Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “OLI”

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 19 records

Verification Testing of OLI Systems Mixed Solvent Electrolyte Model for the Na-K-Mg-Ca-H-Cl-SO 4 -OH-HCO 3 -CO 3 -CO 2 -H 2 ) System to High Ionic Strength at 25°C

This technical report summarizes model verification results and summary statistics for 41 evaporite mineral solubility cases evaluated by Savannah River National Laboratory using OLI Systems’ aqueous electrolyte thermodynamic modeling software. The 41 verification cases containing a total of 60 solubility curves comprise mineral solubility data from low to high ionic strength at 25°C for the eight-component system Na-K-Mg-Ca-H-Cl-SO 4 -OH-HCO 3 -CO 3 -CO 2 -H 2 O as reported by Harvie et al. (1984). Thermodynamic calculations were executed using OLI Systems’ Stream Analyzer computation module within the OLI Studio software platform (Ver. 11.0, Rev. 11.0.1.9). The Mixed Solvent Electrolyte (MSE) thermodynamic framework was chosen for this investigation because of its superiority in modeling high ionic-strength inorganic salt solutions and actinide redox chemistry and solubility, both of which are relevant to the geological repository conditions at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico. Mineral solubility data in various inorganic salt solutions were digitized and extracted from figures generated by Harvie et al. (1984). For each of the 60 solubility curves, a case-specific chemistry model and input file were generated in OLI Studio using OLI Stream Analyzer and the MSE (H 3 O + ion) public databank provided by OLI Systems. Model simulation results were exported to Microsoft Excel to calculate summary statistics and to generate graphs comparing the OLI model predictions to the solubility data. Summary statistics include residuals (model – data) and concordance (accuracy × precision, where precision is indicated by the Pearson correlation coefficient and accuracy accounts for bias and scale differential). Private databanks were not developed, and activity coefficient model regressions were not performed to improve OLI model fits to the data. Of the 41 model verification plots, 83% have a mean of the percent residuals less than or equal to 25%. Similarly, 75% display a concordance greater than or equal to 0.75. Only seven of the 41 verification plots fail to show good agreement between the model and data. Of these seven, three are relevant to the WIPP repository because they involve the Mg-OH-Cl-SO 4 -CO 3 aqueous system. The remaining four address salt solubilities at the pH extremes (strong acid and strong base). It should be noted that in two of the three Mg-OH-Cl-SO 4 -CO 3 system cases, the regressed Harvie et al. (1984) solubility curve also deviated from the data. Lack of agreement between the OLI model-predicted solubility curves and the data is attributable to one or more of the following: specific solid species are not included in the OLI MSE databank; there is significant variation among the different solubility datasets chosen by Harvie et al. (1984); the OLI MSE model’s thermodynamic parameters were determined using different solubility datasets; and the activity coefficient parameters for certain relevant ion-ion and ion-molecule pairs have not been optimized via data regression. Two recommendations for future work are to (1) evaluate solubility data for the Mg-OH-Cl-SO 4 -CO 3 system at high ionic strength and, if necessary, develop a private OLI MSE database that includes missing species and, where necessary, regressed standard state properties and interaction parameters; (2) perform similar verification testing of the OLI model for actinide solubility data.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Evaluation of New Additions to OLI Software in Predicting Mercuric and Mercurous Species in Liquid Waste Operations

