Results for “production data” — Page 77

DOE OSTI2023

DownScaleBench for developing and applying a deep learning based urban climate downscaling- first results for high-resolution urban precipitation climatology over Austin, Texas

Abstract Cities need climate information to develop resilient infrastructure and for adaptation decisions. The information desired is at the order of magnitudes finer scales relative to what is typically available from climate analysis and future projections. Urban downscaling refers to developing such climate information at the city (order of 1 – 10 km) and neighborhood (order of 0.1 – 1 km) resolutions from coarser climate products. Developing these higher resolution (finer grid spacing) data needed for assessments typically covering multiyear climatology of past data and future projections is complex and computationally expensive for traditional physics-based dynamical models. In this study, we develop and adopt a novel approach for urban downscaling by generating a general-purpose operator using deep learning. This ‘DownScaleBench’ tool can aid the process of downscaling to any location. The DownScaleBench has been generalized for both in situ (ground- based) and satellite or reanalysis gridded data. The algorithm employs an iterative super-resolution convolutional neural network (Iterative SRCNN) over the city. We apply this for the development of a high-resolution gridded precipitation product (300 m) from a relatively coarse (10 km) satellite-based product (JAXA GsMAP). The high-resolution gridded precipitation datasets is compared against insitu observations for past heavy rain events over Austin, Texas, and shows marked improvement relative to the coarser datasets relative to cubic interpolation as a baseline. The creation of this Downscaling Bench has implications for generating high-resolution gridded urban meteorological datasets and aiding the planning process for climate-ready cities.

Singh, Manmeet (ORCID:0000000233747149)↗

DOE OSTI2024

Critical Literature Review of Low Global Warming Potential (GWP) Refrigerants and their Environmental Impact

Refrigeration and air conditioning currently account for ~20% of the total electricity consumption in buildings around the world. Over the next three decades as global temperatures are projected to increase, urbanization and economic growth will lead to an increased demand for refrigeration and cooling. Most commonly used refrigerants belong to the five following classes: (i) chlorofluorocarbons, (ii) hydrochlorofluorocarbons, (iii) hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), (iv) hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), and (v) natural refrigerants. Over the past century, there have been shifts in which compounds were used for refrigeration to improve safety and durability, allow for ozone protection, and, most recently, to reduce global warming potential (GWP). Although technological advances have led to increased cooling capacity and safer refrigerants, emissions from refrigeration systems can affect the environment by contributing to greenhouse gas emissions or by depleting the ozone layer, depending on the gas emitted. The focus is increasingly on adopting compounds that are both efficient at cooling and effective for reducing emissions and other adverse environmental impacts. Because of policy and regulatory changes to avert ozone depletion and global climate change, much discussion has centered on the environmental impacts of next-generation refrigerants. Of particular interest are the fluorinated refrigerants, HFCs and HFOs, most of which are defined as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and their breakdown products (especially trifluoroacetic acid). The US Environmental Protection Agency in 2021 drafted a Strategic Roadmap for PFAS, which has already resulted in an increase in investment in research on these compounds and has restricted the release of PFAS into the environment through the implementation of monitoring and reporting requirements. A critical evaluation of fluorinated refrigerants and their breakdown products with respect to persistence, biodegradation and toxicity, and global warming potential is needed to guide environmental regulations. This document aims to perform a critical review of the relevant scientific data on the most common refrigerants currently used, their degradation products, and their alternatives. Where available, estimates of precursor production quantities and existing environmental regulatory information are reviewed. Key data of interest for the evaluation include physicochemical properties, environmental fate parameters, ecological or human health toxicity/risk information, and GWP for compounds of interest.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Critical Literature Review of Low Global Warming Potential (GWP) Refrigerants and their Environmental Impact

