Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “geospatial datasets”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Providing Geospatial Intelligence through a Scalable Imagery Pipeline

This chapter describes ORNL’s (Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s) contributions to imagery preprocessing for geospatial intelligence research and development (R&D) in four sections. First, we discuss challenges involved in building an effective imagery preprocessing workflow and the world-class high-performance computing (HPC) resources at ORNL available to process petabytes of imagery data. Second, we highlight how we developed imagery preprocessing tools over three decades while paving the way for our current cutting-edge machine learning and computer vision algorithms that are impacting humanitarian and disaster response efforts. Third, we discuss how PIPE modules work together to turn raw images into analysis-ready datasets. Fourth, we look toward the future and discuss planned advancements to PIPE and computing trends that will affect geospatial intelligence R&D.

Reith, Andrew↗
DOE OSTI2025

CareWELL: Multimodal Region Representation Learning with Spatial Contexts for Urban Health

Rapid urbanization affects living environments by intensifying exposure to air pollution, heat, noise, and urban dynamics, which together contribute to uneven health outcomes across neighborhoods. For instance, cardiovascular, respiratory, and mental health conditions are each influenced by distinct exposures such as air pollution, extreme temperatures, or limited access to green space. These heterogeneous patterns require understanding the characteristics of geographic regions in order to explain why urban health risks vary across urban areas. Recent work in self-supervised region representation learning provides a promising way to model such characteristics from multimodal geospatial data. However, existing methods face two major limitations: (i) they often depend on non-public datasets, limiting reproducibility and applicability, and (ii) their generic pretraining objectives overlook health-relevant determinants, including temporal variability in environmental exposures and inequalities in social conditions. To address these gaps, we propose Context-Aware Region rEpresentation with Weather, Environment, and Location Learning (CareWELL). CareWELL leverages large language models to encode seasonal variability in weather, employs contrastive learning to align geo-coordinate and weather representations, and introduces a context-aware objective that integrates socio-demographic factors while preserving spatial correlations. We evaluate CareWELL by predicting six urban health outcomes in Manhattan, New York City, and demonstrate that CareWELL consistently outperforms state-of-the-art baselines as well as a traditional spatial computing method. These results suggest the importance of context-aware pretraining objectives for learning health-relevant region representations.

Namgung, Min [ORNL]↗
DOE OSTI2024

Fostering Geothermal Machine Learning Success: Elevating Big Data Accessibility and Automated Data Standardization in the Geothermal Data Repository: Preprint

The Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Data Repository (GDR) has implemented improvements to both its data lakes and its data standards and automated data pipelines. The GDR data lakes have reduced storage and compute-related barriers to using large geothermal datasets, enabling these large datasets to be accessed by anyone with a modern computer and internet access. More recently, the GDR has been working to further reduce barriers through streamlining the data intake process, educating users on the process and requirements, and aiding users in accessing data from the data lakes. These improvements have augmented the quantity of datasets the GDR is able to accept into its data lakes and have enabled users who are new to cloud tools to access these datasets more easily, overall increasing the accessibility of big geothermal data for use in machine learning and other projects. In addition, the GDR now has built-in data standards and pipelines for drilling data, geospatial data, and distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) data. These standardization efforts aim to enhance the real-world applicability of geothermal machine learning outcomes by improving the quality of training data. Specifically, through standardizing high-value datasets, the GDR is reducing project-specific data curation requirements, thus allowing more time for actual research. By automating this process, the burden of standardization is lifted from the user, ultimately increasing the availability of standardized data.

accessibility↗
DOE OSTI2025

Fostering Geothermal Machine Learning Success: Elevating Big Data Accessibility and Automated Data Standardization in the Geothermal Data Repository

The Department of Energy's (DOE's) Geothermal Data Repository (GDR) has implemented improvements to both its data lakes and its data standards and automated data pipelines. The GDR data lakes have reduced storage and compute-related barriers to using large geothermal datasets, enabling these large datasets to be accessed by anyone with a modern computer and internet access. More recently, the GDR has been working to further reduce barriers through streamlining the data intake process, educating users on the process and requirements, and helping users access data from the data lakes. These improvements have augmented the quantity of datasets the GDR is able to accept into its data lakes and have enabled users who are new to cloud tools to access these datasets more easily, overall increasing the accessibility of big geothermal data for use in machine learning and other projects. In addition, the GDR now has built-in data standards and pipelines for drilling data, geospatial data, and distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) data. These standardization efforts aim to enhance the real-world applicability of geothermal machine learning outcomes by improving the quality of training data. Specifically, through standardizing high-value datasets, the GDR is reducing project-specific data curation requirements, thus allowing more time for actual research. By automating this process, the burden of standardization is lifted from the user, ultimately increasing the availability of standardized data. This paper provides an update on recent improvements made to the GDR's data lakes and automated data pipelines, including: (1) streamlining the data lake intake process, (2) better educating users on the process and requirements through a new data lakes page, (3) adding data lake direct access links to GDR data lake submission pages, (4) implementing a DAS data pipeline to convert DAS data uploaded in SEG-Y format to a standardized hierarchical data format v5 (HDF5), (5) extending this pipeline to encompass data in the GDR data lake, (6) adding metadata requirements for geospatial data, (7) making user interface/user experience (UX) enhancements to the data pipelines' documentation pages, and (8) improving the GDR's data standards and pipelines pages to better guide users in ensuring that their data is standardized by the GDR's automated data pipelines. 2024 Geothermal Resources Council. All rights reserved.