Speciation of mercury during the pretreatment steps of tank waste processing is critical to successful mercury removal prior to vitrification during Liquid Waste Operations (LWO) at SRS. OLI software has been used to predict mercury speciation and activity throughout LWO. The OLI software operates based on a thermodynamic framework called the Mixed Solvent Electrolyte (MSE) framework. The MSE framework allows prediction in theoretically infinitely dilute to concentrated mixtures (e.g., purely solute solutions). Before modification to the MSE framework databanks, certain critical mercury species were missing in the MSE databank, and some thermodynamic data needed to be updated for the OLI software to accurately predict mercury chemical species in SRS waste tanks. To better reflect streams across LWO, new mercury species were integrated into the MSE database. To evaluate the changes to the OLI MSE framework per the Technical Task Request (TTR) and the Task Technical and Quality Assurance Plan (TTQAP), waste stream compositions from Tanks 38, 43, and Tank 50 decontaminated salt solution (DSS) were used as model inputs. Models were developed and executed using both the old and new databases. Compositional analyses from caustic Tank 50 DSS and caustic Tanks 38 and 43 were used as the input streams. These streams represent the most comprehensive chemical data sets where both mercury and tank constituents were measured together. Results for Tank 50 DSS predict HgO as the predominant species in both databases. Both methyl and dimethyl Hg species are present when the new database is ‘on’ and are not predicted with the new database turned ‘off’. The new database predicts a greater amount of HgO and a greater fraction of it in the solid phase. Pourbaix diagrams (potential vs. pH) generated for each Tank 50 DSS were identical regardless of which database was used. Elemental Hg and HgO were predicted in the water stable region under basic conditions. Tanks 38 and 43 follow similar trends as the Tank 50 DSS models. Unlike Tanks 38 and 50 DSS, the Tank 43 Pourbaix plot shows a region of stability for an aqueous HgOHCO3 - species between approximately pH 7-11. In all streams, when MeHg+ is included in the inputs, the new database predicts aqueous MeHgOH as the dominant species. If elemental or dimethyl mercury is in the waste stream, the new database model predicts they are unchanged and remain in those states and quantities. Additionally, the total mercury values are reported for both the measured input data and the OLI output data for all considered tanks. The summary indicates that the percentage error between the measured and calculated values is less than 1% in all cases The reconciliations and generation of the Pourbaix diagrams for Tank 50 DSS took approximately ten times longer with the new database ‘on’. In addition, over the course of that time, models with the new database ‘on’ were more likely to crash or display an error. Some modest performance improvements were noted when modeling with an i7 processor versus an i5. An example error is found in Appendix A. Furthermore, Appendix B provides V&V for two chemical systems analyzed with the OLI software, results were satisfactory. It is recommended to utilize the new databases (i.e., HCO.ddb and SR-Hg.ddb) in future Savannah River Mission Completion applications of OLI to represent pseudo steady-state. Furthermore, the integration and utilization of the new databases (i.e., HCO.ddb and SR-Hg.ddb) in modeling applications (e.g., Aspen) is also recommended.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Geochemical Modeling Using OLI Systems Mixed Solvent Electrolyte Model in Support of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

Aqueous electrolyte thermodynamic models were developed for synthetic Salado (GWB) and Castile (ERDA-6) brines to inform the experimental design and to facilitate laboratory data interpretation in geochemical studies supporting disposal in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). The thermodynamic models, which include the relevant vapor-liquid-solid equilibria for the oxidation-reduction conditions of interest, enable computation of system parameters such as activity-based pH, E h [vs. standard hydrogen electrode (SHE)], ionic strength, total dissolved solids, and solution density; the chemical speciation of all phases; saturation tendencies for thermodynamically feasible solids; and changes in brine chemistry because of the addition of H 2 (g), argon, MgO, Fe(0), and other waste form components. The impacts of oxidation-reduction potential (ORP) and pH on aqueous speciation and dominant solid phases were also assessed with the aid of real-solution Pourbaix diagrams for key elements of interest. In addition to the OLI modeling results, limited measurement data for pH and ORP standards are provided, analyzed, and discussed.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

NEWTS EPA Gasification Dataset and Case Studies

Data from the US EPA Gasification Database containing gasification effluent data from selected U.S. coal power plants. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640 Files include: Original data tab, processed data and charge balance information in "NEWTS_EPA_Gasification_Effluent_Dataset_all_tabs.xlsx" Individual .csv files for data in format for input into aqueous chemistry modeling software (OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench) Data input templates for modeling streams in OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench Case studies for selected solved streams modeled in OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench

gasification↗

Effect of Anoxic Iron Corrosion on WIPP Brine Geochemistry FY23 Final Report (U)