Refrigeration and air conditioning currently account for ~20% of the total electricity consumption in buildings around the world. Over the next three decades as global temperatures are projected to increase, urbanization and economic growth will lead to an increased demand for refrigeration and cooling. Most commonly used refrigerants belong to the five following classes: (i) chlorofluorocarbons, (ii) hydrochlorofluorocarbons, (iii) hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), (iv) hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs), and (v) natural refrigerants. Over the past century, there have been shifts in which compounds were used for refrigeration to improve safety and durability, allow for ozone protection, and, most recently, to reduce global warming potential (GWP). Although technological advances have led to increased cooling capacity and safer refrigerants, emissions from refrigeration systems can affect the environment by contributing to greenhouse gas emissions or by depleting the ozone layer, depending on the gas emitted. The focus is increasingly on adopting compounds that are both efficient at cooling and effective for reducing emissions and other adverse environmental impacts. Because of policy and regulatory changes to avert ozone depletion and global climate change, much discussion has centered on the environmental impacts of next-generation refrigerants. Of particular interest are the fluorinated refrigerants, HFCs and HFOs, most of which are defined as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and their breakdown products (especially trifluoroacetic acid). The US Environmental Protection Agency in 2021 drafted a Strategic Roadmap for PFAS, which has already resulted in an increase in investment in research on these compounds and has restricted the release of PFAS into the environment through the implementation of monitoring and reporting requirements. A critical evaluation of fluorinated refrigerants and their breakdown products with respect to persistence, biodegradation and toxicity, and global warming potential is needed to guide environmental regulations. This document aims to perform a critical review of the relevant scientific data on the most common refrigerants currently used, their degradation products, and their alternatives. Where available, estimates of precursor production quantities and existing environmental regulatory information are reviewed. Key data of interest for the evaluation include physicochemical properties, environmental fate parameters, ecological or human health toxicity/risk information, and GWP for compounds of interest.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

The potential of caproate (hexanoate) production using Clostridium kluyveri syntrophic cocultures with Clostridium acetobutylicum or Clostridium saccharolyticum

Caproate (hexanoate) and other medium-chain fatty acids are valuable platform chemicals produced by processes utilizing petroleum or plant oil. Clostridium kluyveri , growing on short chain alcohols (notably ethanol) and carboxylic acids (such as acetate) is noted for its ability to perform chain elongation to produce 4- to 8-carbon carboxylates. C. kluyveri has been studied in monoculture and coculture conditions, which lead to relatively modest carboxylate titers after long fermentation times. To assess the biosynthetic potential of C. kluyveri for caproate production from sugars through coculture fermentations, in the absence of monoculture data in the literature suitable for our coculture experiments, we first explored C. kluyveri monocultures. Some monocultures achieved caproate titers of 150 to over 200 mM in 40–50 h with a production rate of 7.9 mM/h. Based on that data, we then explored two novel, syntrophic coculture partners for producing caproate from sugars: Clostridium acetobutylicum and Clostridium saccharolyticum . Neither species has been cocultured with C. kluyveri before, and both demonstrate promising results. Our experiments of C. kluyveri monocultures and C. kluyveri — C. saccharolyticum cocultures demonstrate exceptionally high caproate titers (145–200 mM), fast production rates (3.25–8.1 mM/h), and short fermentation times (18–45 h). These results represent the most caproate produced by a C. kluyveri coculture in the shortest known fermentation time. We also explored the possibility of heterologous cell fusion between the coculture pairs similar to the results seen previously in our group with C. acetobutylicum and Clostridium ljungdahlii. Fusion events were observed only in the C. acetobutylicum — C. kluyveri coculture pair, and we offer an explanation for the lack of fusion between C. saccharolyticum and C. kluyveri . This work supports the promise of coculture biotechnology for sustainable production of caproate and other platform chemicals.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Functional characterization of prokaryotic dark matter: the road so far and what lies ahead

Eight-hundred thousand to one trillion prokaryotic species may inhabit our planet. Yet, fewer than two-hundred thousand prokaryotic species have been described. This uncharted fraction of microbial diversity, and its undisclosed coding potential, is known as the “microbial dark matter” (MDM). Next-generation sequencing has allowed to collect a massive amount of genome sequence data, leading to unprecedented advances in the field of genomics. Still, harnessing new functional information from the genomes of uncultured prokaryotes is often limited by standard classification methods. These methods often rely on sequence similarity searches against reference genomes from cultured species. This hinders the discovery of unique genetic elements that are missing from the cultivated realm. It also contributes to the accumulation of prokaryotic gene products of unknown function among public sequence data repositories, highlighting the need for new approaches for sequencing data analysis and classification. Increasing evidence indicates that these proteins of unknown function might be a treasure trove of biotechnological potential. Here, we outline the challenges, opportunities, and the potential hidden within the functional dark matter (FDM) of prokaryotes. We also discuss the pitfalls surrounding molecular and computational approaches currently used to probe these uncharted waters, and discuss future opportunities for research and applications.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Californium-252 production at the High Flux Isotope Reactor - II: Comparison between the highly enriched uranium and a proposed low-enriched uranium core

