Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Climate Science Visualization”

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.

228 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2019

Realized ecological forecast through an interactive Ecological Platform for Assimilating Data (EcoPAD, v1.0) into models

Abstract. Predicting future changes in ecosystem services is not only highly desirable but is also becoming feasible as several forces (e.g., available big data, developed data assimilation (DA) techniques, and advanced cyber-infrastructure) are converging to transform ecological research into quantitative forecasting. To realize ecological forecasting, we have developed an Ecological Platform for Assimilating Data (EcoPAD, v1.0) into models. EcoPAD (v1.0) is a web-based software system that automates data transfer and processing from sensor networks to ecological forecasting through data management, model simulation, data assimilation, forecasting, and visualization. It facilitates interactive data–model integration from which the model is recursively improved through updated data while data are systematically refined under the guidance of model. EcoPAD (v1.0) relies on data from observations, process-oriented models, DA techniques, and the web-based workflow. We applied EcoPAD (v1.0) to the Spruce and Peatland Responses Under Climatic and Environmental change (SPRUCE) experiment in northern Minnesota. The EcoPAD-SPRUCE realizes fully automated data transfer, feeds meteorological data to drive model simulations, assimilates both manually measured and automated sensor data into the Terrestrial ECOsystem (TECO) model, and recursively forecasts the responses of various biophysical and biogeochemical processes to five temperature and two CO 2 treatments in near-real time (weekly). Forecasting with EcoPAD-SPRUCE has revealed that mismatches in forecasting carbon pool dynamics are more related to model (e.g., model structure, parameter, and initial value) than forcing variables, opposite to forecasting flux variables. EcoPAD-SPRUCE quantified acclimations of methane production in response to warming treatments through shifted posterior distributions of the CH 4 :CO 2 ratio and the temperature sensitivity ( Q 10 ) of methane production towards lower values. Different case studies indicated that realistic forecasting of carbon dynamics relies on appropriate model structure, correct parameterization, and accurate external forcing. Moreover, EcoPAD-SPRUCE stimulated active feedbacks between experimenters and modelers to identify model components to be improved and additional measurements to be taken. It has become an interactive model–experiment (ModEx) system and opens a novel avenue for interactive dialogue between modelers and experimenters. Altogether, EcoPAD (v1.0) acts to integrate multiple sources of information and knowledge to best inform ecological forecasting.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

SPARTAN and IMPROVE Comparison Experiment (SPICE) Interim Campaign Report

SPICE (the SPARTAN and IMPROVE Comparison Experiment) aims to obtain and quantify comparisons between aerosol PM 2.5 mass concentration measurements from the University of Oklahoma (OU) Surface Particulate Matter Network (SPARTAN) station and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE) station hosted by the U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) User Facility at ARM’s Southern Great Plains (SGP) observatory in Oklahoma. Aerosols—both natural and anthropogenic—affect human populations in multiple ways. Much of ARM’s research focuses on how aerosols influence weather and climate through their optical and radiative effects, as well as their impacts on clouds and precipitation. However, aerosols also pose direct risks to humans and other organisms through inhalation, with the severity of health impacts depending on particle size, chemical composition, and duration of exposure. The IMPROVE network was established by the U.S. EPA to monitor air quality, including visible clarity as well as total and chemically speciated aerosol mass concentrations. The ARM SGP site hosts the IMPROVE SOGP station. Separately, the SPARTAN network operates a globally distributed set of stations similar to IMPROVE but with an emphasis on remote deployment and semi-autonomous operation for use beyond the borders of the United States (IMPROVE only operates within the U.S.). The University of Oklahoma operates a SPARTAN station. To establish confidence in the OU SPARTAN instrumentation and measurement protocol relative to the EPA-certified IMPROVE station, the OU SPARTAN station is currently deployed at SGP in close proximity to the IMPROVE SOGP station. The SPICE campaign was envisioned as a contiguous calendar-year effort for 2025 to capture seasonal variation in mass loading as well as composition. However, independent of the SPICE campaign, the SPARTAN network adopted a new filter construction part-way through the year, interrupting our contiguous data set. Thus, to obtain a contiguous data set with a uniform consistent configuration, SPICE desires an extension through 2026.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

Validation and quantification of uncertainty in coupled climate models using network analysis