A 280-day study was completed to evaluate the effect of zero-valent iron (Fe 0 ) on the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) brine geochemistry under anticipated reducing conditions. Hydrogen (H 2 ) gas is expected to be present in the repository after closure due to the anoxic corrosion of a vast quantity of iron contained in the waste forms disposed at WIPP; therefore, a background argon atmosphere containing H 2 was chosen for this study. WIPP groundwater brine pH and E h will impact the mobility and fate of plutonium within the repository. Modeling and laboratory results for Castile WIPP brine indicate that equilibrium fa values relative to the standard hydrogen electrode (SHE) are 40 mV more reducing (i.e., more negative) than those for Salado WIPP brine (-480 mV vs. -440 mV, respectively) because of the higher pH of the Castile brine (pH 9 .3 for Castile vs. pH 8.8 for Salado). The E h and pH data were corrected for the effects of high ionic strength. The experimental results for both brines are consistent with thermodynamic predictions using OLI Systems' Mixed Solvent Electrolyte chemical equilibrium model. The measured and corrected pH and E h data from this study are provided in Table ES-I and Table ES-2, respectively. The experimental study, with four test conditions in triplicate, was performed in a dual glovebox with a nominally 3 vol.% H 2 in argon atmosphere (target H 2 range: 3 ± I vol.%). Simulants containing MgO only ( experimental control) and MgO+Fe 0 (WIPP base case) were prepared for both the Salado and Castile brines. MgO was included in all simulants to account for the use of bulk magnesium oxide in the WIPP repository. Fe 0 was included in some simulants to incorporate the effects of the anoxic corrosion of iron and in-situ hydrogen generation in the study. The brine compositions were developed by Sandia National Laboratory (SNL; Xiong, 2008) and have been used in previous WIPP evaluations. The test method (agitation, etc.) is partially based on ASTM D3987-12. Twelve rounds of periodic measurements of pH and E h were performed over the course of the study. Chemical analysis results for liquids and solids (ICP-MS, ICP-ES, IC Anion, TIC, SEM-EDX) are consistent with the pH, E h , and thermodynamic modeling results. This study included the following conditions that deviate from anticipated post-closure conditions following brine intrusion, but were selected to facilitate bench-scale testing to validate modeling of pH and E h for the post-closure WIP P repository: an anoxic glove box atmosphere containing ≤ 4 vol. % H 2 vs. substantially higher H 2 gas concentrations assumed in the WIPP Performance Assessment (PA); a significantly higher liquid-to-solid test ratio compared to the much lower phase ratio anticipated in the WIP P repository; agitation of the simulant bottles to maximize mass transfer; and finally the use of Fe 0 reagents having a much greater surface area than expected in the WIP P repository. Non-representative conditions were chosen for various reasons such as: to provide bounding conservative results, to provide a margin of safety for testing, or to facilitate simulant sub-sampling and analysis. In a parallel effort, aqueous electrolyte thermodynamic models were developed for the synthetic Salado and Castile brines to inform the experimental design, facilitate laboratory data interpretation, and allow extension of evaluations beyond the parameters tested. Thermodynamic modeling simulations including the MgO and Fe 0 additives that are directly relevant to the experimental measurements (e.g., pH calibration curve, ORP corrections) are included in this report. The measured fa of the simulants was close to the OLI model predictions for both brines and was largely controlled by the background H 2 partial pressure in the vapor phase as well as H 2 generated in situ in the aqueous phase by the Fe 0 corrosion. The H 2 gas-phase concentration tested and thermodynamically evaluated was much lower than is assumed in the WIPP PA; however, H 2 (g) concentrations significantly below this level are still predicted to result in very reducing conditions. In conclusion: • The experimental results are consistent with thermodynamic model predictions for fa, pH, and the effects of high ionic strength. • Evidence to date suggests that the H2 concentration in the glovebox atmosphere ultimately determined the final E h values of the simulants and resulted in highly reducing conditions. As a result, little difference was observed between the control simulants containing only MgO and the WIPP base-case simulants that contained MgO and Fe 0 . • This test methodology is recommended for future studies evaluating WIPP repository conditions. The methodology includes: (1) background H 2 in argon with agitation ( or could alternatively include in-situ-generated H 2 in sealed bottles); (2) carefully measured and corrected ORP data ( with much effort focused on allowing the probes to fully stabilize); and (3) ionic-strength-corrected pH data. Other best practices, such as simulant sparging/handling, ORP probe replacement, etc., should also be considered. • The coupling of experimental studies and thermodynamic modeling is also highly recommended because these methods inform and direct one another leading to greater confidence in and understanding of the results.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Evaluation of Hanford Supernatant Waste Evaporation