This is the second paper on a 252 Cf production study performed in support of efforts to convert the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) from highly enriched uranium (HEU) to low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel. The first paper primarily focuses on validating computational tools and nuclear data. This companion paper evaluates another critical aspect: the 252 Cf production capability with a proposed LEU core. HFIR must maintain its world-class performance and missions following conversion and because 252 Cf is a vital, multipurpose neutron-emitting radioisotope, the ability to efficiently produce 252 Cf must be preserved. In this study, the HFIRCON transport and depletion tool, several nuclear data libraries, and Campaign 78 data were used to compute 252 Cf production, sensitivity, and safety metrics. Further, results indicate the 252 Cf production and production rates are slightly higher with a 95MW th LEU core compared with those obtained with the 85MW th HEU core. Additionally, the target peak fission rate densities, discharge cumulative fission densities, and heat deposition rates with the LEU core are within a few percent of those calculated with the HEU core. The findings suggest HFIR’s 252 Cf production capability can be effectively maintained with an LEU core without adversely affecting the safety metrics.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Release of NDI Libraries MENDF80 and MT80—Libraries Based on ENDF/B-VIII.0

Several new NDI libraries have been released by the Nuclear Data Team. There are multigroup-energy neutron libraries (see Section II.) and associated production-depletion libraries (see Section IV.). The libraries are based on data from ENDF/B-VIII.0. The libraries will be available with NDI version 2.1.4 when it becomes available in Spring of 2020. These libraries are the libraries recommended for use by the Nuclear Data Team. We encourage all to adopt these libraries at their earliest convenience.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2024

SCALE Activities in FY23 [Slides]

This presentation shows that the SCALE 6.3 is available from RSICC. The lecture touches on new features including the new ENDF/B-VIII.0 data including covariances. It shows that the updated parallel infrastructure enables parallel capability on Windows. Production release with maintenance until 2026 at minimum addressing Code or data bugs, Performance, Ease of installation. There is a New Government Use Agreement (GUA) for SCALE 7.0 beta access. With site licenses available for non-commercial testing and feedback, handled through ORNL technology transfer.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, along with the geospatial data describing the spatial units where water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. We collected water rights databases from 11 western United States states either by downloading them from publicly accessible web portals, or by contacting state water management representatives; detailed descriptions of where and when the data was collected is provided in the README.txt, as well as Lisk et al.(in review). This collection of data are those raw water rights. Each state formats their data differently, meaning that file types, field availability, and names vary from state to state. Note, the data provided here reflects the state of the water rights databases at the time we collected the data; updates have likely occurred in many states. Some pieces of information are common among all states. These are: priority date, volume or flow of water allowed by the right, stated water use of the right, and some means of identifying the geography and source of the water pertaining to the right - typically the coordinates of the Point of Diversion (PoD) of a waterbody or well. Arizona regulates water in a different way than the other 10 states. Outside of some relatively small critical agricultural areas called Active Management Areas (AMAs), Arizona does not maintain any water rights. However, the state does require registration of surface and groundwater pumping devices, which includes disclosing the mechanical specifics of the devices. We used these records as a proxy for water rights. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. In addition, the following states have requested specifically worded disclaimers to be included with their data. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." The available data is provided as a series of compressed files, which each containing the full data collected from each state. Some of the files have been renamed, to more easily know which state the data belongs to. The file renaming was also required as some files from different states had the same name. In other cases, the data for a state has been placed in a folder indicating which state it belongs to - as the state organized its data by selected subregions. Below is a brief description of the format of the collected data from each state. ArizonaRights_StatementOfClaimants: A folder containing a database of interconnected CSV files. The soc_erd.pdf file contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with SOC_MAIN.csv in the center of the page. ArizonaRights_SurfaceWaterRightsData: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 10 associated CSVs. SurfaceWater.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with ADWR_SW_APPL_REGRY.csv. ArizonaRights_Well55Registry: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 59 associated CSVs. Wells55.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with WellRegistry.shp. CaliforniaRights_eWRIMS_directDatabase: A folder containing a collection of four "series" Microsoft Excel files, as either XLS or XLSX. The four "series": byCounty, byEntity (what type of legal entity holds the right), byUse (stated water use), and byWatershed, are various methods by which the California water rights are organized within the state's database. However, it was observed that by only collecting a single series, not all water rights were being provided. So, essentially, the majority of records within each "series" are copies of each other, with each "series" containing some unique records. ColoradoRights_NetAmounts: A folder containing 78 CSV files, with one file per Colorado Water District. IdahoRights_PointOfDiversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Idaho. IdahoRights_PlaceOfUse: A Shapefile containing the Place of Use polygons for the entire state of Idaho. MontanaRights_WaterRights: A Geodatabase file containing the Points of Diversion and Places of Use for the entire state of Montana. The name of the Points of Diversion Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WRDIV", and the name of the Places of Use Feature Layer is "WRPOU". NevadaRights_POD_Sites: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Nevada. NewMexicoRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of New Mexico. OregonRights_state_shp: A folder containing 36 Shapefiles and are split between "pod" (Point of Diversion) and "pou" (Place of Use) for each water management basin within Oregon. In other words, each basin has one "pod" file and one "pou" file. The "pod" files are point shapes, and the "pou" files are polygons. UtahRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Utah. WashingtonRights_WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD: A Geodatabase file containing both the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Washington. The name of the Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD". WyomingRights: A folder containing four subdirectories, one for each Wyoming Water Division. Each Division directory includes a varying number of subdirectories for each Wyoming Water District. Each District folder contains two copies of the Point of Diversion records for that area, with one copying being in CSV and one copy in Microsoft Excel XLS format.

