Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “surface waters”

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 1,477 records · Page 82
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Carbon dioxide treatment of cathodes

A method for producing water resistant cathodes is discussed. The method uses mixing cathode powder with solid carbon dioxide to create a mixture and heating the mixture to a temperature. The heating occurs for a time sufficient to cause lithium carbonate coatings to form on the powder. A method for coating lithium-containing cathode surfaces is also discussed. This method uses simultaneously sublimating solid CO 2 and condensing atmospheric water vapor onto surfaces. Afterwards allowing the lithium to react with the sublimated CO 2 for a time sufficient to create a lithium carbonate film on the surface.

Kahvecioglu, Ozgenur↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

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

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

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

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Amplified bottom water acidification rates on the Bering Sea shelf from 1970–2022

The Bering Sea shelf supports a highly productive marine ecosystem that is vulnerable to ocean acidification (OA) due to the cold, carbon-rich waters. Previous observational evidence suggests that bottom waters on the shelf are already seasonally undersaturated with respect to aragonite (i.e. Ω arag <1) and that OA will continue to increase the spatial extent, duration, and intensity of these conditions. Here, we use a regional ocean biogeochemical model to simulate changes in ocean carbon chemistry for the Bering Sea shelf from 1970–2022. Over this timeframe, model results suggest that surface Ω arag decreases by −0.043 per decade and surface pH by −0.014 per decade, comparable to observed global rates of OA. However, bottom water pH decreases at twice the rate of surface pH, while bottom [H + ] decreases at nearly 3 times the rate of surface [H + ]. This amplified bottom water acidification has emerged over the past 25 years and is likely driven by a combination of anthropogenic carbon accumulation and increasing primary productivity and subsurface respiration and remineralization. Due to this enhanced bottom water acidification, the spatial extent of bottom waters with Ω arag <1 has greatly expanded over the past 2 decades, along with pH conditions harmful to red king crab. Interannual variability in surface and bottom Ω arag , pH, and [H + ] has also increased over the past 2 decades, resulting in part from the increased physical climate variability. We also find that the Bering Sea shelf is a net annual carbon sink of 1.1–7.9 Tg C yr −1 , with the range resulting from the difference in the two different atmospheric forcing reanalysis products used. Seasonally, the shelf is a significant carbon sink from April–October but a somewhat weaker carbon source from November–March.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Mixed‐Phase Clouds Over the Southern Ocean as Observed From Satellite and Surface Based Lidar and Radar

Abstract This study investigates the occurrence of mixed‐phase clouds (MPC, i.e., cloud layers containing both liquid and ice water at sub‐freezing temperatures) over the Southern Ocean (SO) using space‐ and surface‐based lidar and radar observations. The occurrence of supercooled clouds is dominated by geometrically thin (<1 km) layers that rarely contain ice. We diagnose layers that are geometrically thicker than 1 km to contain ice ~65% and ~4% of the time from below by surface remote sensors and from above by orbiting remote sensors, respectively. We examine the discrepancy in MPC occurrence statistics as diagnosed from below and above the cloud layer. From above, we find that MPC occurrence has a gradient associated with the Antarctic Polar Front near 55°S with a rare occurrence of satellite‐derived MPC south of that latitude. In contrast, surface sensors find ice in 33% of supercooled liquid water layers. We infer using observing system simulation experiments and data analysis that space‐based lidar cannot identify the occurrence of MPC except when secondary ice‐forming processes operate in convection that is, sufficiently strong to loft ice crystals to cloud tops. We conclude that the CALIPSO phase statistics of MPC have a severe low bias in MPC occurrence. Based on surface‐based statistics in the SO, we present a parameterization of the frequency of MPC as a function of cloud top temperature that differs substantially from that used in recent climate model simulations.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Surface Atmosphere Integrated Field Laboratory (SAIL) Science Plan

Mountains are the natural water towers of the world, effectively turning water vapor into readily available fresh water through precipitation, snowpack, and runoff. Unfortunately, Earth system models (ESMs) have persistently been unable to predict the timing and availability of water resources from mountains because the source(s) of model error are difficult to isolate in complex terrain with limited atmospheric or land-surface observations. Further complications arise from the gross scale mismatch between ESM grid box sizes and the relevant scales of mountainous hydrological processes. The mountain hydrometeorology community has repeatedly called for integrated atmospheric and land observations of water and energy budgets in complex terrain that span these scales to establish benchmarks against which scale-dependent models can be further developed.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Water Formation Reaction under Interfacial Confinement: Al0.25Si0.75O2 on O-Ru(0001)

