Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “geospatial data”

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
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Geospatial Data Workflow Orchestration and Architecture

In an era characterized by explosive growth in geospatial data, the selection of appropriate technologies for data storage, processing, and orchestration is critical for organizations aiming to maintain competitive advantages. This white paper provides a comprehensive analysis of how Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has effectively employed various cloud technologies, including containerized applications, container orchestrators, and workflow orchestrators, to develop robust geospatial data processing solutions. We explore the fundamental concepts behind these technologies and compare multiple deployment models tailored to diverse use cases. Our findings conclude that while Kubernetes has emerged as the preferred platform for truly scalable and fault-tolerant production workflows, the choice of workflow orchestration tool requires careful consideration of team needs, pipeline complexity, and deployment environments. This paper aims to serve as a strategic guide for organizations leveraging geospatial data, articulating the balance between technology choices and practical implementation to enhance workflow efficacy and scalability.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with Mongird et al. (in prep) organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSI+RP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_ep_score_raster.tif solar_msi_ep_score_raster.tif wind_msi_ep_score_raster.tif Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2026

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with the Mongird et al. paper entitled "Can US power grid expansion avoid prime agricultural lands?" and is organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSIxRP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_rp_score_raster.tif solar_msi_rp_score_raster.tif wind_msi_rp_score_raster.tif Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Agriculture↗
DOE OSTI2025

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

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

accessibility↗
DOE OSTI2026

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

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

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

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

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

accessibility↗
DOE OSTI2025

Basin-Scale Structural Features Database

The Basin-Scale Structural Features database provides spatial datasets of faults, fractures, folds, and earthquakes compiled from public, authoritative sources (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey and State Geological Surveys) and aggregated into derivative forms to support subsurface assessments. Recognizing that characterizing basin-scale structural features requires interpreting data that are often ambiguous or lack key information, the source data were evaluated using a knowledge-data framework and geospatial fuzzy logic method (Justman et al., 2020) to represent both measured (observed) and predicted (inferred or potential) structural features as derivative datasets. This workflow employs conceptual models for known structural features and predicted structural features, incorporating geospatial data to estimate potential, even with limited data. The aim is to aid and support an understanding of basin-scale features and identify potential gaps in data and knowledge. As of 4/30/2025, the database includes resources for nine sedimentary basins: Appalachian, Denver, U.S. Gulf Coast, Illinois, Michigan, Permian, Sacramento, San Joquin and Williston. The database is organized by basin and then data category: 1) Faults, fractures, folds, 2) Earthquakes, 3) Topographic, 4) Structural contours and isopachs, 5) Geophysical, and 6) Structural feature density assessment maps.

basin scale↗
DOE OSTI2025

VA EDH Advanced Software Pipeline Framework Report: Enhancing Automation and Scalability

The VA Environmental Determinants of Health (EDH) Advanced Software Pipeline Framework is designed to enhance the efficiency, scalability, and security of geospatial data processing workflows. This framework integrates modern data orchestration and containerization technologies, including Prefect for workflow automation, Docker for containerization, and PostgreSQL/PostGIS for geospatial data storage and analysis. It ensures standardized, reproducible, and automated data processing, supporting VA objectives related to substance use risk assessment and recovery research. The pipeline addresses key scalability and performance challenges through horizontal and vertical scaling, high-performance computing (HPC) integration, parallel processing, task caching, and dynamic resource allocation. These optimizations improve throughput and reduce latency, allowing the system to efficiently manage large and complex datasets. Additionally, security and compliance measures—such as data encryption (SSL), Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), and adherence to GDPR and HIPAA standards—safeguard sensitive information throughout data transmission and storage. A key implementation of this framework includes the automation of shelter list geolocation workflows, ensuring that up-to-date data is readily available for VA decision-making. Lessons learned from this project include the transition from in-memory processing to incremental storage writes, improving resource management and reliability. Future enhancements aim to expand automation, integrate AI-driven anomaly detection, and incorporate high-performance computing resources. This framework provides a scalable, secure, and adaptable solution for managing geospatial datasets, reinforcing the VA’s ability to support clinical and strategic initiatives through data-driven decision-making.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Site and endmember spectra of terrestrial vegetation and soils for the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study, June-July 2025