We developed a fast, robust and scalable methodology to examine, quantify, and visualize climate patterns and their relationships. It is based on a set of notions, algorithms and metrics used in the study of graphs, referred to as complex network analysis. This approach can be applied to explain known climate phenomena in terms of an underlying network structure and to uncover regional and global linkages in the climate system, while comparing general circulation models outputs with observations. The proposed method is based on a two-layer network representation, and is substantially new within the available network methodologies developed for climate studies. At the first layer, gridded climate data are used to identify ‘‘areas’’, i.e., geographical regions that are highly homogeneous in terms of the given climate variable. At the second layer, the identified areas are interconnected with links of varying strength, forming a global climate network. The robustness of the method (i.e. the ability to separate between topological distinct fields, while identifying correctly similarities) has been extensively tested. It has been proved that it provides a reliable, fast framework for comparing and ranking the ability of climate models of reproducing observed climate patterns and their connectivity. We further developed the methodology to account for lags in the connectivity between climate patterns and refined our area identification algorithm to account for autocorrelation in the data. The new methodology based on complex network analysis has been applied to state-of-the-art climate model simulations that participated to the last IPCC (International Panel for Climate Change) assessment to verify their performances, quantify uncertainties, and uncover changes in global linkages between past and future projections. Network properties of modeled sea surface temperature and rainfall over 1956–2005 have been constrained towards observations or reanalysis data sets, and their differences quantified using two metrics. Projected changes from 2051 to 2300 under the scenario with the highest representative and extended concentration pathways (RCP8.5 and ECP8.5) have then been determined. The network of models capable of reproducing well major climate modes in the recent past, changes little during this century. In contrast, among those models the uncertainties in the projections after 2100 remain substantial, and primarily associated with divergences in the representation of the modes of variability, particularly of the El Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), and their connectivity, and therefore with their intrinsic predictability, more so than with differences in the mean state evolution. Additionally, we evaluated the relation between the size and the ‘strength’ of the area identified by the network analysis as corresponding to ENSO noting that only a small subset of models can reproduce realistically the observations.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Subsidence Measurements at the Teller 27 Field Site, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2021

In September 2021, differential GPS (dGPS) points were collected in areas of visual subsidence in the Teller watershed near mile marker 27 of the Bob Blodgett Nome-Teller Memorial Highway on the Seward Peninsula of Alaska. This study aimed to understand how structural permafrost loss is affecting meter-scale ground elevation. As ice thaws, heaving and slumping of the landscape creates new microtopographical features on the landscape that may alter surface hydrology and soil moisture and thus plant community composition and biogeochemical cycling. The Teller 27 field site is underlain with discontinuous permafrost, so the landscape features a variety of permafrost features. We collected ground elevations from eight subsidence areas in two forms: 1) Transects were sampled laterally through areas of ground subsidence to capture the high edges and low spots where the earth slumped. 2) The circumference of the subsidence area was sampled in order to measure the ground area affected by subsidence. These data were collected with an Emlid Reach RS2 dGPS and a base station. This dataset includes one *.csv of dGPS locations of the eight subsidence locations and one *.kml of measurement locations.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic) was a 15-year research effort (2012-2027) to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy’s Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Field and Model Data Associated with the Manuscript “Drivers of Streamflow Intermittency in Humid Regions: 1. Evaluating Above- and Below-ground Controls of Flow Persistence in a Forested Catchment”