Lisk, Matthew↗

DOE OSTI2020

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Switched source data from collecting records from each state independently to using the WestDAAT dataset v1.0 - Initial public release Description In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, as well as geospatial data defining the areas in which water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. In addition, while all states make their water rights publicly available, each provides their records in unique formats, meaning that file types, field availability, and terms vary from state to state. This leads to additional challenges to managing resources which cross state lines, or conducting consistent multi-state water analyses. For the first version of HarDWR, we collected the water rights databases from 11 Western States of the United States. In order to preform regional analyses with the collected data, the raw records had to be harmonized into one single format. The Water Data Exchange (WaDE) is a program dedicated to the sharing of water-related data for the Western U.S. in a singular consistent format. Created by the Western States Water Council (WSWC) to facilitate the collection and dissemination of water data among WSWC's member states and the public, WaDE provides an important service for those interested in water resource planning and management in their focus region. Of the services which WaDE provides, the one of the most interesting is the WestDAAT dataset, which is a collection of water rights data provided by the 18 WSWC member states that have been standardized into a single format, much like we had done on a more limited scale with HarDWR v1. For this version of HarDWR we decided to use WestDAAT, specifically a snapshot created in Feburary 2024, as our water rights source data. A full explanation of the benefits gained from this switch can be found in the description of the updated Harmonized Water Rights Records v2.0, but in short it has allowed us to focus more of our efforts on answering research questions and gaining a more realistic understanding of how water rights are allocated. For more information on how the data for WestDAAT was collected, please see the WaDE data summary. Terms of Use While WaDE works directly with the state agencies to collect and standardize the water rights records, the ultimate authority for the water rights data remains the individual states. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. As several of the states update their water rights databases daily, the information provided here is not the latest possible, and should not be used for legal purposes. WestDAAT itself has irregular updates. Additional questions about the data the source states provided should be directed to the respective state agencies (see methods.csv and organization.csv files described below). In addition, although data was presented here was not collected directly from the states, several states requested specifically worked disclaimers when sharing their data. These disclaimers are included here as an acknowledgement from where the water rights data is primarily sourced. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." File Descriptions The unmodified February, 2024 WestDAAT snapshot is composed of nine files. Below is a brief description of each file, as well as how they were utilized for HarDWR. WaDEDataDictionaryTerms.xlsx: As the file's name implies, this is a data dictionary for all of the below named files. This file describes the column names for each of the following files, with the exception of citation.txt which does not have any columns. The descriptions for each file are divided by tab,with the same name as their associated file, within this document. allocationamount.csv: The "main" file of the group, it contains the water right records for each state. Of particular note, each water right is broken down into one or more water allocations. Allocations may be withdrawn from one or more locations, or even multiple allocations associated with a particular location. This is a more subtle and realistic representation of how water is used than what was available in the first version of HarDWR. For the records from some states, this can mean that multiple allocations listed under a single right will appear as rows within this file. citation.txt: A combination of contact information for WaDE personnel, disclaimer about how the data should be used, and guidelines for citing WestDAAT. methods.csv: A file describing the source and method by which WaDE collected water rights data from each state. organization.csv: A file listing the water rights authoritative agencies for each state. sites.csv: This file provides the geographic, and other descriptors, of the physical location of allocations, called 'sites'. To reiterate, it is possible for one allocation to be associated with multiple sites, as well as one site to be associated with multiple allocations. The two descriptors which we were most interested in where the site's coordinates, as well as whether the site was classified as a Point of Diversion (POD) or a Place of Use (POU). As a general rule, PODs are geographic points, while POUs are areas typically represented as property boundaries or irregularly shaped polygons. sites_pouGeometry.csv: For those allocations with a POU site, this file contains the defining points for the associated polygons. variables.csv: A file describing the units in which an allocation's water amount is reported within WestDAAT. This information is essentially a repeat of the 'AllocationFlow_CFS' and 'AllocationVolume_AF' columns within allocationamount.csv, at least for our purposes. watersources: This file describes the source of water from which each site extracts from. For our purposes, this table was used to determine whether the water came from Surface Water, Groundwater, or Unspecified Water.