Storage space within Hanford’s double shell tanks is running low, with only an approximate 4.1 Mgal of space remaining. Construction of additional storage space is not a pursuable option, but treatment of the waste via vacuum evaporation may be used to reduce the waste volume and increase the available amount of free space. However, without proper care and consideration, concentrating the waste may lead to harmful effects such as excessive solids generation, growth in liquid density and ionic concentration, and development of aggressive properties in the solution. OLI Studio was used to simulate a subset of DSTs using BBI ionic concentrations to generate recipes of every tank’s supernatant layer. Vacuum evaporation was performed by taking each simulated solution and bringing it to 50°C under a pressure of 60 Torr, after which the vapor phase was removed from the simulation, and the solution was brought back to ambient temperature and pressure. Several million gallons of space were created, and only about 100-200 kgal of solids were precipitated during evaporation. Minimal changes to the solution’s pitting factor occurred, and no solution is expected to develop aggressive characteristics due to evaporation. Although a theoretical result is provided, it is unique to the specific temperature and pressure value chosen for the simulation, and future transfers of waste are expected to cause changes in waste properties, which would cause the OLI recipes to lose accuracy. Though the results are not anticipated to be used as a target value or a guide, as an exercise, they show that the extent of volume gains could be equivalent to the construction of new DSTs.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Do Arctic mixed-phase clouds sometimes dissipate due to insufficient aerosol? Evidence from comparisons between observations and idealized simulations

Abstract. Mixed-phase clouds are ubiquitous in the Arctic. These clouds can persist for days and dissipate in a matter of hours. It is sometimes unknown what causes this sudden dissipation, but aerosol–cloud interactions may be involved. Arctic aerosol concentrations can be low enough to affect cloud formation and structure, and it has been hypothesized that, in some instances, concentrations can drop below some critical value needed to maintain a cloud. We use observations from a Department of Energy ARM site on the northern slope of Alaska at Oliktok Point (OLI), the Arctic Summer Cloud Ocean Study (ASCOS) field campaign in the high Arctic Ocean, and the Integrated Characterisation of Energy, Clouds, Atmospheric state, and Precipitation at Summit – Aerosol Cloud Experiment (ICECAPS-ACE) project at the NSF (National Science Foundation) Summit Station in Greenland (SMT) to identify one case per site where Arctic boundary layer clouds dissipated coincidentally with a decrease in surface aerosol concentrations. These cases are used to initialize idealized large eddy simulations (LESs) in which aerosol concentrations are held constant until, at a specified time, all aerosols are removed instantaneously – effectively creating an extreme case of aerosol-limited dissipation which represents the fastest a cloud could possibly dissipate via this process. These LESs are compared against the observed data to determine whether cases could, potentially, be dissipating due to insufficient aerosol. The OLI case's observed liquid water path (LWP) dissipated faster than its simulation, indicating that other processes are likely the primary drivers of the dissipation. The ASCOS and SMT observed LWP dissipated at similar rates to their respective simulations, suggesting that aerosol-limited dissipation may be occurring in these instances. We also find that the microphysical response to this extreme aerosol forcing depends greatly on the specific case being simulated. Cases with drizzling liquid layers are simulated to dissipate by accelerating precipitation when aerosol is removed while the case with a non-drizzling liquid layer dissipates quickly, possibly glaciating via the Wegener–Bergeron–Findeisen (WBF) process. The non-drizzling case is also more sensitive to ice-nucleating particle (INP) concentrations than the drizzling cases. Overall, the simulations suggest that aerosol-limited cloud dissipation in the Arctic is plausible and that there are at least two microphysical pathways by which aerosol-limited dissipation can occur.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

