Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Database”

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 1,567 records · Page 87
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Threat Reduction Research Networks: Fostering Sustainable Collaborations Through Trainings for Genomics for Biosurveillance

Scientific research communities can be represented as heterogeneous or multidimensional networks encompassing multiple types of entities and relationships. These networks might include researchers, institutions, meetings, and publications, connected by relationships like authorship, employment, and attendance. We describe a method for efficiently and flexibly capturing, storing, and extracting information from multidimensional scientific networks using a graph database. The database structure is based on an ontology that captures allowable types of entities and relationships. This allows us to construct a variety of projections of the underlying multidimensional graph through database queries to answer specific research questions. We demonstrate this process through a study of the U.S. Biological Threat Reduction Program (BTRP), which seeks to develop Threat Reduction Networks to build and strengthen a sustainable international community of biosecurity, biosafety, and biosurveillance experts to address shared biological threat reduction challenges. Networks like these create connectional intelligence among researchers and institutions around the world, and are central to the concept of cooperative threat reduction. Our analysis focuses on a series of seven BTRP genome sequencing training workshops, showing how they created a growing network of participants and countries over time, which is also reflected in coauthorship relationships among attendees. By capturing concept and relationship hierarchies, our ontology-based approach allows us to pose general or specific questions about networks within the same framework. This approach can be applied to other research communities or multidimensional social networks to capture, analyze, and visualize different types of interactions and how they change over time.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

A System for Standardizing and Combining U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Emissions and Waste Inventory Data

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) provides databases that agglomerate data provided by companies or states reporting emissions, releases, wastes generated, and other activities to meet statutory requirements. These databases, often referred to as inventories, can be used for a wide variety of environmental reporting and modeling purposes to characterize conditions in the United States. Yet, users are often challenged to find, retrieve, and interpret these data due to the unique schemes employed for data management, which could result in erroneous estimations or double-counting of emissions. To address these challenges, a system called Standardized Emission and Waste Inventories (StEWI) has been created. The system consists of four python modules that provide rapid access to USEPA inventory data in standard formats and permit filtering and combination of these inventory data. When accessed through StEWI, reported emissions of carbon dioxide to air and ammonia to water are reduced approximately two- and four-fold, respectively, to avoid duplicate reporting. StEWI will greatly facilitate the use of USEPA inventory data in chemical release and exposure modeling and life cycle assessment tools, among other things. To date, StEWI has been used to build the recent USEEIO model and the baseline electricity life cycle inventory database for the Federal LCA Commons.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2020

Using Residential and Office Building Archetypes for Energy Efficiency Building Solutions in an Urban Scale: A China Case Study

Building energy consumption accounts for 36% of the overall energy end use worldwide and is growing rapidly as developing countries continue to urbanize. Understanding the energy use at urban scale will lay the foundation for identification of energy efficiency opportunities to be deployed at speed. China has almost half of global new constructions and plays an important role in building suitability. However, an open source national building energy consumption database is not available in China. To provide data support for building energy consumptions, this paper used a simulation method to develop an urban building energy consumption database for a pilot city in Wuhan, China. First, residential, small, and large office building archetype energy models were created in EnergyPlus to represent typical building energy consumption in Wuhan. The baseline reference model simulation results were further validated using survey data from the literature. Second, stochastic simulations were conducted to consider different design parameters and occupants’ energy usage intensity scenarios, such as thermal properties of the building envelope, lighting power density, equipment power density, HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) schedule, etc. A building energy consumption database was generated for typical building archetypes. Third, data-driven regression analysis was conducted to support quick building energy consumption prediction using key high- level building information inputs. Finally, a web-based urban energy platform and an interface were developed to support further third-party application development. The research is expected to provide fast energy efficiency building design solutions for urban planning, new constructions as well as building retrofits.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

NCBI’s Virus Discovery Codeathon: Building “FIVE” —The Federated Index of Viral Experiments API Index