Lisk, Matthew↗

DOE OSTI2024

Data for Pilot-Scale Processing of Miscanthus x giganteus for Recovery of Anthocyanins Integrated with Production of Microbial Lipids and Lignin-Rich Residue

Chemical-free hydrothermal pretreatment of Miscanthus x giganteus (Mxg) at the lab scale using high liquid-to-solid ratios resulted in the recovery of anthocyanins and enhanced enzymatic digestibility of residual biomass. In this study, the process is scaled up by using a continuous hydrothermal pretreatment reactor operated at a low liquid-to-solid ratio (50 % w/w solids) as an important step towards commercialization. Anthocyanin yield was 70 % w/w at the pilot scale (50 kg of Mxg), compared to the 94 % w/w yield achieved at the lab scale (0.5 g of Mxg). The pretreated biomass was subsequently refined mechanically using a disc mill to increase the accessibility of cellulose by cellulases. Enzymatic saccharification of the pretreated and disc-milled residue yielded 238 g/L sugar concentration by operating in fed-batch mode at 50 % w/v solids content. Two strains of Rhodosporidium toruloides were evaluated for converting the hydrolysate sugars into microbial lipids, and strain Y-6987 had the highest lipid titer (11.0 g/L). Further, the residue left after enzymatic saccharification was determined to be enriched 1.7-fold in the lignin content. This lignin-rich residue has value as a feedstock for the production of sustainable aviation fuel precursors and other high-value lignin-based chemicals. Hence the proposed biorefinery based on Mxg creates an opportunity for generating revenue from multiple high-value products. As the demand for biofuels and biobased products is rising, the biorefinery products from Mxg would create a niche in the industrial sector.

Conversion↗

DOE OSTI2023

Data for Metabolic Engineering of Low-pH-Tolerant Non-Model Yeast, Issatchenkia orientalis , for Production of Citramalate

Methyl methacrylate (MMA) is an important petrochemical with many applications. However, its manufacture has a large environmental footprint. Combined biological and chemical synthesis (semisynthesis) may be a promising alternative to reduce both cost and environmental impact, but strains that can produce the MMA precursor (citramalate) at low pH are required. A non-conventional yeast, Issatchenkia orientalis , may prove ideal, as it can survive extremely low pH. Here, we demonstrate the engineering of I. orientalis for citramalate production. Using sequence similarity network analysis and subsequent DNA synthesis, we selected a more active citramalate synthase gene (cimA) variant for expression in I. orientalis . We then adapted a piggyBac transposon system for I. orientalis that allowed us to simultaneously explore the effects of different cimA gene copy numbers and integration locations. A batch fermentation showed the genome-integrated-cimA strains produced 2.0 g/L citramalate in 48 h and a yield of up to 7% mol citramalate/mol consumed glucose. These results demonstrate the potential of I. orientalis as a chassis for citramalate production.