CORPSE model with litter decomposition parameters derived from the LIDET dataset

This is a version of the CORPSE model (Carbon, Organisms, Rhizosphere and Protection in the Soil Environment, Sulman et al. 2014) that uses litter decomposition parameters derived from a modified Monte Carlo simulation using the LIDET litter decomposition dataset (Long-term Intersite Decomposition Experiment Team, Harmon 2013). The code also includes the Baseline parameters, and the eight other best parameter sets identified in a modified Monte Carlo simulation. Related publication:Juice, S.M., Ridgeway, J.R., Hartman, M.D., Parton, W.J., Berardi, D.M., Sulman, B.N., Allen, K.E., & Brzostek, E.R. Reparameterizing litter decomposition using a simplified Monte Carlo method improves litter decay simulated by a microbial model and alters bioenergy soil carbon estimates. Description of files:The folder "Input Files" contains one folder for each LIDET site with data necessary to run the model. Note that "(site)" in the filenames below indicates where the LIDET site code appears (see Table 1 for site codes). Data streams include: CORPSE_full_spinup_litter.csv, CORPSE_full_spinup_rhizo.csv, CORPSE_full_spinup_bulk.csv, litterbag_init_100g_6spp.csv: initial C and N (kg C or N/m2) pool values for each soil layer, the litterbag_init_100_6spp.csv file is for the litterbag layer and is the same file for all sites. All initial C and N files have the same columns (Column - Description - Units) uFastC - Unprotected fast decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 uSlowC - Unprotected slow decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 uNecroC - Unprotected necromass carbon - kg carbon/m2 pFastC - Protected fast decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 pSlowC - Protected slow decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 pNecroC - Protected necromass carbon - kg carbon/m2 livingMicrobeC - Carbon in living microbial biomass - kg carbon/m2 uFastN - Unprotected fast decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 uSlowN - Unprotected slow decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 uNecroN - Unprotected necromass nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pFastN - Protected fast decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pSlowN - Protected slow decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pNecroN - Protected necromass nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 inorganicN - Inorganic nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 CO2 - Carbon in carbon dioxide - kg carbon/m2 livingMicrobeN - Nitrogen in living microbial biomass - kg nitrogen/m2 soilT (site) DOY274start.csv: Average daily soil temperature (oC) interpolated from previously calculated monthly values used in DayCent LIDET simulations (Bonan et al., 2013). soilT (site) DOY274start.csv: Average daily soil volumetric water content (VWC) scalar interpolated from previously calculated monthly values used in DayCent LIDET simulations (Bonan et al., 2013). litter production.csv: Average daily litter production values for each site, data sources listed in Table S3 of related publication. litter (site) CN.csv: C:N ratio for each species from LIDET dataset (Table 2, Harmon 2013). (site).csv: Table indicating number of observations for each species decomposed at each site. Instructions: Save the model code ("CORPSE_LIDET.R") and "Input Files" folder in the same folder. Also make a folder for the model output (e.g., "results_Baseline") in the same folder. Set the working directory (setwd) in the model code to the folder with the files saved in step #1. Select the parameter set to use for the litter and litterbag compartments, comment out all other parameter sets. Run code. Output will be saved in the folder made in step 1. Output destination can be changed as necessary in code section called "Running the model." Table 1 LIDET sites and site codes used in model files. Site Code - Site AND - H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest BNZ - Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest BSF - Blodgett Research Forest CDR - Cedar Creek Natural History Area CPR - Central Plains Experimental Range HBR - Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest HFR - Harvard Forest JUN - Juneau KBS - Kellogg Biological Station KNZ - Konza Prairie Research Natural Area NWT - Niwot Ridge/Green Lakes Valley OLY - Olympic National Park OLY Conifer forest SEV - Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge SMR - Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve UFL - University of Florida VCR - Virginia Coast Reserve Table 2 LIDET species and species codes used in model files (6 common species). Species - Species Code Sugar maple (Acer saccharum) - ACSA Drypetes (Drypetes glauca) - DRGL Red pine (Pinus resinosa) - PIRE Chestnut oak (Quercus prinus) - QUPR Western redcedar (Thuja plicata) - THPL Wheat (Triticum aestivum) - TRAE References:Bonan, G. B., Hartman, M. D., Parton, W. J., & Wieder, W. R. (2013). Evaluating litter decomposition in earth system models with long-term litterbag experiments: an example using the Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4). Global Change Biology, 19(3), 957-974. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12031 Harmon, M. (2013). LTER Intersite Fine Litter Decomposition Experiment (LIDET), 1990 to 2002. Long-Term Ecological Research. Forest Science Data Bank, Corvallis, OR. [Data set]. Accessed http://andlter.forestry.oregonstate.edu/data/abstract.aspx?dbcode=TD023. https://doi.org/10.6073/pasta/f35f56bea52d78b6a1ecf1952b4889c5. Sulman, B. N., Phillips, R. P., Oishi, A. C., Shevliakova, E., & Pacala, S. W. (2014). Microbe-driven turnover offsets mineral-mediated storage of soil carbon under elevated CO2. Nature Climate Change, 4, 1099 - 1102. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2436