accessibility↗
DOE OSTI2026

Fostering Geothermal Machine Learning Success: Elevating Big Data Accessibility and Automated Data Standardization in the Geothermal Data Repository

The Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Data Repository (GDR) has implemented improvements to both its data lakes and its data standards and automated data pipelines. The GDR data lakes have reduced storage and compute-related barriers to using large geothermal datasets, enabling these large datasets to be accessed by anyone with a modern computer and internet access. More recently, the GDR has been working to further reduce barriers through streamlining the data intake process, educating users on the process and requirements, and aiding users in accessing data from the data lakes. These improvements have augmented the quantity of datasets the GDR is able to accept into its data lakes and have enabled users who are new to cloud tools to access these datasets more easily, overall increasing the accessibility of big geothermal data for use in machine learning and other projects. In addition, the GDR now has built-in data standards and pipelines for drilling data, geospatial data, and distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) data. These standardization efforts aim to enhance the real-world applicability of geothermal machine learning outcomes by improving the quality of training data. Specifically, through standardizing high-value datasets, the GDR is reducing project-specific data curation requirements, thus allowing more time for actual research. By automating this process, the burden of standardization is lifted from the user, ultimately increasing the availability of standardized data.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Emerging Flexible Designs for Geospatial Multimodal Foundation Models

Foundation models are rapidly transforming Earth observation by enabling scalable pretraining across diverse unlabeled geospatial modalities. However, their architectural diversity—ranging from encoder-only to encoder-decoder and masked autoencoding paradigms—makes it challenging to assess performance trade-offs in a consistent manner. In this work, we present an apples-to-apples comparison of leading FM architectures designed for geospatial multimodal reasoning, with a particular focus on flexibility across varied spectral band configurations. We standardize pretraining using identical self-supervised learning objectives and training datasets, and evaluate all models under consistent parameterization on the GEOBench benchmark across classification and segmentation tasks. Our results offer new insights into the design trade-offs between model flexibility, modality alignment, and downstream task performance. By highlighting architectural strengths and limitations under controlled conditions, this study provides practical guidance for building next-generation geospatial foundation models capable of robust multimodal reasoning.

Ambrozio Dias, Philipe [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000194277↗
DOE OSTI2022

Optimizing Error-Bounded Lossy Compression for Scientific Data With Diverse Constraints

Vast volumes of data are produced by today's scientific simulations and advanced instruments. These data cannot be stored and transferred efficiently because of limited I/O bandwidth, network speed, and storage capacity. Error-bounded lossy compression can be an effective method for addressing these issues: not only can it significantly reduce data size, but it can also control the data distortion based on user-defined error bounds. In practice, many scientific applications have specific requirements or constraints for lossy compression, in order to guarantee that the reconstructed data are valid for post hoc analysis. For example, some datasets contain irrelevant data that should be isolated in particular and users often have intuition regarding value ranges, geospatial regions, and other data subsets that are crucial for subsequent analysis. Existing state-of-the-art error-bounded lossy compressors, however, do not consider these constraints during compression, resulting in inferior compression ratios with respect to user's post hoc analysis, due to the fact that the data itself provides little or no value for post hoc analysis. In this work we address this issue by proposing an optimized framework that can preserve diverse constraints during the error-bounded lossy compression, e.g., cleaning the irrelevant data, efficiently preserving different precision for multiple value intervals, and allowing users to set diverse precision over both regular and irregular regions. We perform our evaluation on a supercomputer with up to 2,100 cores. Experiments with six real-world applications show that our proposed diverse constraints based error-bounded lossy compressor can obtain a higher visual quality or data fidelity on reconstructed data with the same or even higher compression ratios compared with the traditional state-of-the-art compressor SZ. Furthermore, our experiments also demonstrate very good scalability in compression performance compared with the I/O throughput of the parallel file system.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Unraveling the Threads of Environmental Justice in Critical Mineral Extraction: A Framework for Regionalized Life Cycle Data

