Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “rivers”

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 847 records · Page 47
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Bulb-style Kaplan Turbine - Run-of-the-river (ror) Hydro Governor And Turbine Model

This software package includes hydro governor and turbine models developed in Simulink (Mathworks Inc.) and RSCAD (RTDS Technologies) for low-head bulb-style Kaplan turbine hydropower plants. The model developed in Simulink has been designed and tuned to match the governor-turbine response for a real-world hydropower unit owned by Idaho Falls Power (IFP). The Simulink and RSCAD models enable real-time testing in a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) implementation using OPAL-RT and RTDS digital real-time simulators, respectively. An automatic initialization for dynamic simulation has also been integrated to each model in both Simulink and RSCAD. The RSCAD initialization involves a novel python-based interfacing for automatic modification of the initial conditions in the model. The parameters of these models can be tuned to match other hydropower plants in this class.

Alam, SMShafiul↗
DOE OSTI2020

NEON AOP Survey of Upper East River CO Watersheds: LAZ Files, LiDAR Surface Elevation, Terrain Elevation, and Canopy Height Rasters

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) contracted the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP) to observe watersheds of interest surrounding Crested Butte, CO with remotely sensed data, including LiDAR. The flight box design encompassed the watersheds, surveying a total area of 334 km2 across 72 lines. The instrument used was an Optech Gemini, with a pulse density of 2-9 pulses m-2 across the study area (see final report document for detailed information (Goulden and Musinsky 2020). These LiDAR data are the primary data that were provided by NEON, and include both LiDAR source data and derived surface products. The source data are contained in 'crbu_laz.zip' and 'classified_point_cloud.zip. 'classified_point_cloud.zip' represents an additional processing level on 'crbu_laz.zip'. The derived products are 'dsm_mosaic_min_phase_me.tif', 'dtm_mosaic_min_phase_me.tif', and 'tch_mosaic_min_phase_me.tif'. These files are raster mosaics of a digital surface elevation model (DSM), digital terrain elevation model (DTM), and a canopy height model (CHM) at 1 m resolution with a height threshold of > 2 m, respectively, in geotiff (.tif) format. This work was 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. [UPDATE] On 06/26/2026 the files 'crbu_laz.zip' and 'classified_point_cloud.zip' were replaced with original output files from NEON to address zip file corruption and naming errors. No changes were made to the underlying data. (See Methods Step 2 for details).

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2020

NEON AOP Imaging Spectroscopy Survey of Upper East River Colorado Watersheds: Raw-Space Radiance and Observational Variable Dataset

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) contracted the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP) to observe watersheds of interest near Crested Butte, CO with remotely sensed data including imaging spectroscopy. The flight box design encompassed the watersheds, and flight design targeted a minimum of 30% overlap between adjacent flight lines. The total area surveyed was 334 km2 across 72 lines. Flight lines were oriented north-south for consistency in solar illumination geometry. Seven days were required to cover the flight area. Some areas were flown additional times to improve data quality or temporal coincidence between airborne acquisitions and field sampling. In total, 102 lines were collected and can be downloaded here: https://portal.nersc.gov/wfsfa/doi-10-15485-1617204/. The instrument used for the acquisition was an Airborne Visible-Infrared Imaging Spectrometer - Next Generation (AVIRIS-NG), which records radiance within 426 contiguous spectral bands in the wavelength range from 380 to 2510 nm. The instrument was flown at a target aboveground altitude of 1000 m for a processed data spatial resolution of 1 m. These data are non-orthorectified, radiance data that require further processing prior to use as a surface reflectance data set.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2021

Bedrock weathering rates, reactive nitrogen influxes and effluxes, and nitrous oxide emissions rates from the Pumphouse Hillslope, East River Watershed, Colorado

