of net electricity production by a biorefinery, but only the CFR yields similar CI sensitivity to spatially explicit factors (feedstock CI, grid electricity CI) as scenario-specific LCA: most GHG accounting frameworks do not capture CI variation across candidate sites in the United States. Ultimately, this work demonstrates the importance of LCA methodological specifications in low carbon fuel policies and tax credits.

Miscanthus↗
DOE OSTI2023

Effectiveness of Residue and Tillage Management on Runoff Pollutant Reduction from Agricultural Areas

Highlights No-till and no-till residue systems were effective in reducing runoff particulate and total nutrients but increased dissolved nutrients. Maintaining >30% residue cover reduced most runoff constituents, irrespective of no-till or tillage. No-till-residue prevented runoff nutrient losses and benefitted farm revenue by avoiding tillage. Abstract. Reduced tillage management conservation practices (No-till and Reduced-till) are widely adopted in agriculture; however, understanding their overall effectiveness for water quality protection is challenging. A meta-analysis was conducted to understand and quantify the effectiveness of residue and tillage management on runoff, sediment, and nutrient losses from agricultural fields. Annual runoff and the associated sediment, and nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) loads were compiled from 60 peer reviewed research articles published across the United States and Canada. A total of 1575 site-years of data were categorized into tillage (<30% surface cover), no-tillage (<30% surface cover), tillage with residue (>30% surface cover), no-tillage with residue (>30% surface cover), and pasture management. No-tillage, no-tillage-residue, and tillage-residue managements were evaluated for their effectiveness in reducing runoff, nutrients, and sediment loads compared to tillage. Synthesized and surveyed corn yield data were used to evaluate the economic cost effectiveness of no-tillage-residue management with respect to tillage. Across the site years (1968-2019) studied, median runoff depth for no-tillage and no-tillage-residue were 84% and 70% greater than tillage and tillage-residue management, respectively. No-tillage-residue management had up to 86% less sediment losses than tillage systems, on average, for both >30% and <30% surface cover. No-tillage-residue management was most effective, with a positive performance effectiveness of 65% to 90% in controlling sediments, particulate, and total nutrient losses in runoff compared to tillage. Cost effectiveness analysis revealed the benefits of no-tillage-residue management in reducing nutrient loads and increasing net-farm revenue by avoiding tillage operational costs. Except for dissolved phosphorus, no-tillage-residue management cost effectiveness for sediments and nutrient loads ranged from negative $6 to negative $102 per every Mg or kg of load reduction, indicating it had both economic and environmental benefits compared to tillage management. Overall, these results indicate that over the long-term, no-tillage and tillage, combined with greater than 30% residue cover, can effectively reduce sediment and nutrient losses. This work highlights the importance of crop residues on the soil surface to reduce runoff losses, even in no-tillage systems. Keywords: Conservation tillage, No-tillage, Residue cover, Tillage, Water quality.

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2022

Updated U.S. Low-Temperature Heating and Cooling Demand by County and Sector

This dataset includes U.S. low-temperature heating and cooling demand at the county level in major end-use sectors: residential, commercial, manufacturing, agricultural, and data centers. Census division-level end-use energy consumption, expenditure, and commissioned power database were dis-aggregated to the county level. The county-level database was incorporated with climate zone, numbers of housing units and farms, farm size, and coefficient of performance (COP) for heating and cooling demand analysis. This dataset also includes a paper containing a full explanation of the methodologies used and maps. Residential data were updated from the latest Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) dataset (2015) using 2020 census data. Commercial data were baselined off the latest Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) dataset (2012). Manufacturing data were baselined off the latest Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS) dataset (2021).

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-CF1 CAF-LTAR Cook East

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CF1 CAF-LTAR Cook East. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CF1 CAF-LTAR Cook East produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - CF1 has operated since May 2017 at the R.J. Cook Agronomy Farm outside of Pullman, Washington, and monitors the no-till side of a paired-catchment study that is part of the Longterm Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) site common experiment. CF1 is located in “Cook East,” a field that has been in no-till management since 1998, and represents the Alternative treatment of the LTAR common experiment. It is paired with the CF2 tower location in “Cook West,” which has been in conventional tillage since prior to 1998 and represents the Prevalent treatments of the common experiment. Cook Agronomy Farm is in the high precipitation agroecological zone of the Columbia Plateau’s dryland cropping region. Crop rotations are wheat-based and include winter wheat, spring wheat, chickpea, spring canola, and winter peas. Wheat is the principal cash crop, with other crops grown in rotation for diversity, nutrient, and pest management. Soils are predominantly silt loam texture Mollisols in the Palouse, Thatuna, Naff soil series. The CF1 tower replaced US-RC1, which operated 2012-2016 in a neighboring field that was also in no-till management since 1998. CF1 and RC1 have distinct footprints, aspects, and soil series compositions.