Viruses represent important test cases for data federation due to their genome size and the rapid increase in sequence data in publicly available databases. However, some consequences of previously decentralized (unfederated) data are lack of consensus or comparisons between feature annotations. Unifying or displaying alternative annotations should be a priority both for communities with robust entry representation and for nascent communities with burgeoning data sources. To this end, during this three-day continuation of the Virus Hunting Toolkit codeathon series (VHT-2), a new integrated and federated viral index was elaborated. This Federated Index of Viral Experiments (FIVE) integrates pre-existing and novel functional and taxonomy annotations and virus–host pairings. Variability in the context of viral genomic diversity is often overlooked in virus databases. As a proof-of-concept, FIVE was the first attempt to include viral genome variation for HIV, the most well-studied human pathogen, through viral genome diversity graphs. As per the publication of this manuscript, FIVE is the first implementation of a virus-specific federated index of such scope. FIVE is coded in BigQuery for optimal access of large quantities of data and is publicly accessible. Many projects of database or index federation fail to provide easier alternatives to access or query information. To this end, a Python API query system was developed to enhance the accessibility of FIVE.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

Filovirus RefSeq Entries: Evaluation and Selection of Filovirus Type Variants, Type Sequences, and Names

Sequence determination of complete or coding-complete genomes of viruses is becoming common practice for supporting the work of epidemiologists, ecologists, virologists, and taxonomists. Sequencing duration and costs are rapidly decreasing, sequencing hardware is under modification for use by non-experts, and software is constantly being improved to simplify sequence data management and analysis. Thus, analysis of virus disease outbreaks on the molecular level is now feasible, including characterization of the evolution of individual virus populations in single patients over time. The increasing accumulation of sequencing data creates a management problem for the curators of commonly used sequence databases and an entry retrieval problem for end users. Therefore, utilizing the data to their fullest potential will require setting nomenclature and annotation standards for virus isolates and associated genomic sequences. The National Center for Biotechnology Information’s (NCBI’s) RefSeq is a non-redundant, curated database for reference (or type) nucleotide sequence records that supplies source data to numerous other databases. Building on recently proposed templates for filovirus variant naming [<virus name> (<strain>)/<isolation host-suffix>/<country of sampling>/<year of sampling>/<genetic variant designation>-<isolate designation>], we report consensus decisions from a majority of past and currently active filovirus experts on the eight filovirus type variants and isolates to be represented in RefSeq, their final designations, and their associated sequences.

Mononegavirales↗
DOE OSTI2016

THE CHARGE STATE OF POLYCYCLIC AROMATIC HYDROCARBONS ACROSS REFLECTION NEBULAE: PAH CHARGE BALANCE AND CALIBRATION

Low-resolution Spitzer spectral map data (>1700 spectra) of ten reflection nebulae (RNe) fields are analyzed using the data and tools available through the NASA Ames PAH IR Spectroscopic Database. The PAH emission is broken down into PAH charge state using a database fitting approach. Here, the physics of the PAH emission process is taken into account and uses target appropriate parameters, e.g., a stellar radiation model for the exciting star. The breakdown results are combined with results derived using the traditional PAH band strength approach, which interprets particular PAH band strength ratios as proxies for the PAH charge state, e.g., the 6.2/11.2 μ m PAH band strength ratio. These are successfully calibrated against their database equivalent; the PAH ionized fraction ( f {sub i} ). The PAH ionized fraction is converted into the PAH ionization parameter, which relates the PAH ionized fraction to the strength of the radiation field, gas temperature and electron density. The behavior of the 12.7 μ m PAH band is evaluated as a tracer for PAH ionization and erosion. The plot of the 8.6 versus 11.2 μ m PAH band strength for the northwest photo-dominated region (PDR) in NGC 7023 is shown to be a robust diagnostic template for the PAH ionized fraction. Remarkably, most of the other RNe fall within the limits set by NGC 7023. Finally, PAH spectroscopic templates are constructed and verified as principal components. Template spectra derived from NGC 7023 and NGC 2023 compare extremely well with each other, with those derived for NGC 7023 successfully reproducing the PAH emission observed from NGC 2023.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2019

A Correction for GALEX Spectroscopic UV Flux Distributions from Comparisons with CALSPEC and IUE