Atmospheric nitrous oxide contributes directly to global warming, yet models of the nitrogen cycle do not account for bedrock, the largest pool of terrestrial nitrogen, as a source of nitrous oxide. Although it is known that release rates of nitrogen from bedrock are large, there is an incomplete understanding of the connection between bedrock-hosted nitrogen and atmospheric nitrous oxide. Here, we quantify nitrogen fluxes and mass balances at a hillslope underlain by marine shale. We found that at this site bedrock weathering contributes 78% of the subsurface reactive nitrogen, while atmospheric sources (commonly regarded as the sole sources of reactive nitrogen in pristine environments) account for only the remaining 22%. About 56% of the total subsurface reactive nitrogen denitrifies, including 14% emitted as nitrous oxide. The remaining reactive nitrogen discharges in porewaters to a floodplain where additional denitrification likely occurs. We also found that the release of bedrock nitrogen occurs primarily within the zone of the seasonally fluctuating water table and suggest that the accumulation of nitrate in the vadoes zone, often attributed to fertilization and soil leaching, may also include contributions from weathered nitrogen-rich bedrock. Our hillslope study suggests that under oxygenated and moisture-rich conditions, weathering of deep, nitrogen-rich bedrock makes an important contribution to the nitrogen cycle. The data files are in Excel, which can be accessed using Microsoft Office, and consist of many data sets from the Pumphouse Hillslope PLM (Pumphouse Lower Montane) 1, 2, 3, and 4. They include soil to rock (0-10 meters) solid phase minerals and elements compositions; time- and depth-resolved pore-water chemistry and pore-gas compositions; time- and depth-resolved water table depths and water fluxes; subsurface weathering rates; nitrogen influxes and effluxes and mass balance. The attached paper is in a Word document, which can be accessed using Microsoft Office, and in pdf format.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

NEON AOP Survey of Upper East River CO Watersheds: Waveform LiDAR Binary Data

The waveform Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data in this package were generated through a National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP) acquisition over watersheds of interest surrounding Crested Butte, Colorado. The remote sensing imagery acquired by the NEON AOP supports an interdisciplinary project on hydrology, biogeochemistry, and ecosystem functioning in a snow-dominated headwater environment. These waveform LiDAR data enable spatially continuous estimation of vegetation structure parameters to facilitate analyses of the major environmental drivers of structural and compositional variability. The package contains 97 compressed file archives in 7-zip (.7z) format, each corresponding to one acquisition flightpath. Within each .7z archive is a set of constituent files describing properties of the LiDAR waveforms, such as return intensity, geolocation, outgoing pulse and other behavior of the sensor and signals. Once downloaded, the files must first be unzipped using the widely distributed command-line software utility 7z, using the command '7z x \[filename\].7z \[target_directory\]'. All files within the .7z archives can be opened in IDL, MatLab, or the open-source R statistical computing environment. Further details about the data package are in the attached user guide (neon_aop_crbu_waveformlidar_userguide.pdf). This work was 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 OSTI2025

Model data for a watershed-scale study in the Portage River Basin (OH) examining the effects of subsurface drainage on the hydrologic response of an agricultural watershed.

This study builds on Rathore et al. (2024, WRR) and investigates the role of artificial tile-drainage on various aspects of watershed hydrological response, with a particular focus on peakflow. The model-data for the original modeling-focused paper (Rathore et al., 2024, WRR) is archived at Rathore et al. (2024, ESS-DIVE). Hence, this model-data archive provides scripts that are specific to this study that includes model updates, processing and analysis scripts. For details and models files of original model, readers are referred to Rathore et al. (2024, ESS-DIVE). The key difference between the model configuration in this study and Rathore et al. (2024, WRR) is that the tile drains are applied to the entire domain, to study the impact of tile-drains on different aspects of hydrological response. Additional scenario considering intensified precipitation after a dry period was also simulated. The Watershed Workflow package is implemented in Python3. The Jupyter notebooks can be executed through multiple open-source tools, for example, Anaconda Jupyter Lab, VS Studio Code, etc. Other data files include CSV and HDF5 files, which can be read through Python scripts.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Metagenome-assembled genomes from topsoils along a hillslope water gradient across early snowmelt to late summer in East River, CO

Drought is changing the American Mountain West at unprecedented rates with unknown consequences to soil microbiome composition and function. As a part of LBNL Watershed Science Focus Area (SFA), we investigated shifts in microbial community and transcriptional activity on a subalpine conifer-meadow transition zone throughout the summer of 2023 as soil dried down. This work took place in Crested Butte, CO on Snodgrass mountain, using a proxy for drought conditions.Here we present metagenome assembled genomes (MAGs) for the bacterial and archaeal community at 0-10cm from three sites along a hillslope water gradient across five timepoints from early snowmelt to late summer. 42 metagenomes were sequenced at Joint Genome Institute (JGI) and can be found under the JGI GOLD (Genomes Online Database) sequencing project Gs0166660. Metagenomes were assembled through an inhouse pipeline (see methods), binned using four autobinners (concoct, maxbin2, metabat2, and vamb) and consolidated using dastool. The consolidated bins from all metagenomes were pooled, filtered by completeness (>70%) and contamination (<10%), and dereplicated at 95% ANI using drep. This dataset (1) a zip file of 157 MAGs (as fasta files, Gs0166660_bins_tar.gz), (2) sample metadata file with sample IGSNs (International Generic Sample Numbers) (samples.csv), (3) bounding box coordinates for the sampled locations (Gs0166660.kml), (4) metagenome assembly and coassembly metadata file listing IMG/M (Integrated Microbial Genomes/Metagenomes) metagenome accessions linking samples to metagenomes (EastRiver_Drought_ESSDive_Metadata.csv), (5) location metadata file (locations.csv), (6) file-level metadata file (flmd.csv) and (7) data dictionary (dd.csv) file.This work was 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.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Depth-resolved sagebrush root metabolomics, rhizosphere microbial communities, and geochemistry at the East River Watershed