This dataset provides site and endmember spectra collected during the 2025 Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) campaign. The site spectra were collected to help validate airborne hyperspectral data acquired by the National Ecological Observatory Network's aerial observation platform (NEON AOP). Endmember spectra were collected to augment existing spectral libraries with additional samples of bare surfaces and non-photosynthetic vegetation. All measurements were acquired with an Analytical Spectral Devices (ASD) FieldSpec4 Hi-Res NG (Next Generation) spectroradiometer, which records radiance at 1nm (nanometer) intervals from the ultraviolet to the short-wave infrared (350-2500 nm). The dataset includes spectra measured at meadow sites where the CHESS team also collected vegetation samples for trait analyses. The site spectra were collected with the ASD FieldSpec4 palm grip attachment using an 8° field-of-view foreoptic. Site spectra are integrated measurements of the entire surface within the foreoptic’s field of view. For site-level spectra, the sun is the illumination source. A Spectralon panel mounted on a tripod was used for instrument optimization and white reference measurements for all site spectra. Site spectra were acquired within two hours of solar noon and within 48 hours of a NEON AOP overflight. Site spectra are labeled by date, sampling area, and site number according to the naming conventions of the CHESS campaign’s data management plan. The dataset also contains endmember spectra in the following categories: photosynthetic vegetation (PV), non-photosynthetic vegetation (NPV), bare (soil/rock), and flowers. Endmember measurements were acquired using either the contact probe or the leaf clip attachments of the ASD FieldSpec4. In these configurations, the bulb inside the spectrometer provides the light source for the measurements. The spectrometer was optimized and white reference measurements were recorded using the circular white pucks attached to the contact probe and leaf clip. Because they do not rely on solar illumination, contact probe and leaf clip measurements were collected during a broader time frame than the palm grip site spectra. Some endmembers were measured at CHESS meadow sites, while others were collected within the larger sampling area or in nearby locations (e.g. Gothic Townsite) with similar characteristics. Radiance, reflectance, and metadata files are split into three subfolders according to measurement type: proximal/palm grip (prx), contact probe (cp), and leaf clip (lc). Radiance spectra are provided in ASD file format (.asd file extension). All ASD files can be opened using the provided scripts. Metadata is provided in two formats: CSV file format (no geolocation) and GEOJSON file format (includes geolocation for each spectra). The dataset includes a set of pre-processed reflectance spectra as CSV files (yyyymmdd_rfl.csv). The python scripts and jupyter notebook used to calculate reflectance spectra from the ASD radiance data is included here and was previously published at: https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2446. There is also a folder of JPEG photographs corresponding to selected spectra. We include a protocol document with detailed steps for ASD FieldSpec4 assembly and operations. This data additionally contains a file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (dd.csv) file. Geospatial information: Geospatial data for mapping measurement site locations are in the files CHESS_polygons_lai_UTM.geojson, CHESS_polygons_shrub_UTM.geojson, and CHESS_polygons_meadow_UTM.geojson in the companion geospatial package for the 2025 CHESS campaign, ‘CHESS 2025: Location data for field observations and sampling’ (Henderson et al., 2026). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004) and was funded by EMIT Extended Mission Phase E Science.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2026

Meteoric 10Be Flux Calibration Data for the East River Watershed, Colorado, USA

This data package contains tabular and geospatial data used to quantify and model meteoric beryllium-10 fluxes in the East River watershed, Colorado, USA. The tabular component includes calibration-site data from five glacial moraine sites and includes environmental variables used to evaluate spatial controls on meteoric 10Be delivery, including elevation, mean annual precipitation (MAP), mean snow depth, and mean snow water equivalent (SWE). These site-level data were used to compare observed fluxes with environmental gradients across the watershed and to evaluate the effects of erosion correction on flux estimates. The package also includes supporting slope and curvature values used to assess topographic inputs to the erosion analysis. A second component of the data package contains updated manuscript tables and regression outputs used to summarize the relationships between meteoric 10Be flux and environmental predictors. These tables include meteoric 10Be sample information and AMS results, site-level environmental values, site-level meteoric 10Be inventory and flux values, watershed-averaged predicted fluxes, soil bulk density measurements, fine-fraction values, soil pH measurements, and regression statistics including slope, intercept, coefficient of determination, and p-value. The regression products include both standard linear regressions and regressions in which the intercept is constrained to pass through zero, and they support the analyses presented in the companion manuscript. Together, these tabular files provide the numerical basis for the manuscript tables and the regression-based interpretation of meteoric 10Be flux variability in a snow-dominated mountain watershed. The geospatial component of the package consists of GeoTIFF raster files used to generate the map products presented in Figures 2 and 6 of the companion manuscript. These rasters represent watershed-scale spatial layers for environmental variables and regression-based predictions of meteoric 10Be flux. This dataset contains comma-separated values files (.csv), Microsoft Excel files (.xlsx), GeoTIFF raster files (.tif), and upporting metadata files, including CSV data dictionaries and readme text files (.csv, .txt). The tabular files can be opened with standard spreadsheet software, and the raster files can be viewed and analyzed in GIS software such as ArcGIS Pro or QGIS. Together, these files document the numerical and spatial datasets used to calibrate and predict meteoric 10Be delivery in the East River watershed.