As we transition to a more sustainable energy system, the extraction and processing of critical minerals becomes increasingly important. However, these industries often raise concerns about environmental and social impacts, particularly in disadvantaged communities. To address these concerns, our research focuses on regionalizing environmental life cycle data to connect it with communities affected by mineral extraction. A framework was developed for collecting life cycle background data that supports the Justice40 Toolset, a market-based approach to evaluating net benefits and costs of critical mineral material recovery pathways. A goal was to alleviate public skepticism around mineral extraction processes, including secondary and unconventional feedstocks, by highlighting both environmental and social impacts. To achieve this, computational analysis and geospatial data science techniques were employed, such as within-scale and across-scale methods and proxy dataset usage. By doing so, we were able to develop a framework for identifying and disaggregating data down to regions small enough to support Justice40 goals. Our approach not only provides valuable tools fo insight into the environmental implications of mineral extraction but also helps policymakers evaluate the social impacts on local communities. This research contributes to a more just and equitable transition to a sustainable energy system, ensuring that marginalized voices are heard in decision-making process.

Davis, Tyler [NETL Site Support Contractor, Nation↗
DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

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

CERF↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with the Mongird et al. paper entitled "Can US power grid expansion avoid prime agricultural lands?" and is organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSIxRP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_rp_score_raster.tif solar_msi_rp_score_raster.tif wind_msi_rp_score_raster.tif 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. 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

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2025

ORBITaL-Net: A labeled training library for large-scale building feature extraction

Over the course of several years, nearly 1.5 million building outlines have been created from approximately 128,000 training tiles covering roughly 7,000 km 2 of very high-resolution multispectral overhead imagery, primarily dated between 2010 and 2020. This dataset, dubbed the Oak Ridge Building Image and TrAining Label Net (ORBITaL-Net), is designed for machine learning applications and is global in scope, with samples drawn from 72 countries across North America, South America, Africa, Europe, and Asia. ORBITaL-Net captures a great diversity in geographic setting, structural characteristics, land use (urban and rural), terrain, and imagery conditions. While the labeled building outlines are themselves valuable, the dataset’s true strength lies in the pairing of these labels with corresponding reference imagery, which is being released for open source use. Similar to SpaceNet and Replicable AI For Microplanning (ramp), this building outline dataset will allow the larger computer vision community from academia, government, and industry the opportunity to develop robust, scalable, and generalizable geospatial machine learning techniques. Unlike SpaceNet and ramp, which offer high resolution labels and imagery primarily for large urban cities, ORBITaL-Net is not focused on training samples from heavily populated areas but instead aims to capture the innate variability of conditions present in both the physical environment and imagery collections.

Geography↗
DOE OSTI2024

Mapping Support for Targeted Critical Minerals Exploration and Extraction

The United States’ dependency on imported minerals poses significant risks to economic stability and national security due to potential supply disruptions. Recognizing the strategic importance of critical minerals, the Department of Energy (DOE) emphasizes the need for a secure and resilient supply chain to support emissions reduction, technology development, and capitalization on clean energy opportunities. The DOE’s Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC), in collaboration with the Office of Policy (OP), addresses these vulnerabilities by focusing on upstream domestic critical minerals production, balancing extraction with social and environmental goals, including conservation, environmental justice, and respect for Tribal sovereignty. This report showcases a collaborative effort involving Idaho National Laboratory (INL), Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to map mineral development potential along with key social and environmental datasets. A geographical information system (GIS)-based web map application was developed as a preliminary tool for environmental analysis, integrating 158 geospatial data layers such as critical habitat, land ownership, economic indicators, and environmental concerns. Data were sourced from agencies like the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and USGS and processed using GIS technology to enhance visualization and analysis. The proposed analysis framework categorizes areas into high, mid, and low concern based on withdrawn lands, special status species, the Economic Development Capacity Index (EDCI) Mining Composite Index, and the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST). While the application provides broad visualizations, it is not a substitute for detailed environmental reviews required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Users must conduct further analyses and engage with tribal entities and other stakeholders for comprehensive planning. A case study of the Idaho Cobalt Belt (ICB) in Lemhi County, Idaho, has been provided in the report to illustrate the tool's practical use. This report introduces a GIS application and framework to support stakeholders in identifying and prioritizing areas for critical mineral exploration, promoting secure supply chains, and advancing the nation's energy independence through responsible resource stewardship.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

U.S. national water and energy land dataset for integrated multisector dynamics research

Abstract Understanding resource demands and tradeoffs among energy, water, and land socioeconomic sectors requires an explicit consideration of spatial scale. However, incorporation of land dynamics within the energy-water nexus has been limited due inconsistent spatial units of observation from disparate data sources. Herein we describe the development of a National Water and Energy Land Dataset (NWELD) for the conterminous United States. NWELD is a 30-m, 86-layer rasterized dataset depicting the land use of mappable components of the United States energy sector life cycles (and related water used for energy), specifically the extraction, development, production, storage, distribution, and operation of eight renewable and non-renewable technologies. Through geospatial processing and programming, the final products were assembled using four different methodologies, each depending upon the nature and availability of raw data sources. For validation, NWELD provided a relatively accurate portrayal of the spatial extent of energy life cycles yet displayed low measures of association with mainstream land cover and land use datasets, indicating the provision of new land use information for the energy-water nexus.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