Confined nanosized spaces at the interface between a metal and a seemingly inert material, such as a silicate, have recently been shown to influence the chemistry at the metal surface. In prior work, we observed that a bilayer (BL) silica on Ru(0001) can change the reaction pathway of the water formation reaction (WFR) near room temperature when compared to the bare metal. In this work, we looked at the effect of doping the silicate with Al, resulting in a stoichiometry of Al0.25Si0.75O2. We investigated the kinetics of WFR at elevated H2 pressures and various temperatures under interfacial confinement using ambient pressure X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. The apparent activation energy was lower than that on bare Ru(0001) but higher than that on the BL-silica/Ru(0001). The apparent reaction order with respect to H2 was also determined. The increased residence time of water at the surface, resulting from the presence of the BL-aluminosilicate (and its subsequent electrostatic stabilization), favors the so-called disproportionation reaction pathway (*H2O + *O ↔ 2 *OH), but with a higher energy barrier than for pure BL-silica.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2020

Stabilization of Hydroxide Ions at the Interface of a Hydrophobic Monolayer on Water via Reduced Proton Transfer

We report a joint study using surface-specific sum-frequency vibrational spectroscopy and ab initio molecular dynamics simulations, respectively, on a pristine hydrophobic (sub)monolayer hexane-water interface, namely, the hexane/water interface with varied vapor pressures of hexane and different pHs in water. We show clear evidence that hexane on water revises the interfacial water structure in a way that stabilizes the hypercoordinated solvation structure and slows down the migration of hydroxide ion (OH – ) relative to that in bulk water. Furthermore, this mechanism effectively attracts the OH – to the water-hydrophobic interface with respect to its counterion. The result illustrates the striking difference of proton transfer of hydrated OH – at the interface and in the bulk, which is responsible for the intrinsic charging effect at the hydrophobic interface.

74 ATOMIC AND MOLECULAR PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

In-service corrosion and grain boundary oxidation in neutron-irradiated 316 stainless steel baffle-former bolts

Reactor core internal components such as baffle-former bolts (BFBs) are subjected to significant mechanical stress, corrosive environment, and neutron irradiation from the reactor core during the plant operation. Over the long operation period, these conditions lead to potential degradation and of the bolts. In this work, characterization was performed on the oxidized surface of stainless steel BFBs harvested from a commercial pressurized water reactor (PWR) after 40 years of operation. The analysis shows that a complex multilayered surface oxide with six identified layers formed that is different from 2-layer structure commonly observed in model experiments. The oxide varies by composition – predominantly Fe, Cr, and Ni, grain size, and phase, and has features resembling both unirradiated and radiation/ corrosion experiments likely due to the low radiation flux compared to ion-irradiation or the test reactor radiation. In addition, grain boundary oxidative attack featured a pathway for Fe and other elements to move from the metal matrix to the outermost oxide. In conclusion, the results help assess PWR lifetime extension, put into context previous experimental studies, and provide input for designing experiments combining radiation and corrosion effects.

Baffle-former bolt↗
DOE OSTI2025

Effects of PFOS on the behavior, growth, emergence, and predation susceptibility of larval mosquitoes ( Culex quinquefasciatus )

Per-/polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been commonly used over several decades for a variety of products and are very persistent in the environment. However, not much is known about their direct effects on aquatic invertebrates and their ecosystems. We examined the survival, behavior, development, and predation susceptibility of mosquito larvae Culex quinquefasciatus exposed to concentrations of perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) ranging from 0.02 to 453.7 µg/L. PFOS exposure resulted in reduced larval survival, with a 48 hour LC50 (concentration with 50 % mortality) of 255.99 µg/L. PFOS exposure also resulted in reduced developmental success and slower maturation to adulthood (and thus slower emergence from the water) compared to control larvae. PFOS also resulted in delays in reaction to prodding stimuli, which were meant to simulate a predator attack, and longer reactions to prodding. Larvae exposed to PFOS also spent more time at the bottom of the water column, rather than at the surface where respiration takes place. Effects of larval mosquito PFOS exposure on predation by unexposed damselfly naiads (genus Ischnura) were not detected. Overall, this research suggests that PFOS impacts mosquito larvae survival, behavior, development, and adult emergence, which could have important implications for food webs or public health given the role of mosquitos as disease vectors.