East River↗
DOE OSTI2026

GRIDCERF - Geospatial Raster Input Data for Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility

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

capacity expansion↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html 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 The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. 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 [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html 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 The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. 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 [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
NASA NTRS2026

Hydrology Copilot: A Cloud-Native Ai System for Hydrological Data Analysis

The emergence of AI-driven Earth observation systems promises to broaden access to petabyte-scale geospatial data beyond domain specialists. However, translating this vision into operational scientific infrastructure requires addressing fundamental challenges in data virtualization, code transparency, and domain-specific reasoning. We present Hydrology Copilot, a cloud-native AI framework for natural-language-driven analysis of Earth observation data. To demonstrate operational capabilities at scale, we implement the system using NASA's North American Land Data Assimilation System version 3 (NLDAS-3), which provides surface meteorological forcing and land-surface model output across North and Central America at 1-km resolution, from which drought diagnostics are derived. The system integrates five core contributions: (1) scalable data virtualization using Kerchunk-based cloud optimized access, achieving a 1.5 to 4.6 times improvement in I/O latency across benchmark queries spanning regional single-day extractions (4.6 times speedup) to continental monthly aggregations (1.5 times speedup); (2) transparent code generation through Microsoft Azure AI Foundry agents that expose executable Python workflows for scientific verification; (3) persistent conversational memory enabling multi-turn analytical discourse across sessions; (4) intelligent query validation that enforces dataset boundaries and resolves ambiguous requests before execution; and (5) a multi-agent architecture coordinating query parsing, code generation, and visualization. We evaluate the system through drought-monitoring workflows, demonstrating reliable code generation, accurate results validated against reference computations and the operational U.S. Drought Monitor, and efficient operation across increasingly complex tasks. By bridging natural-language interfaces with rigorous hydrological analysis, Hydrology Copilot advances beyond proof-of-concept demonstrations to provide a deployable framework for operational Earth science applications.

Data virtualization↗
DOE OSTI2026

Vegetation classification map and covariates associated with NEON AOP survey, East River, CO 2018

This package includes geospatial data layers developed to investigate how environmental gradients—specifically topography and near-surface soil properties—drive the spatial arrangement of dominant plant communities in mountainous watersheds. The geospatial products, which support the analysis of these ecological relationships, are derived from airborne hyperspectral and LiDAR datasets acquired by the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) Airborne Observation Platform (AOP), in conjunction with an extensive ground field campaign conducted in summer 2018. This work is part of the DOE Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA) and features geospatial datasets developed based on observations and ground data collected at East River, Colorado, in collaboration with the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) Airborne Observation Platform (AOP) survey in June 2018. Classification Map: - Classification Map (PNG, GeoTIFF): Derived from hyperspectral and LiDAR airborne data using a machine learning approach. - Class Code Mapper (CSV): Associates pixel values with corresponding vegetation/non-vegetation classes. - Classification Reference Data (CSV): Reference data used in the machine learning procedure. LiDAR-Derived Products: - Topographical Metrics (GeoTIFFs): Elevation, slope, curvature, TWI, TPI, solar insolation, and canopy height model (CHM), smoothed with a 5x5 pixel window. Vegetation Indices: - GeoTIFFs of NDVI, NDNI, NDWI: Vegetation indices derived from hyperspectral data. Urban Masks: - Urban Mask (GeoTIFF): Applied to the mapping to convert bare soil classes to urban classes. Software Compatibility: GeoTIFFs: Can be visualized with GIS software or libraries that support GeoTIFF images. CSV Files: Can be opened with any software that handles comma-separated values. The FLMD file provides details and links to the source datasets used to derive the products. The manuscript (in the Method session) provides details on how each product was derived. 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. Update on 2026-03-25: Since the original dataset publication date of 02/28/2020, this package has a new classification map derived by an improved methodology. This update also includes additional ground data that improved the representation of some of the communities. See the methods for further details on what has changed between versions.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2026