Conversion↗

DOE OSTI2024

Radial Deconsolidation Leach-Burn-Leach of Five AGR-3/4 TRISO Fuel Compacts after Post-Irradiation Heating Tests

Five AGR-3/4 fuel compacts were previously heated in the Fuel Accident Condition Simulator (FACS) furnace. Three of these compacts were also reirradiated in the Neutron Radiography (NRAD) reactor before the FACS tests. One of these was heated to 1200°C, two were heated to 1400°C, one was heated to 1600°C, and one was held for a period of time at 1600 and 1700°C. After these FACS tests, the compacts were subjected to destructive post-irradiation examination (PIE) via radial-deconsolidation-leach-burn-leach (RDLBL) at INL. The RDLBL process deconsolidated the compacts in multiple radial steps, followed by a final, single-step axial deconsolidation. The samples generated at each step were analyzed for isotopes of key fission products and actinides. After each deconsolidation step, the compact volume was assessed, and this was used to normalize the measured quantities of nuclides of interest to give volumetric concentrations as a function of radial position within the compact. The total inventories of measured fission products and actinides and the radial concentration profiles were compared with their sibling compacts within the same capsule (similar irradiation conditions) that went through RDLBL in the as-irradiated state. These data will be used to refine the fission product transport models.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Subsurface Characterization and Machine Learning Predictions at Brady Hot Springs: Preprint

Subsurface data analysis, reservoir modeling, and machine learning (ML) techniques have been applied to the Brady Hot Springs (BHS) geothermal field in Nevada, USA to further characterize the subsurface and assist with optimizing reservoir management. Hundreds of reservoir simulations have been conducted in TETRAD-G and CMG STARS to explore different injection and production fluid flow rates and allocations and to develop a training data set for ML. This process included simulating the historical injection and production since 1979 and prediction of future performance through 2040. ML networks were created and trained using TensorFlow based on multilayer perceptron (MLP), long short-term memory (LSTM), and convolutional neural network (CNN) architectures. These networks took as input selected flow rates, injection temperatures, and historical field operation data and produced estimates of future production temperatures. This approach was first successfully tested on a simplified single fracture doublet system, followed by the application to the BHS reservoir. Using an initial BHS dataset with 37 simulated scenarios, the trained and validated network predicted the production temperature for 6 production wells with the mean absolute percentage error of less than 8%. In a complementary analysis effort, the principal component analysis applied to 13 BHS geological parameters revealed that vertical fracture permeability shows the strongest correlation with fault density and fault intersection density. A new BHS reservoir model was developed considering the fault intersection density as proxy for permeability. This new reservoir model helps to explore under-exploited zones in the reservoir. A data gathering plan to obtain additional subsurface data was developed; it includes temperature surveying for three idle injection wells, at which the reservoir simulations indicate high bottom-hole temperatures. The collected data assist with calibrating the reservoir model and may lead to converting these wells to producers to access under-exploited zones in the reservoir. Data gathering activities are planned for the first quarter of 2021.

40 EE - Geothermal Technologies Office (EE-4G)↗

DOE OSTI2020

LDM-612: Plans and Policies for LSST Alert Distribution

A major product of the nightly processing of LSST images is a world-public stream of alerts from transient, variable, and moving sources. Science users will access these alerts through community brokers or through a simple filtering service provided by LSST. This document provides a guide to the plans and policies for the alert distribution system to aid science users, broker developers, funding agencies, and LSST Project personnel. It describes the components of the alert distribution system and the data rights required to access specific scientific products. It provides guidelines for organizations developing community brokers and describes the planned capabilities of the LSST simple alert filtering service and Science Platform to aid science users in planning for LSST science.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Real-time ensemble microalgae growth forecasting with data assimilation

