Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Flood Risk”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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 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

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

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↗
NASA NTRS1983

Application of remote sensing to hydrological problems and floods

The main applications of remote sensors to hydrology are identified as well as the principal spectral bands and their advantages and disadvantages. Some examples of LANDSAT data applications to flooding-risk evaluation are cited. Because hydrology studies the amount of moisture and water involved in each phase of hydrological cycle, remote sensing must be emphasized as a technique for hydrological data acquisition.

Parada, N. D. J.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Applications of TRMM-based Multi-Satellite Precipitation Estimation for Global Runoff Simulation: Prototyping a Global Flood Monitoring System

Advances in flood monitoring/forecasting have been constrained by the difficulty in estimating rainfall continuously over space (catchment-, national-, continental-, or even global-scale areas) and flood-relevant time scale. With the recent availability of satellite rainfall estimates at fine time and space resolution, this paper describes a prototype research framework for global flood monitoring by combining real-time satellite observations with a database of global terrestrial characteristics through a hydrologically relevant modeling scheme. Four major components included in the framework are (1) real-time precipitation input from NASA TRMM-based Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis (TMPA); (2) a central geospatial database to preprocess the land surface characteristics: water divides, slopes, soils, land use, flow directions, flow accumulation, drainage network etc.; (3) a modified distributed hydrological model to convert rainfall to runoff and route the flow through the stream network in order to predict the timing and severity of the flood wave, and (4) an open-access web interface to quickly disseminate flood alerts for potential decision-making. Retrospective simulations for 1998-2006 demonstrate that the Global Flood Monitor (GFM) system performs consistently at both station and catchment levels. The GFM website (experimental version) has been running at near real-time in an effort to offer a cost-effective solution to the ultimate challenge of building natural disaster early warning systems for the data-sparse regions of the world. The interactive GFM website shows close-up maps of the flood risks overlaid on topography/population or integrated with the Google-Earth visualization tool. One additional capability, which extends forecast lead-time by assimilating QPF into the GFM, also will be implemented in the future.

Hong, Yang↗
NASA NTRS2014

Assessing the Utility of 3-km Land Information System Soil Moisture Data for Drought Monitoring and Hydrologic Applications

The NASA Short term Prediction Research and Transition (SPoRT) Center in Huntsville, AL has been running a real-time configuration of the Noah land surface model within the NASA Land Information System (LIS) since June 2010. The SPoRT LIS version is run as a stand-alone land surface model over a Southeast Continental U.S. domain with 3-km grid spacing. The LIS contains output variables including soil moisture and temperature at various depths, skin temperature, surface heat fluxes, storm surface runoff, and green vegetation fraction (GVF). The GVF represents another real-time SPoRT product, which is derived from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer instrument aboard NASA's Aqua and Terra satellites. These data have demonstrated operational utility for drought monitoring and hydrologic applications at the National Weather Service (NWS) office in Huntsville, AL since early 2011. The most relevant data for these applications have proven to be the moisture availability (%) in the 0-10 cm and 0-200 cm layers, and the volumetric soil moisture (%) in the 0-10 cm layer. In an effort to better understand their applicability among locations with different terrain, soil and vegetation types, SPoRT is conducting the first formal assessment of these data at NWS offices in Houston, TX, Huntsville, AL and Raleigh, NC during summer 2014. The goal of this assessment is to evaluate the LIS output in the context of assessing flood risk and determining drought designations for the U.S. Drought Monitor. Forecasters will provide formal feedback via a survey question web portal, in addition to the NASA SPoRT blog. In this presentation, the SPoRT LIS and its applications at NWS offices will be presented, along with information about the summer assessment, including training module development and preliminary results.

White, Kristopher D.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Interannual Variations in Aerosol Sources and Their Impact on Orographic Precipitation Over California's Central Sierra Nevada

Aerosols that serve as cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) and ice nuclei (IN) have the potential to profoundly influence precipitation processes. Furthermore, changes in orographic precipitation have broad implications for reservoir storage and flood risks. As part of the CalWater I field campaign (2009-2011), the impacts of aerosol sources on precipitation were investigated in the California Sierra Nevada. In 2009, the precipitation collected on the ground was influenced by both local biomass burning (up to 79% of the insoluble residues found in precipitation) and long-range transported dust and biological particles (up to 80% combined), while in 2010, by mostly local sources of biomass burning and pollution (30-79% combined), and in 2011 by mostly long-range transport from distant sources (up to 100% dust and biological). Although vast differences in the source of residues was observed from year-to-year, dust and biological residues were omnipresent (on average, 55% of the total residues combined) and were associated with storms consisting of deep convective cloud systems and larger quantities of precipitation initiated in the ice phase. Further, biological residues were dominant during storms with relatively warm cloud temperatures (up to -15 C), suggesting these particles were more efficient IN compared to mineral dust. On the other hand, lower percentages of residues from local biomass burning and pollution were observed (on average 31% and 9%, respectively), yet these residues potentially served as CCN at the base of shallow cloud systems when precipitation quantities were low. The direct connection of the source of aerosols within clouds and precipitation type and quantity can be used in models to better assess how local emissions versus long-range transported dust and biological aerosols play a role in impacting regional weather and climate, ultimately with the goal of more accurate predictive weather forecast models and water resource management.