The CALSPEC database of absolute spectral energy distributions (SEDs) from the Hubble Space Telescope is based on pure hydrogen model atmosphere calculations for three unreddened white dwarf stars and represents the current UV flux calibration standard with a precision approaching 1% for well observed stars. Following our previous work to correct International Ultraviolet Explorer (IUE) fluxes, this paper provides an average correction for the Galaxy Evolution Explorer (GALEX) spectral database that places GALEX fluxes on the current CALSPEC scale. Our correction is derived by comparing GALEX spectroscopic flux distributions with CALSPEC and corrected IUE SEDs. This recalibration is relevant for any project based on GALEX archival spectroscopic data, e.g., UV or multi-wavelength analyses, correlating GALEX spectra with other existing or future databases, and planning of new observations. The recalibration will be applied to our planned catalog of corrected GALEX SEDs.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Leveraging Big Data Analysis Techniques for U.S. Vocational Vehicle Drive Cycle Characterization, Segmentation, and Development

Under a collaborative interagency agreement between the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) performed a series of in-depth analyses to characterize on-road driving behavior including distributions of vehicle speed, idle time, accelerations and decelerations, and other driving metrics of medium- and heavy-duty vocational vehicles operating within the United States. As part of this effort, NREL researchers segmented U.S. medium- and heavy-duty vocational vehicle driving characteristics into three distinct operating groups or clusters using real-world drive cycle data collected at 1 Hz and stored in NREL's Fleet DNA database. The Fleet DNA database contains millions of miles of historical drive cycle data captured from medium- and heavy-duty vehicles operating across the United States. The data encompass existing DOE activities as well as contributions from valued industry stakeholder participants. For this project, data captured from 913 unique vehicles comprising 16,250 days of operation were drawn from the Fleet DNA database and examined. The Fleet DNA data used as a source for this analysis has been collected from a total of 30 unique fleets/data providers operating across 22 unique geographic locations spread across the United States. This includes locations with topographies ranging from the foothills of Denver, Colorado, to the flats of Miami, Florida. This paper includes the results of the statistical analysis performed by NREL and a discussion and detailed summary of the development of the vocational drive cycle weights and representative transient drive cycles for testing and simulation. Additional discussion of known limitations and potential future work is also included.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2017

SPATIO-TEMPORAL DATA MODEL FOR INTEGRATING EVOLVING NATION-LEVEL DATASETS

Ability to easily combine the data from diverse sources in a single analytical workflow is one of the greatest promises of the Big Data technologies. However, such integration is often challenging as datasets originate from different vendors, governments, and research communities that results in multiple incompatibilities including data representations, formats, and semantics. Semantics differences are hardest to handle: different communities often use different attribute definitions and associate the records with different sets of evolving geographic entities. Analysis of global socioeconomic variables across multiple datasets over prolonged time is often complicated by the difference in how boundaries and histories of countries or other geographic entities are represented. Here we propose an event-based data model for depicting and tracking histories of evolving geographic units (countries, provinces, etc.) and their representations in disparate data. The model addresses the semantic challenge of preserving identity of geographic entities over time by defining criteria for the entity existence, a set of events that may affect its existence, and rules for mapping between different representations (datasets). Proposed model is used for maintaining an evolving compound database of global socioeconomic and environmental data harvested from multiple sources. Practical implementation of our model is demonstrated using PostgreSQL object-relational database with the use of temporal, geospatial, and NoSQL database extensions.

Sorokine, Alexandre↗
DOE OSTI2023

Output Data: gcam_usa_v5p3_im3

Output databases and tables supporting the publication: Khan, Z., Zhao, M., Ahsan, H., Wolfram, P., Vernon, C., Rice, J., Iyer, G., Binsted, M., Snyder, A., Graham, N., Kyle, P., 2023. Coevolution of future water, energy and land systems across the United States in response to national and global socioeconomic, climate, and energy policy drivers. (In progress) Earths Future, DOI: XXX with further details available at the meta-repository: https://immm-sfa.github.io/khan-etal_2023_im3gcamusa Folder: gcam_usa_im3_outputs (GCAM USA v 5.3 used for IM3 experiment Output Databases): database_rcp45cooler_ssp3.tar.gz database_rcp45cooler_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp45hotter_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp45hotter_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp85cooler_ssp3.tar.gz database_rcp85cooler_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp85hotter_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp85hotter_ssp5.tar.gz Folder: gcam_usa_im3_gcamextractor_outputs (gcamextractor post-processing of the GCAM databases for specific downstream models ): dataGCAM_cerf.tar.gz (For CERF Model) dataGCAM_demeter.tar.gz (For Demeter model) dataGCAM_go.tar.gz (For GO model) gcamDataTable.tar.gz (All IM3 scenarios)