CHESS 2025: Field-collected vegetation attributes and site photos

This dataset represents field observations of vegetation samples collected as part of the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) during June and July of 2025. Samples were collected in the field using tablet computers and digital forms, with target data differing by sample type (individual trees, individual shrubs, or 1-meter square plots of meadow and subshrub vegetation). Field samples were collected within 72 hours of airborne data collection using the National Ecological Observatory Network’s Aerial Observation Platform (NEON AOP). The NEON AOP collected waveform LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and imaging spectrometer data in 426 spectral bands from the visible to shortwave infrared. Remote sensing data for the project is available on ESS-DIVE (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). Field data collected included canopy height and per-species horizontal proportional cover for meadow plots, species identity and height information for shrubs, as well as species identity, height, diameter at breast height, and health assessment information for trees. Photos of the focal site and surrounding landscape were taken for all sampling sites and are included in this archive. Green leaves or needles were collected for plant trait and foliar chemistry analysis. This data is archived separately (DOI and citation to be added upon publication). High-precision geospatial data for each sample (crown perimeter polygons for trees and shrubs, plot boundaries for meadow plots) is available here (Henderson et al., 2026). Field and remote sensing protocols largely followed those of a previous field and airborne imaging campaign performed in 2018 (described in Chadwick et al. 2020). Field data from the 2018 campaign can be found here (Chadwick et al., 2020 doi:10.15485/1618130). Because different field measurements were taken for meadow, shrub, and tree sites, data from these three sample types are archived as separate tables (chess_meadow_site_cleaned.csv, chess_shrub_site_cleaned.csv, chess_tree_site_cleaned.csv). Meadow proportional cover data is stored in a separate table (chess_meadow_cover_cleaned.csv). Taxonomy was treated identically between sample types, and the dataset shares a common set of voucher specimens (chess_voucher_IDs_cleaned.csv), as well as a single species list (chess_species_list_cleaned.csv). All taxonomic determinations were performed to the species level, and adhere to the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) backbone taxonomy as of January 10th, 2026 (GBIF Secretariat 2023). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: Field and remote-sensing data acquisition was performed under a grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC24K1005). This work was also 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.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2026

CHESS 2025: Leaf Area Index (LAI) for meadow, shrub, tree, and understory vegetation

This dataset contains Leaf Area Index (LAI) measurements made as part of the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) during June and July of 2025. Data were collected in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, across three study domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). Field observations of LAI were collected within 72 hours of airborne data collection by the National Ecological Observatory Network’s Aerial Observation Platform (NEON AOP). The NEON AOP collected waveform LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) and imaging spectrometer data in 426 spectral bands from the visible to shortwave infrared. LAI measurements were collected using the LICOR LAI-2200C Plant Canopy Analyzer following protocols outlined in the instrument manual (LI-COR 2019). Sampling targeted four distinct vegetation types: meadows, shrubs, trees, and aspen forest understory. We have archived data separately by site type because different field methods were used for each. At meadow sites, measurements were made at the four corners of 1m x 1m plots, with the instrument moving inward toward the center of the plot. At shrub sites, we measured the canopies of individual shrubs. At tree sites, we made measurements within a 10m x 10m subplot centered around a focal tree, with 30 observations taken on a regular grid. At aspen understory sites, we measured overstory trees following the tree protocol and understory herbaceous vegetation following the meadow protocol. All measurements included above-canopy (A) and below-canopy (B) readings, with specific protocols for scattering correction measurements in direct-sun conditions. Data were processed using the R package `rlai` (Worsham 2025). This package includes functions to calculate LAI, gap fraction, apparent clumping factor (Ω), scattering correction, and other canopy metrics. Package contents: Full file descriptions appear in ‘flmd.csv’. Files named according to the convention ‘lai_*_summary_data_cleaned.csv’ contain summary values of LAI, apparent clumping factor (Ωapp), and scattering correction factors for each site. These are the analysis-ready products that most data users will work with. Files named ‘lai_*_metadata_cleaned.csv’ contain additional site-level observations made during field collection. We have also archived intermediate and supplementary data for users who wish to check our processing approach or apply alternative methods. ‘raw_lai_2200C.zip’ contains the raw files as read from the LI-COR instrument, with no processing applied, in TXT format. The zip archive contains subdirectories by site type, which are further subdivided by sampling area. Filenames correspond to the sampling site number. ‘intermediate_results.zip’ contains detailed output from the processing routines, in JSON format. The zip archive contains subdirectories by site type; filenames correspond to the sampling site number. ‘scattering_correction_logs.zip’ contains logfiles from the implementation of Kobayashi et al.'s (2013) scattering correction algorithm. The logfiles report values of several parameters at each iteration of the algorithm, as the model converges toward a stable solution. They are intended for users who want to verify scattering correction performance. The zip archive contains subdirectories by site type; filenames correspond to the sampling site number. ‘spot_checks.csv’ reports LAI and other values for a small number of files processed with LI-COR FV2200 software (LI-COR 2013) using the same control parameters as in our R-based approach. Additional metadata are provided in a data dictionary describing column names and definitions (dd.csv), and in a file-level metadata file (flmd.csv). All zip files can be expanded with common archive utilities. TXT, CSV, and JSON files can be ingested into R or Python computing environments or read in common text editor utilities. Geospatial information: Geospatial data for mapping measurement site locations are in the files CHESS_polygons_lai_UTM.geojson, CHESS_polygons_shrub_UTM.geojson, and CHESS_polygons_meadow_UTM.geojson in the companion geospatial package for the 2025 CHESS campaign, ‘CHESS 2025: Location data for field observations and sampling’ (Henderson et al., 2026). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgement: Field and remote-sensing data acquisition was performed under a grant from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NSSC24K1005). This work was also 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. * Todorov and Worsham are co–first authors.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗
DOE OSTI2026