Food web dynamics↗
DOE OSTI2021

La 3+ and Y 3+ interactions with the carboxylic acid moiety at the liquid/vapor interface: Identification of binding complexes, charge reversal, and detection limits

Specific interactions of yttrium and lanthanum ions with a fatty acid Langmuir monolayer were investigated using vibrational sum frequency spectroscopy. The trivalent ions were shown to interact with the charged form of the carboxylic acid group from nanomolar concentrations (<300 nM). Analysis of the spectral features from both the symmetric and the asymmetric carboxylate modes reveals the presence of at least three distinct coordination structures linked to specific binding configurations. Although the same species were identified for both La 3+ and Y 3+ , they display a different concentration dependence, highlighting the ion-specificity of the interaction. From the analysis of the response of interfacial water molecules, the reversal of the surface charge, as well as the formation of yttrium hydroxide complexes, were detected upon increasing the amount of salt in solution. The binding interaction and kinetics of absorption are sensitive to the solution pH, showing a distinct ion speciation in the interfacial region when compared to the bulk. Changing the subphase pH or adding a monovalent background electrolyte that promotes deprotonation of the carboxylic acid headgroup could further improve the detection limit of La 3+ and Y 3+ to concentrations < 100 nM. These findings demonstrate that nM concentrations of trace metals contaminants, typically found on monovalent salts, can significantly influence the binding structure and kinetics in Langmuir monolayers.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2024

Solid-State Hydroxide Ion Conductivity in Silver(I) Oxide, Ag 2 O

Silver (I) oxide, Ag 2 O, precipitated as microcrystals by combining aqueous silver(I) nitrate and KOH solutions, was found to be a solid-state hydroxide ion conductor with ionic conductivity on the order of 10 -3 S/cm. The proton chemical shifts at 4.87 and -7.35 ppm measured by solid-state 1H-NMR experiments are attributed to water molecules and in-lattice OH - coordinated to silver, respectively. The lack of spinning sidebands around the 4.87 ppm peak indicates rapid reorientation on the NMR timescale, suggesting that the water molecules are adsorbed to the surface of the Ag 2 O crystals. Pulsed field gradient measurements gave similar diffusion coefficients (2 x 10 -7 cm 2 /s at 298K) for all three proton environments indicating chemical exchange between sites on the millisecond timescale. The activation energy for OH - diffusion measured by NMR (0.18 eV) was comparable to that obtained by conductivity measurements and density functional theory (DFT) electronic structure calculations. Furthermore, the calculated Pourbaix diagram of Ag 2 O is consistent with the slightly lower sample density observed in He pycnometry and thermogravimetric measurements.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2020

Grain Size Variations in the Murray Formation: Stratigraphic Evidence for Changing Depositional Environments in Gale Crater, Mars

The lowermost exposure of the Murray formation in Gale crater, Mars, was interpreted as sediment deposited in an ancient lake based on data collected by the Curiosity rover. Constraining the stratigraphic extent and duration of this environment has important implications for the paleohydrology of Gale. Insights into early Martian environments and paleofluid flow velocity can be obtained from grain size in rocks. Visual inspection of grain size is not always available for rocks investigated at field sites on Mars due to limited image coverage. But grain sizes can also be estimated from the Gini Index Mean Score, a grain-size proxy that uses point-to-point chemical variations in ChemCam Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy data. Here, new Gini Index Mean Score results indicate that the Murray formation is dominated by mudstones with grains smaller than the spatial resolution of all rover cameras. Intervals of fine to coarse sandstone also are present, some of which are verified using observations of grain size and sedimentary structures in associated images. Overall, results demonstrate that most of the Murray consists of mudstone, suggesting settling of grains from suspension in low energy depositional environments such as lakes. Some of the mudstones contain desiccation cracks indicating periods of drying with a lowering of lake water level. However, beds and lenses of cross-bedded sandstones are common at specific intervals, suggesting episodes of fluvial and possibly eolian deposition. The persistence of lacustrine deposits interspersed with fluvial deposits suggests that liquid water was sustained on the Martian surface for tens of thousands to millions of years.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Aerosol Direct Radiative Effects at the ARM SGP and TWP Sites: Clear Skies

The clear-sky aerosol direct radiative effect (DRE) was estimated at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Southern Great Plains (SGP) and Tropical Western Pacific (TWP) sites. The NASA Langley Fu-Liou radiation model was used with observed inputs including aerosol vertical extinction profile from the Raman lidar; spectral aerosol optical depth (AOD), single-scattering albedo and asymmetry factor from Aerosol Robotic Network; temperature and water vapor profiles from radiosondes; and surface shortwave (SW) spectral albedo from radiometers. A radiative closure experiment was conducted for clear-sky conditions. The mean differences of modeled and observed surface downwelling SW total fluxes were 1 W m-2 at SGP and 2 W m -2 at TWP, which are within observational uncertainty. At SGP, the estimated annual mean clear-sky aerosol DRE is -3.00 W m -2 at the top of atmosphere (TOA) and -6.85 W m -2 at the surface. The strongest aerosol DRE of -4.81 (-10.77) W m -2 at the TOA (surface) are in the summer when AODs are largest. The weakest aerosol DRE of -.28 (-2.77) W m -2 at the TOA (surface) are in November–January when AODs and single-scattering albedos are lowest. At TWP, the annual mean clear-sky DRE is -2.82 W m-2 at the TOA and -10.34 W m -2 at the surface. The strongest aerosol DRE of -5.95 (-22.20) W m -2 at the TOA (surface) are in November (October) due to the biomass burning season’s peak. The weakest aerosol DRE of -0.96 (-4.16) W m -2 at the TOA (surface) are in March (April) when AODs are smallest.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2021