Phillips, Claire L.↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux US-UiC University of Illinois Maize-Soy

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-UiC University of Illinois Maize-Soy. Site Description - Agricultural field planted with maize in a three year rotation with soy (maize-maize-soy). The first soy rotation year was 2010. This field is typically planted in May and harvested in October. This site is located at an experimental farm approximately 2 miles south of the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign and is colocated with (500-1000m distance) all other Us-Ui sites.

Bernacchi, Carl J↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux US-Mi1 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 1

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mi1 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 1. Site Description - This Farm was a privately owned farm in Ohio Leased to Aloterra Energy Corporation out of Texas, The crop was Miscanthus grown continually originally for alternative Ethanol production but eventually for fiber as absorbant material. Miscanthus grows upwards of 15 ft tall each year.

Goslee, Sarah↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux US-Mi2 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 2

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mi2 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 2. Site Description - This Farm was a privately owned farm in Ohio Leased to Aloterra Energy Corporation out of Texas, The crop was Miscanthus grown continually originally for alternative Ethanol production but eventually for fiber as absorbant material. Miscanthus grows upwards of 15 ft tall each year.

Goslee, Sarah↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux US-Mi3 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 3

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mi3 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 3. Site Description - This Farm was a privately owned farm in Ohio Leased to Aloterra Energy Corporation out of Texas, The crop was Miscanthus grown continually originally for alternative Ethanol production but eventually for fiber as absorbant material. Miscanthus grows upwards of 15 ft tall each year.

Goslee, Sarah↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-CF2 CAF-LTAR Cook West

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CF2 CAF-LTAR Cook West. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CF2 CAF-LTAR Cook West produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - CF2 has operated since May 2017 at the R.J. Cook Agronomy Farm outside of Pullman, Washington, and monitors the conventionally tilled side of a paired-catchment study that is part of the Longterm Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) site common experiment. CF2 is located in “Cook West,” a field that has been in conventional tillage since prior to 1998 and constitutes the Prevalent treatment of the common experiment. In this case, conventional tillage involves chisel plowing after the winter wheat phase of rotations (approximately every 3-4 years) and occasional harrowing. CF2 is paired with the CF1 tower location in “Cook East,” which has been in no-till since 1998 and represents the Alternative treatment of the common experiment. Both fields are planted in the same crops every year. Cook Agronomy Farm is in the high precipitation agroecological zone of the Columbia Plateau’s dryland cropping region. Crop rotations are wheat-based and include winter wheat, spring wheat, chickpea, spring canola, and winter peas. Wheat is the principal cash crop, with other crops grown in rotation for diversity, nutrient, and pest management. Soils are predominantly silt loam texture Mollisols in the Palouse, Thatuna, Naff soil series. The CF2 tower replaced US-RC2, which operated 2012-2016 in a neighboring field that was also conventionally tilled. CF2 and RC2 have distinct footprints, aspects, and soil series compositions.

Huggins, Dave↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-Ro6 Rosemount I18_North

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ro6 Rosemount I18_North. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Ro6 Rosemount I18_North produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - This tower is located in a farm field farmed in accordance with a conservation type agricultural practice in the region: a corn/soybean/clover (living mulch/cover crop) rotation with chisel plow tillage in the fall following corn harvest and in the spring following soybeans.

Baker, John↗
DOE OSTI2025

AmeriFlux US-IAB Iowa State University NE tower

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-IAB Iowa State University NE tower. Site Description - This is a 4 ha (200 m x 200 m) crop rotation established at the Sustainable Advanced Bioeconomy Research (SABR) farm at Iowa State University. The site has a long history of conventional row-cropping, predominantly corn-soy rotations. In the immediately preceding growing season, soybeans were grown at the SABR farm.

(Rojda), Guler Aslan Sungur↗
DOE OSTI2025

AmeriFlux US-IAM Iowa State University Miscanthus

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-IAM Iowa State University Miscanthus. Site Description - This is a 4 ha (200 m x 200 m) Miscanthus established at the Sustainable Advanced Bioeconomy Research (SABR) farm at Iowa State University. The site has a long history of conventional row-cropping, predominantly corn-soy rotations. In the immediately preceding growing season, soybeans were grown at the SABR farm.

(Rojda), Guler Aslan Sungur↗