This data set consists of results from soil nutrient profile, untargeted metabolomics, mass spec imaging, and amplicon sequencing. Data for soil nutrient profile includes common cations (Ca, Mg, Na, and K etc.) extracted from 3 digesting steps – ammonia acetate (for exchangeable cations), nitric acid (for acid dissolved fraction), and hydrofluoric acid/perchloric acid (HF/HClO4) for whole soil digestion. It also includes concentration of organic carbon, inorganic nitrogen (ammonia and nitrate) and phosphorus (Bray-1 P and nitric acid extract), and total nitrogen and phosphorus. Data for untargeted metabolomics includes metabolomic profile for root exudate/tissues and soil extracts from depths at surface soil to saprolite, that were measured using gas chromatography – mass spectrometry (GC-MS), and liquid chromatography – tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Data for mass spec imaging includes spatial distribution of metabolites that were detected and annotated with Fourier transformation ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometer (FTICR-MS). Data for amplicon sequencing includes the base paired 16S and ITS ribosomal RNA sequences from Miseq Illumina sequencing. All samples were collected from 2 sampling campaign October 2022 and June 2023. Collectively, these datasets enable a mechanistic evaluation of how nutrient acquisition, especially nitrogen and phosphorus, differs between shallow roots operating in soil and deep roots functioning within the fractured bedrock zone. All files are provided as comma-separated values (CSV) fies (.csv) and (GZIP) file (.gz). The compressed .gz FASTQ files can be read directly in R using the dada2 package as part of the amplicon sequence analysis workflow. This work was 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. This research was performed on a project award 60563 (https://dx.doi.org/10.46936/expl.proj.2022.60563/60008727) from the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory, a DOE Office of Science User Facility sponsored by the Biological and Environmental Research program under Contract No. DE-AC05-76RL01830.

EARTH SCIENCE > AGRICULTURE > SOILS > CARBON↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was 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.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was 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.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Reactive Transport Modeling of Anthropogenic Carbon Mineralization in Stacked Columbia River Basalt Reservoirs

Numerical simulation of CO2 storage in basalts and related reactive lithologies requires modeling complex, coupled hydrologic and chemical processes, including multi-phase flow and transport, partitioning of CO2 into the aqueous phase, and chemical interactions with aqueous fluids and rock minerals. We conducted reactive transport simulations of the Wallula pilot-scale CO2 injection into the flow tops of the Grande Ronde Basalt using our PNNL STOMP-CO2 simulator with the ECKEChem reactive module. Our mineralization simulation of the ~1,000 tons of injected CO2 into the interflow zones was based on the hydrologic transport model we previously developed. For this work, the simulations considered geochemical reactions involving the basalt components, precipitates, formation brine, and injected CO2. In our benchmark case, carbonate minerals precipitated, resulting in ~20% of the CO2 being mineralized in 10 years. Increasing the reaction rate of a single primary mineral phase (clinopyroxene) by an order of magnitude resulted in a carbon mineralization reaction extent of ~90% over the same time interval. Based on these initial sensitivity analysis results, it is clear that a thorough understanding of primary mineral dissolution rates is required for accurately predicting long-term fate and transport of injected CO2 into basalt formations. Our reactive transport numerical simulations will be key components of commercial-scale CO2 storage operation permitting, de-risking, and optimization in mafic and ultramafic reservoirs.