All-sky aerosol direct radiative effects at the ARM SGP site

All-sky aerosol direct radiative effect (DRE) was estimated for the first time at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Southern Great Plains site using multi-year ground-based observations. The NASA Langley Fu-Liou radiation model was employed. Observed inputs for the radiation model include aerosol and cloud vertical extinction profile from Raman lidar; spectral aerosol optical depth, single-scattering albedo, and asymmetry factor from Aerosol Robotic Network; cloud water content profiles from radars; temperature and water vapor profiles from radiosondes; and surface shortwave spectral albedo from radiometers. A cloudy-sky radiative closure experiment was performed. The relative mean differences between modeled and observed surface downwelling shortwave total fluxes were 6% (7%) for transparent (opaque) cloudy-skies. The estimated annual mean all-sky aerosol DRE is -2.13±0.54W m -2 at the top of atmosphere (TOA) and -5.95±0.87 W m -2 at the surface, compared to -3.00±0.58 W m -2 AND -6.85±1.00 W m -2 , respectively, under clear-sky conditions. The seasonal cycle of all-sky aerosol DRE is similar to that of the clear-sky, except with secondary influences of the clouds: The cloud radiative effect is strongest (most negative) in the spring, which reduces the all-sky aerosol DRE. The relative uncertainties in all-sky aerosol DRE due to measurement errors are generally comparable to those in clear-sky conditions except for the aerosol single-scattering albedo. Finally, the TOA all-sky aerosol DRE relative uncertainty due to aerosol single-scattering albedo uncertainty is larger than that in clear-sky, leading to a larger total relative uncertainty. The measurement errors in cloud properties have small effects on the all-sky aerosol DRE.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Biogeochemical Equilibrium Responses to Maximal Productivity in High Nutrient Low Chlorophyll Regions

Whether ocean iron fertilization in high nutrient low chlorophyll (HNLC) regions is a practical geoengineering strategy to combat climate warming has been debated because the fate of absorbed carbon by the ocean remains unclear. Here, we use an optimized oceanic biogeochemical inverse model to explore the equilibrium responses to increased productivity in major HNLC regions. We find that an overall downward shift of nutrients and carbon from the surface and intermediate to the deep waters with maximal productivity in the HNLC Southern Ocean (SO), North Pacific (NP) and eastern equatorial Pacific (EP). The efficiency of soft tissue pump is increased by 37.8%, 2.7% and 5.4% in the SO, EP and NP simulation while atmospheric CO 2 concentration is drawn down by 45.1, 3.4 and 6.7 ppm, respectively. Meanwhile, global mean oxygen is decreased by 21.1%, 1.3% and 2.4% in the SO, EP and NP simulation, accompanied by an expansion of oxygen minimum zones by 400%, 26% and 63%, respectively. Our study indicates that iron fertilization has the potential to be an effective geoengineering approach to mitigate climate warming but also has a strong impact on the development of ocean hypoxia.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Synoptic Drivers of Atmospheric River Induced Precipitation Near Dronning Maud Land, Antarctica

Atmospheric rivers (ARs) that reach the Antarctic Ice Sheet (AIS) transport anomalous moisture from lower latitudes and can impact the AIS via extreme precipitation and increased downward longwave radiation. ARs contribute significantly to the interannual variability of precipitation over the AIS and thus are likely to play a key role in understanding future changes in the surface mass balance of the AIS. Dronning Maud Land (DML) is one of four maxima in AR frequency over coastal East Antarctica, with AR precipitation explaining 77% of the interannual variability in precipitation for this region. We employ a 16-node self-organizing map (SOM) trained with MERRA-2 sea-level pressure anomalies to identify synoptic-scale environments associated with landfalling ARs in and around DML. Node composites of atmospheric variables reveal common drivers of precipitation associated with ARs reaching DML including anomalous high-low surface pressure couplets, anomalously high integrated water vapor, and coastal barrier jets. Using a quasi-geostrophic framework, we find that upward vertical motion associated with the occlusion process of attendant cyclones dominates atmospheric lift in AR environments. We further identify mechanisms that explain the variability in AR precipitation intensity across nodes, such as the lift associated with the occlusion process of attendant cyclones and the spatial coincidence of ascent induced by the occlusion process and frontogenesis. Here, the latter suggests that ARs making landfall during the mature phase of cyclogenesis result in higher precipitation intensity compared to landfalling ARs that occur during the occluded phase.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