Juice, Stephanie↗

Topical Report on Water Balance Model Development and Initial Application

This topical report summarizes results from developing a generic dynamic water balance tool which can be used by coal-fired power plant operators to evaluate FGD water management strategies. EPRI is using a statistical software model created on the GoldSim platform and data from coal-fired energy plants to determine the fraction of power plant water needs that can be satisfied by electrodialysis reversal treatment and, correspondingly, the discharge volume and/or byproducts that still need to be managed. The generic model is designed to accept a number of easily obtainable process variables and generate probabilities of resultant water characteristics. The model is also constructed as a universal process flow; one that can be adjusted to accommodate most major components of an FGD blowdown handling system. The generic model is dynamic and utilizes user-inputted operational variation in water quality and quantity to best provide a probabilistic representation of potential performance outcomes. In order to account for complexities of water composition and treatment, a separate chemical modeling software is used to evaluate water chemistry and unit operation performance. The thermodynamic modeling software, OLI Studio, is employed to convert ion data from laboratory analyses into balanced molecular concentrations that are classified as dissolved and suspended solids. The dynamic water model is designed to import a total of 11 species commonly found in FGD blowdown water as molecular concentrations.Water management unit operations are used in the model and categorized by either physical unit operation blocks or chemical unit operations blocks. As the name implies, the physical water treatment blocks are unit operations that are exclusively physical changes to the system (e.g., separations and volume changes). The chemical water treatment blocks are unit operations where chemical changes occur and require the use of OLI Studio to characterize subsequent streams. Water and material balances from three unique coal-fired power plants were obtained and preliminary modeling on the dynamic water balance tool was performed using the extracted data from these power plants. These three power plants were chosen due to their unique configurations and water profiles that represented a variety of operational changes. Results from using the dynamic tool with the three plant configurations are presented and discussed in the context of the existing tool and planned future capabilities.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

NEWTS EPA FGD Effluent Case Studies

Case studies of selected streams from the EPA FGD Database. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench example files. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640

Case Study↗

NEWTS USGS Brackish Water Database

Data from the USGS Brackish Water Database on brackish water compositions from across the US. Data has been filtered for high salinity and completeness of data attributes. Data has been transposed and converted for ease of input into aqueous chemistry modeling software including OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench. Original data from: Qi, S.L., and Harris, A.C., 2017, Geochemical Database for the Brackish Groundwater Assessment of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F72F7KK1.