Creamean, J. M.↗
NASA NTRS2016

California Reservoir Inflow Projections Using a Hybrid EMD-Matalas Method

Inflow projections provide scenarios for future water availability and are integral to operational reservoir management. They can aid water practitioners in decision-making for conservation efforts, multiyear storage retention, managing flood risk, downstream water releases, and regional growth planning. However, conventional methods are often limited in terms of their ability to incorporate non-stationarity, long run persistence, and the cross-correlation of multiple series in a region. This research aims to address these issues with a hybrid approach that integrates Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) with the Matalas multisite generation method. Multiple long-run inflows were examined for the Shasta/Trinity Reservoirs and Oroville Reservoir of California. EMD is used to decompose each inflow series into a set of independent intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) that have different timescales and frequencies. These IMFs were grouped into intradecadal (less-than- 10-year average periodicity) and interdecadal (greater-than-10-year average periodicity) series for each site. The IMF projections at each site were then combined to produce replicates of the historical data. This preserves the correlation structure of the intra- and interdecadal components of the series. The hybrid EMD-Matalas method was compared to a traditional autoregressive lag-one model. Both methods were found to retain the statistical characteristics of the historical data. However, the EMD-Matalas method retained the multiyear wet and dry periods to a greater degree. This was examined by comparing the 5-year and 10-year sums from the traditional model with the hybrid EMD-Matalas model. An advantage of the EMD-Matalas method is the ability to explicitly incorporate modes of non-stationary long-run persistence often associated with large-scale climate drivers such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) or the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). This contributes to scenario planning that may be particularly important for managing multiyear low flow periods.

inflow projections↗
NASA NTRS2018

Assessing Global Surface Water Inundation Dynamics Using Combined Satellite Information from SMAP, AMSR2 and Landsat

A method to assess global land surface water (fw) inundation dynamics was developed by exploiting the enhanced fw sensitivity of L-band (1.4 GHz) passive microwave observations from the Soil Moisture Active Passive (SMAP) mission. The L-band fw (fw(sub LBand)) retrievals were derived using SMAP H-polarization brightness temperature (Tb) observations and predefined L-band reference microwave emissivities for water and land endmembers. Potential soil moisture and vegetation contributions to the microwave signal were represented from overlapping higher frequency (Tb) observations from AMSR2. The resulting (fw(sub LBand)) global record has high temporal sampling (1-3 days) and 36-km spatial resolution. The (fw(sub LBand)) annual averages corresponded favourably (R=0.84, p<0.001) with a 250-m resolution static global water map (MOD44W) aggregated at the same spatial scale, while capturing significant inundation variations worldwide. The monthly (fw(sub LBand)) averages also showed seasonal inundation changes consistent with river discharge records within six major US river basins. An uncertainty analysis indicated generally reliable (fw(sub LBand)) performance for major land cover areas and under low to moderate vegetation cover, but with lower accuracy for detecting water bodies covered by dense vegetation. Finer resolution (30-m) (fw(sub LBand)) results were obtained for three sub-regions in North America using an empirical downscaling approach and ancillary global Water Occurrence Dataset (WOD) derived from the historical Landsat record. The resulting 30-m (fw(sub LBand)) retrievals showed favourable spatial accuracy for water (70.71%) and land (98.99%) classifications and seasonal wet and dry periods when compared to independent water maps derived from Landsat-8 imagery. The new (fw(sub LBand)) algorithms and continuing SMAP and AMSR2 operations provide for near real-time, multi-scale monitoring of global surface water inundation dynamics and potential flood risk.