Accurate short-range (e.g., 7-day) microalgae growth forecasts will be beneficial for both production and harvesting of microalgae. This study developed an operational microalgae growth forecasting system with ensemble data assimilation (DA). The forecasting system was validated against observed Monoraphidium minutum 26B-AM growth in two outdoor pond cultures located in Mesa, Arizona, U.S. We first examined the relative roles of uncertainty in the meteorological forecast and initial conditions (i.e., algal concentration at the time of forecast) in the microalgae 7-day forecast and found initial conditions dominated the microalgae forecasting skill, suggesting the importance of implementing DA to improve initial condition characterization. To correct the systematic bias in biomass simulations, we developed a particle filter with bias estimation (PFBE) DA method to estimate biases and correct the model forecast. We found the DA forecasting system could improve the 7-day microalgae forecasting skill by about 85% on average compared to model forecasts without DA. These results suggest the potential accuracy of biomass growth forecasts may be sufficient to inform real-time operational decisions, such as harvesting planning, for commercial-scale microalgae production.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

GRIDCERF - Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility

The Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (GRIDCERF) data package is a high-resolution product to evaluate siting suitability for renewable and non-renewable power plants in the conterminous United States. GRIDCERF offers hundreds of individual suitability layers for use with both renewable and non-renewable power plant technology configurations in a harmonized format that can be easily ingested by geospatially-enabled modeling software. It also provides pre-compiled technology-specific suitability layers and allows for user customization to robustly address science objectives when evaluating varying future conditions. GRIDCERF data can be directly used with the CERF (Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility) model to site power plants at a 1km resolution. GRIDCERF includes composite technology siting suitability raster layers for the following utility scale technology configurations. Note that, in addition to technology sub-types shown below, various cooling types are also included (recirculating, pond, once-through, recirculating-seawater, dry-hybrid, or dry) for various technologies. Biomass Conventional (with or without CCS) IGCC (with or without CCS) Coal Conventional (with or without CCS) IGCC (with or without CCS) Natural Gas Combined-cycle (CC) (with or without CCS) Turbine Geothermal Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) - Class 1 through Class 5 resource potential Nuclear Gen 2 Light Water Reactor (LWR) Gen 3 Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Gen 3 AP1000 Refined Liquids Combined-cycle (CC) (with or without CCS) Turbine Solar Photovoltaic (PV) - for capacity factors in the range of 6-18% Utility-scale Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) - for capacity factors in the range of 24-46% Tower Wind (Onshore) - for capacity factors in the range of 5-50% 80m hub height 100m hub height 120m hub height 140m hub height Wind (Offshore) - for capacity factors in the range of 25-60% 100m hub height 140m hub height 160m hub height

capacity expansion↗

DOE OSTI2026

GRIDCERF - Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility

The Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (GRIDCERF) data package is a high-resolution product to evaluate siting suitability for renewable and non-renewable power plants in the conterminous United States. GRIDCERF offers hundreds of individual suitability layers for use with both renewable and non-renewable power plant technology configurations in a harmonized format that can be easily ingested by geospatially-enabled modeling software. It also provides pre-compiled technology-specific suitability layers and allows for user customization to robustly address science objectives when evaluating varying future conditions. GRIDCERF data can be directly used with the CERF (Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility) model to site power plants at a 1km resolution. GRIDCERF includes composite technology siting suitability raster layers for the following utility scale technology configurations. Note that, in addition to technology sub-types shown below, various cooling types are also included (recirculating, pond, once-through, recirculating-seawater, dry-hybrid, or dry) for various technologies. Biomass Conventional (with or without CCS) IGCC (with or without CCS) Coal Conventional (with or without CCS) IGCC (with or without CCS) Natural Gas Combined-cycle (CC) (with or without CCS) Turbine Geothermal Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS) - Class 1 through Class 5 resource potential Nuclear Gen 2 Light Water Reactor (LWR) Gen 3 Small Modular Reactor (SMR) Gen 3 AP1000 Refined Liquids Combined-cycle (CC) (with or without CCS) Turbine Solar Photovoltaic (PV) - for capacity factors in the range of 6-18% Utility-scale Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) - for capacity factors in the range of 24-46% Tower Wind (Onshore) - for capacity factors in the range of 5-50% 80m hub height 100m hub height 120m hub height 140m hub height Wind (Offshore) - for capacity factors in the range of 25-60% 100m hub height 140m hub height 160m hub height

capacity expansion↗