Brackish Groundwater↗

NEWTS USGS Brackish Water Case Studies

Case studies from the USGS Brackish Water Database. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench files. Original data from: Qi, S.L., and Harris, A.C., 2017, Geochemical Database for the Brackish Groundwater Assessment of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F72F7KK1.

Brackish Groundwater↗

NEWTS USGS Produced Waters Database

Data from the USGS Produced Waters Database on produced water compositions from across the US. Data has been filtered for completeness of data attributes. Data has been transposed and converted for ease of input into aqueous chemistry modeling software including OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench. Original data from: Blondes, M. S., Gans, K. D., Engle, M. A., Kharaka, Y. K., Reidy, M. E., Saraswathula, V., Thordsen, J. J., Rowan, E. L., & Morrissey, E. A. (2019). U.S. Geological Survey National Produced Waters Geochemical Database v2.3 [Data set]. U.S. Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J964W8

Geochemists Workbench↗

NEWTS USGS Produced Waters Case Studies

Case studies from the USGS Produced Waters Database. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench files. Original data from: Blondes, M. S., Gans, K. D., Engle, M. A., Kharaka, Y. K., Reidy, M. E., Saraswathula, V., Thordsen, J. J., Rowan, E. L., & Morrissey, E. A. (2019). U.S. Geological Survey National Produced Waters Geochemical Database v2.3 [Data set]. U.S. Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J964W8

Case Studies↗

Overview and How-to Tutorial Videos for Using NEWTS Data

Overview and How-to Tutorial Videos for Using NEWTS Data Video 1: Overview of NEWTS Database Video 2: How-to tutorial for EPA Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) Effluent NEWTS dataset Video 3: How-to tutorial for USGS Produced Waters NEWTS dataset Video 4: How-to tutorial for EPA Ash NEWTS dataset Video 5: How-to tutorial for Quillinan, et al 2018 DOE Geothermal Technology Office REE dataset Video 6: Tutorial video on navigating the NEWTS Dashboard, with an overview of NEWTS and navigating between the NEWTS Dashboard and Datasets (https://netl-doe.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/a5fa4192f7c6478dab3d6180d9c30b84) Video 7: Additional tutorial video on navigating the NEWTS Dashboard and investigating specific data points in the Dashboard and Datasets Video 8: Re-record of recent webinar giving an overview of the NEWTS Database and Dashboard, including interacting with the NEWTS Dashboard, locating specific data points, and finding the relevant streams in the NEWTS Database and datasets on EDX. Includes overview of the datasets, case studies, and steps for taking stream data from the database and modeling stream data in OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench. Note: Video 3 tutorial is also applicable to the USGS Brackish Water NEWTS dataset.

Aqueous Chemistry↗

NEWTS EPA Ash Dataset Case Studies

Case studies of selected streams from the EPA Ash Dataset. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench example files. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640

Aqueous Chemistry↗

NEWTS EPA Leachate Case Studies

Case studies of selected streams from the EPA Leachate Dataset. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench example files. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640

Aqueous Chemistry↗

Quillinan, et al 2018 DOE Geothermal Technology Office REE Report for NEWTS Database and Case Studies

Produced water data processed into the NEWTS data format for easy input into aqueous chemistry modeling software, including oil & gas and coal bed methane produced waters, and geothermal waters. Includes information on rare earth elements (REEs) and critical minerals (CMs). Case studies are included to demonstrate solved streams using aqueous chemistry software. An input template is provided for modeling stream data in OLI Studio. Original data from: Quillinan, Scott, Nye, Charles, Engle, Mark, Bartos, Timothy T., Neupane, Ghanashyam, Brant, Jonathan, Bagdonas, Davin, McLing, Travis, McLaughlin, J. Fred, Phillips, Erin, Hallberg, Laura L., Shahabadi, Mahdi, and Johnson, Matthew. Assessing rare earth element concentrations in geothermal and oil and gas produced waters: A potential domestic source of strategic mineral commodities (Final Report). United States: N. p., 2018. Web. doi:10.2172/1509037.

Aqueous Chemistry↗