LandScan Global 30 Arcsecond Annual Global Gridded Population Datasets from 2000 to 2022

Abstract Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) annually develops the LandScan Global (LSG) dataset, a 30 arcsecond global gridded population dataset representing global ambient human population distribution. This multivariable dasymetric model disaggregates census counts within administrative boundaries using ancillary data. Each country’s distribution reflects cultural and socioeconomic patterns; manual validations yield a unique global dataset for assessing populations at risk. For over two decades, LSG has been a standard for estimating populations at risk, aiding U.S. federal government, academia and humanitarian organizations. During disasters such as the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the 2010 Haiti earthquake and geopolitical crises such as the Syrian civil war and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, LSG supported scientific and operational communities in emergency response and recovery. In 2022, LSG datasets from 2000 onward were made publicly available through ORNL’s LandScan Portal. This data descriptor details our methodology and the application of geospatial science and machine learning to geographic and demographic data, highlighting uses in urban resiliency, emergency management, disaster response, and human health and security.

Science & Technology - Other Topics↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data from: "Towards CONUS-Wide ML-Augmented Conceptually-Interpretable Modeling of Catchment-Scale Precipitation-Storage-Runoff Dynamics"

This data package was generated to support the manuscript “Towards CONUS-Wide Machine Learning-Augmented Conceptually Interpretable Modeling of Catchment-Scale Precipitation-Storage-Runoff Dynamics.” It provides input files, model outputs, plotting data, scripts, notebooks, and documentation used to develop, evaluate, and reproduce Mass-Conserving Perceptron (MCP)-based hydrologic modeling experiments across 513 selected Catchment Attributes and Meteorology for Large-sample Studies in the United States (CAMELS-US) basins. The files are organized by modeling component and analysis purpose, including rainfall–runoff experiments, snow module experiments, coupled hydrologic-snow experiments, Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) benchmark results, model skill metrics, initialization and epoch records, cell-state normalization files, Akaike Information Criterion (AIC)-based model comparison files, and data used to generate manuscript figures. Tabular files can be opened using standard spreadsheet software or Python/R data-analysis tools. Python scripts, Jupyter notebooks, and selected MATLAB scripts are included for model execution, postprocessing, plotting, and statistical analysis. Quality assurance and quality control were conducted through the source-data selection and modeling workflow. Meteorological forcing, streamflow, and static catchment attributes were derived from the CAMELS-US dataset, and snow water equivalent data were derived from the University of Arizona (UA) Snow Water Equivalent dataset. Selected basins and time periods were screened during the associated research workflow to avoid missing observations or poor-quality cases. Static geospatial features were processed primarily using Quantum Geographic Information System (QGIS) and Geospatial Data Abstraction Library (GDAL) workflows. Additional details are provided in the associated manuscript and documentation.

ESS-DIVE CSV File Formatting Guidelines Reporting ↗
DOE OSTI2025

Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Applications in Modern Power Systems

Machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms offer valuable tools for the analysis and interpretation of large datasets. These tools have the capability to uncover insights that may not be readily apparent within these datasets. In recent years, the integration of ML and AI has become increasingly prevalent in various applications within the power system domain. One of the earliest instances of machine learning in power systems can be traced back to demand forecasting, where artificial neural networks were employed for short-term load forecasting. In contemporary power systems, an abundance of high-resolution geospatial and temporal data is generated at various time intervals, ranging from sub-seconds (Phasor Measurement Units or PMUs) to seconds (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition or SCADA), minutes (Process Information or PI), and extending to days, months, and years. These datasets contain valuable information concerning system reliability and performance. This information holds the potential to offer critical insights into system operations, as well as solutions for predicting and mitigating contingencies to prevent cascading outages. Despite the immense power of machine learning tools, system operators, planners, and utilities often exhibit hesitancy in fully embracing AI-enabled system operations and planning. This cautious approach persists, even as numerous diverse applications of machine learning continue to emerge in the realm of power systems. In this chapter, our focus will delve deep into ML and AI applications tailored for power systems. These applications aim to furnish system operators with enhanced situational awareness and augment their decision-making capabilities, especially during challenging operating conditions. Specific areas of interest encompass root cause analyses of electricity market datasets and the strategic selection of representative samples from vast power system databases for training ML/AI models. Finally, the chapter will conclude with a short discussion on the future of ML/AI in power systems and possible directions that the industry is moving towards.

power system applications, machine learning (ML), ↗