Sensitivity Analysis of Drivers Water Shortage in the Los Angeles Region During Drought

The code and detailed step-by-step instructions for generating the model output data, processing results, and analysis and plotting are provided at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/Ferencz_et_al_2026_ER_Water. The PyArtes model is a python adaptation of the Artes model. PyArtes uses many of the same input data and optimization model architecture as Artes. Documentation for the PyArtes model is provided in the Supplement to the paper. The primary data product are simulated monthly water shortages for indoor and outdoor demand under a large ensemble of drought scenarios (>13,000). The droughts are hypothetical and are not based on historical time series data of supply sources - though historical data did help inform ranges explored for supply parameters. Demands are informed by recent 2017-2021 water supply data. Demands used for the model can be accessed at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/Ferencz_et_al_2026_ER_Water. Simulations resolve demand for over 90 water providers in the study region. The results report 36 months of water shortage data for each indoor and outdoor demand node. The study also developed a multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural network trained on a subset of the simulated shortage ensemble to emulate worst annual water shortage for a given set of parameter multipliers -- provided the parameter values fall within the ranges sampled in the ensemble. Emulated water shortages for synthetic ensembles are in the MLP-generated shortages folder. The MLP model was used to generate larger ensembles to support Sobol analysis that would have been extremely computationally expensive to simulate. Datasets provided in this repository*: Simulated shortages. These results are used for the analysis for Figures 5, 8, and 9 in the paper, and also to train the MLP emulator. .zip file containing outputs for the 13,312 scenario ensemble. Separate .csv files for indoor and outdoor shortage for each scenario. Rows = demand ids (~100), Columns = months (36) Units = acre-feet/month of shortage (shortage = monthly demand - supply). 1 acft = 1233.48 m^3 .csv files of aggregated shortages derived from the 13,312 ensemble Rows = scenarios (13,312), Columns = demand ids (~100) Units = acre-feet/year (either worst annual shortage or total shortage over the 3-year drought) .csv file of the parameter multipliers scenarios for the ensemble .csv file of the parameter ranges and baseline values the multipliers were applied to MLP-generated shortages. These results are used for Figures 4, 6, and 7 in the paper. mwd higher folder: scenario ensembles, emulated worst year total shortages (acft), and Sobol results Emulated shortages. Rows = scenarios, columns = demand ids, units acft Sobol results. Rows = demand ids, columns Sobol (S1, ST, or 95% confidence interval) value for each parameter mwd lower folder: scenario ensembles, emulated worst year total shortages (acft), and Sobol results same organization as mwd higher MLP performance: performance metrics (R^2, RMSE, BIAS, MAPE) for the testing subset (20% or 2,662 scenarios) and simulated vs emulated worst year shortage (acre-feet/year) for every demand node, MWD wholesale regions, and the entire study region (LAC). Supporting data for figures. Figure plotting scripts in the associated GitHub repo. These files support analysis and visualization. Geospatial Data used for plotting simulated water shortages and Sobol results. Dictionary of full names for demand nodes in the model and estimates of water supply by source type informed by Artes input files and California Urban Water Management Planning data: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Urban-Water-Use-Efficiency/Urban-Water-Management-Plans *Readme files provided for each folder.

drought↗