WOD↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dissemination of Global Flood Severity and Surface Water Mapping using Remote Sensing Data to Global Stakeholders

Flooding is a natural event that occurs frequently with high severity worldwide, responsible for significant societal and economic impacts. Disaster managers face significant challenges managing essential information for preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. The development of an open access, global flood alerting system for effective identification of flood impacted areas, classification of potential impacts, and the formulation of effective emergency response measures requires the incorporation of a wide variety of flood models and remote sensing data sources from multiple platforms. NASA is currently funding projects focused on flood forecasting, post-event flood mapping, flood depth estimation and pre-event flood severity estimation using Earth observation (EO) datasets and derived flood products. A new initiative in the Disasters Program is underway to disseminate flood products from different hydrologic models and sensors to global stakeholders via Pacific Disaster Center’s DisasterAWARE®, NASA’s Disasters Mapping Portal and potentially other mechanisms. This initiative focuses on improving response capacity and use of EO products in near real-time by a broader community for resource planning in case of extreme events. As part of this initiative, we have deployed Model of Models (MoM) – an open-source ensemble approach, that integrates outputs from hydrologic models and EO data from optical imagery to assess flood severity daily at sub-watershed level globally. The MoM output is integrated with the incident event system of DisasterAWARE to generate flood severity risk and flood impact boundaries, which are disseminated via the DisasterAWARE platform to different stakeholders globally for decision-making and response efforts. The next step will focus on using MoM outputs to estimate flood depth and extent mapping using high-resolution Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery, impact assessment using optical imagery and population datasets, and damage estimation using critical infrastructure datasets, which would be disseminated via DisasterAWARE to decision-makers, emergency managers and first responders around the world.

flood↗
NASA NTRS2024

Mapping Recent Coastal Shoreline Changes in Southwestern Alaska Using Landsat 8 Satellite Imagery

Coastal communities in Alaska are frequently subjected to storm surges that erode shorelines and riverbanks, which increases flood risks around critical village infrastructure. Coastal erosion in western Alaska may be occurring currently at rates as high as 15 m per year, but the region has not been mapped in enough detail to accurately assess recent shoreline and inland riverbank erosion rates. To update the mapping of changes in all of SWAlaska’s coastal margins, Landsat 8 satellite imagery was analyzed to detect trends in the normalized difference water index collected from 2013 to 2023. The normalized difference water index values range from -1 to 1, with negative values indicating majority land that includes soil and live vegetation cover and positive values indicating majority water coverage. Results showed marked coastal shoreline erosion at Chagvan Bay, Hagemeister Island, and Nanvak Bay over the past decade. Additional locations of recent bank erosion were detected on the Kuskokwim River, from its upriver mouth past the city of Bethel. Riverbank erosion was also detected in northern Nushagak Bay, and extensive surface-wetting trends around wetlands and riverbanks were detected near the village of Togiak. Moreover, many villages on the west coast of Alaska and in the Kuskokwim River Delta have recently documented climate change case studies highlighting bank erosion, indicating that a variety of related ecological disturbances are ongoing across the region.

Imagery↗
DOE OSTI2025

Data Repository for Multi-Objective Urban Observational Strategies: A risk-based framework for expanding flood sensor networks.

These data support the manuscript "Multi-Objective Urban Observational Strategies: A risk-based framework for expanding flood sensor networks." These data are generated to allow water managers to reason about optimal locations to expand a flood observation system from multiple perspectives, specifically focusing on flood hazards, and population exposure to flooding. The data included are a) a shapefile of individual sensor locations b) a shapefile of river reach catchments, c) raster of FEMA flood likelihood layers d) shapefile of population locations and population socioeconomic characteristics. The code is written in R and includes all files necessary to generate the figures for the associated manuscript. Interactive maps of the final calculated maps of hazard, vulnerability, exposure, and risk are also included as html files.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Exploring Flood Predictability in Taiwan through Coupled Atmospheric–Hydrological and High-Performance Hydrodynamic Models

Effective flood simulation capabilities can tremendously support early warning and disaster prevention. To examine the applicability of a fully physics-based and high-performance flood simulation and forecasting modeling framework for a flood-prone region in Taiwan, we conduct a numerical experiment that couples the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Model, WRF-Hydrological modeling system (WRF-Hydro), and the Two-Dimensional Runoff Inundation Toolkit for Operational Needs (TRITON) to perform integrated rainfall, streamflow, and flood simulations. Furthermore, we first use the coupled WRF and WRF-Hydro (WWH) to predict rainfall and streamflow and then drive TRITON with the predicted streamflow hydrographs to simulate flood depth and inundation area. With the refined spatial resolution and parameterization, this framework can better predict rainfall with reasonable spatial patterns. Although WWH could overestimate the amount of rainfall in some areas, the uncertain rainfall–streamflow predictions produce reasonable flood maps able to pinpoint regions at risk of flooding. In terms of model efficiency, the graphics processing unit–based computation can yield a speed-up factor as high as ∼13 compared to the central processing unit–based computation, promoting the efficacy of the coupled modeling framework in practical real-time flood forecasting.

Coupled models↗