Cao, Ruoshi↗
DOE OSTI2021

Local-Distance Seismic Event Relocation and Relative Magnitude Estimation, Applications to Mining Related Seismicity in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming

Recent efforts to characterize small ( M w < 3 ) seismic events at local distances have become more important because of the increased observation of human-triggered and induced seismicity and the need to advance nuclear explosion monitoring capabilities. The signals generated by low-magnitude seismic sources necessitate the use of nearby short-period observations, which are sensitive to local geological heterogeneity. Local to near-regional distance ( < 300 km ) surface and shear waves can dominate short-period observations from small, shallow seismic sources. In this work, we utilize these observations to estimate precise, relative locations and magnitudes of ~ 700 industrial mining events in Wyoming, using nearly 360,000 observations. The precise, relative location estimates (with formal location uncertainty estimates of less than 1 km) collapse a diffuse collection of mining events into discrete clusters associated with individual blasting operations. We also invert the cross-correlation amplitudes to estimate precise, relative moment magnitude estimates, which help validate and identify disparities in the event sizes reported by regional network catalogs. Joint use of multiple phases allows for the inclusion of more seismic events due to the increase in the number of observations. In some cases, using a single phase allowed us to relocate only 50% of the original reported seismic events within a cluster. Combining shear- and surface-wave phases increased the number of events to above 90% of the original events, allowing us to characterize a broader range of event sizes, source to station distances, and event distributions. This analysis takes a step toward making a fuller characterization of small industrial seismic events observed at local distances.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Quantitative Determination of Total Cesium in Savannah River Site (SRS) Tank Waste by Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscropy

Utilization of the significant and unique wavelength dynamic range (165 to 1100 nm) available on the Leeman Prodigy Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectroscopy (ICP-ES) allows for quantification of cesium using the emission line 894.347 nm without the potential of Barium interference in nuclear waste samples. Samples are added to a Sodium Peroxide Fusion and Lithium Carbonate buffer in 2% nitric acid solution to increase sensitivity of the easily ionizable (<6 eV) cesium for quantitation to 5 pbb. Through direct comparison of analytical data results, the method is proven to be complementary to the Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) analysis (LOQ 100 ppt) in support of the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Nuclear Waste Mission.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Representing the Unrepresented Impact of River Ice on Hydrology, Biogeochemistry, Vegetation, and Geomorphology: A Hybrid Physics-Machine Learning Approach

Focal areas include: Predictive modeling through the use of AI techniques and AI-derived model components; the use of AI and other tools to design a prediction system composed of a hierarchy of models (e.g., AI driven model/component/parameterization selection). Insight gleaned from complex data (both observed and simulated) using AI, big data analytics, and other advanced methods, including explainable AI and physics- or knowledge-guided AI.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Using Machine Learning to Develop a Predictive Understanding of the Impacts of Extreme Water Cycle Perturbations on River Water Quality

This whitepaper addresses to two focal areas – (3) Insight gleaned from complex data using Artificial Intelligence (AI), and other advanced techniques (primary), and (2) Predictive modeling through the use of AI techniques and AI-derived model components (secondary). This topic is directly relevant to four DOE Earth and Environmental Systems Science Division Grand Challenges: integrated water cycle, biogeochemistry, drivers and responses in the Earth system, and data-model integration.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Proton Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (H NMR) of Glycolate in Real Waste: Developing and Testing Analytical Methods for the Savannah River Site Liquid Waste System

In preparation for implementing the NG acid flowsheet for the SRS LWS, analytical methods for determining glycolate at low concentration are desired to support system management and safety. Previous work documented that the IC method performed well for samples with low to moderate ionic strength. That work also included a scoping effort to determine if an alternate analytical strategy using H NMR would complement and extend the capabilities of the IC method. The H NMR scoping results indicated that the method had the potential to expand glycolate analysis in LWS samples to higher ionic strength tanks/solutions. The scope of this work is to develop innovative proton NMR techniques, including demonstrating ion exchange decontamination protocols needed for application of the technique to real waste samples. Part of radioactive waste processing at SRS uses formic acid to reduce oxidized (Hg 2+ ) to more volatile elemental Hg for steam striping, collecting, and disposal. Under acidic conditions found in the Chemical Processing Cell (CPC) at the Defense Waste Processing Facility (DWPF), formic acid has a much higher hydrogen generation rate than an alternative reductant, glycolic acid. Thus, an NG acid flowsheet has been developed utilizing glycolic acid with the benefit of easing the need for headspace monitoring requirements for hydrogen and ammonia at DWPF. Low concentrations of glycolate are conservatively assumed to be in the recycle stream, which will collect in the Recycle Collection Tank (RCT). The DWPF recycle stream collected in the RCT has a distinct pathway to the LWS waste tanks that feed the 2H and 3H Evaporator. This route involves transfer of the DWPF recycle to Tank 22 in the Concentration, Storage, and Transfer Facilities (CSTF) followed by transfer to the LWS tank farm/evaporators.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