Climate Change↗
DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a collection of objects stored within an RDate file, stateWaterRightsHarmonized.RData. Each object either describes how one should interact with the other objects, or contains the harmonized water rights data. Here is each object described in detail: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. The column headers for each data frame are: waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. allocatedFlow - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. rightsByState_surface: A list of the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, these lists are the merging of rightsByState_ground and rightsByState_surface by state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Cumulative Water Rights Curves

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. This product is the dataset used as input to the WBM model (Grogan et al., in review; Grogan et al. 2022), and is the result of the step creating cumulative water rights curves described in Lisk et al. (submission pending). This database contains 1,744 individual .csv files, two for each Water Management Area (WMA; see here) in the 11-state region. File naming convention: WMA_[###]_[X]W.csv, where [###] is the unique identifier for each WMA, and [X] is either S for surface water rights, or G for groundwater rights. Column headers in each file: Year: the priority date year CUML: the total cumulative water rights allocated up to this priority date year (ft3s-1) Irrigation: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Irrigation category up to this priority date year (%) Domestic: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Domestic category up to this priority date year (%) Livestock: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Livestock category up to this priority date year (%) Fish: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Fish category up to this priority date year (%) Industrial: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Industrial category up to this priority date year (%) Environmental: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Environmental category up to this priority date year (%) Other: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Other category up to this priority date year (%) In addition to the database files, there is a companion .csv file, called stateWMAs_ID.csv. The main purpose of this file is to provide the means of translating between the ### unique identifier and the various other id of the WMA the file is attached to. This translation file has five columns, which are: basinNum: The official state given alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA basinName: the state provided English name of the area, where applicable state: the state name uniID: a unique identifier we created by concatenating the state name, and underscore, and the state numerical ID ID: a unique numeric identifier we created as a requirement for the files to be used within WBM (Grogan et al., in review)

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Cumulative Water Rights Curves

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. This product is the dataset used as input to the WBM model (Grogan et al., in review; Grogan et al. 2022), and is the result of the step creating cumulative water rights curves described in Lisk et al. (submission pending). This database contains 1,744 individual .csv files, two for each Water Management Area (WMA; see here) in the 11-state region. File naming convention: WMA_[###]_[X]W.csv, where [###] is the unique identifier for each WMA, and [X] is either S for surface water rights, or G for groundwater rights. Column headers in each file: Year: the priority date year CUML: the total cumulative water rights allocated up to this priority date year (ft3s-1) Irrigation: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Irrigation category up to this priority date year (%) Domestic: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Domestic category up to this priority date year (%) Livestock: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Livestock category up to this priority date year (%) Fish: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Fish category up to this priority date year (%) Industrial: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Industrial category up to this priority date year (%) Environmental: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Environmental category up to this priority date year (%) Other: The percent of cumulative water rights allocated to the Other category up to this priority date year (%) In addition to the database files, there is a companion .csv file, called stateWMAs_ID.csv. The main purpose of this file is to provide the means of translating between the ### unique identifier and the various other id of the WMA the file is attached to. This translation file has five columns, which are: basinNum: The official state given alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA basinName: the state provided English name of the area, where applicable state: the state name uniID: a unique identifier we created by concatenating the state name, and underscore, and the state numerical ID ID: a unique numeric identifier we created as a requirement for the files to be used within WBM (Grogan et al., in review) The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataCumulationCurves.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to included within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2025

Projected Urban Morphology of the Los Angeles Area by the Year 2100

This dataset provides projections of urban building morphologies for the Los Angeles urban area at 30-meter spatial resolution. It contains 192 raster files that detail two primary building attributes: building footprint fractions (ranging from 0 to 1) and average building heights (ranging from 0 to 75 meters). The projections account for a wide range of future pathways, covering two Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP3 and SSP5), two population scenarios, two developed land intensification scenarios, and four distinct levels of intensification. The dataset was created using dual Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) trained on 2015 land cover and building properties from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) and Model America datasets. Supporting information on the dataset has been described in the LAUrbanAreaMorphologyProjections2100_README.txt file.

Pandey, Bhartendu↗
DOE OSTI2025

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds Developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2026

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