This package contains field data, modeling files, and scripts supporting the investigation of the drivers of streamflow intermittency in a forested catchment. It includes the field data collected from electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) surveys, ground penetrating radar (GPR), continuous self-potential (SP) monitoring, electromagnetic (EM) imaging, groundwater and stilling well. In addition, it contains the data and results of the coupled water- and electrical-flow model developed using the COMSOL Multiphysics and Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), as well as software files and Jupyter notebooks used to process the data and generate figures in the manuscript submitted for peer review. The data archive is organized in the following directories: 1) Climate Includes hourly precipitation and daily evapotranspiration time series (2024 – 2025) provided as CSV files, alongside a text file detailing dataset units. 2) Coupled_model Contains two subfolders: Synthetic and Field_Application subfolder. Synthetic subfolder contains the ATS XML input script (can be opened using any code editor) for the four synthetic hydrological cases tested (Connected and gaining, Connected and losing, Disconnected and losing, and dry stream). It also includes other experimental cases to test the influence of precipitation and concentration gradient. For each synthetic case, the flow model simulation is executed using the ATS XML scripts and the included Python script (generate_data_set.py) to convert ATS output to COMSOL-ready input. COMSOL Multiphysics template (.mph can be opened with the commercial software COMSOL and requires a license) is executed using the ATS output data to simulate the potential field. It also includes the Synthetic_model_plot.ipynb (can be opened using any code editor) to visualize the SP result and generate manuscript figures. The data subfolder contains mesh files to run both the ATS (.exo and .stl files can be viewed using Paraview; .h5 files can be opened using HDFView software and h5py Python package) and COMSOL models. Field_Application subfolder contains two subfolders: ES_MDA_inversion and Final_Model. ES_MDA_inversion contains the Python script (.py can be opened using any code editor) and SP observation data used to run the Ensemble Smoother with Multiple Data Assimilation (ES-MDA) inversion sequence to get the optimal model parameters. The Final_model subfolder contains the ATS XML input scripts, data files, output data for the two SP sites. The same workflow steps outlined for the Synthetic subfolder apply here. It also contains the Jupyter notebook (Plot_final_calib.ipynb) to visualize the results of the modeled SP, stream-groundwater exchange and moisture content. 3) Discharge Includes the electrical conductivity (EC) time series (provided as CSV files) from salt slug injections. It also includes the Jupyter notebook (Discharge_process.ipynyb) used to estimate discharge. All discharge measurements collated into rating_curve_processed.csv 4) EM Contains the CSV file of the EM data from the DUALEM-42, including spatial coordinates (x, y, z), apparent conductivity, and in-phase measurements at 2 m coil separations for horizontal coplanar (HCP) and perpendicular (PRP) geometries. 5) ERT Contains raw resistivity data (provided as CSV files), spatial location of each of the electrodes (provided as CSV files), and files used for the resistivity inversion (.resipy can be opened with the open-source ResIPy software). 6) GPR Includes GPR field datasets collected at 100 MHz and 250 MHz antenna frequencies, along with the processing/interpretation project file (GPR_process.gpz can be viewed using EKKO_Project 6, a commercial software by Sensors & Software that requires a license). 7) Slug_test Includes the slug test data at all the groundwater wells provided as CSV files, as well as the Jupyter notebook (Slug_test.ipynb) for calculating hydraulic conductivity. 8) SP Contains the SP data collected in field at the two SP sites (one in the perennial reach and the other in the intermittent reach), provided as DAT files. 9) Well_data Contains two subfolders: 1) Raw, which provides unprocessed pressure, electrical conductivity and temperature timeseries downloaded from the loggers in all the groundwater and stilling wells, and 2) Processed, which contains sorted, QA/QC timeseries data for each well. The data archive also contains data_process.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook used for field data analysis and generating figures (plotting well, SP, climate, and discharge data, as well as calculating head gradient at sites with nested groundwater wells). It also includes DTW.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook containing the code for the dynamic time warping (DTW) with sliding window to evaluate SP signal synchronicity.

ATS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Macro-physical Properties of Shallow Cumulus from Integrated ARM Observations (Final Report)

Fair-weather shallow cumuli (ShCu) play an important role in many climate-related processes. Irregular geometry of ShCu and their strong temporal and spatial variability make it challenging to observe ShCu holistically and to represent them correctly in climate models. To improve ShCu parameterizations, information on both vertically and horizontally resolved cloud properties is required. Commonly, the vertically resolved cloud properties are provided by zenith pointing lidar-radar observations with a very narrow field of view (FOV). Thus, these “pencil-beam” properties may not be representative of a larger surrounding area. Limited number of areal-averaged cloud properties, such as fractional sky cover (FSC), are offered typically by wide-FOV observations. The main goal of our project was to integrate advantages of the narrow-FOV (vertical structure of clouds) and wide-FOV (spatial arrangement of clouds) observations for an improved characterization of single-layer ShCu observed at the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Southern Great Plains (SGP) site for an 18-yr period (2000-2017). There are four major accomplishments of our project, First, an updated operational cloud classification for days with ShCu has been suggested and evaluated through a detailed comparison with the manually curated records. Our classification extends successfully the latest ARM cloud type Value Added Product (VAP) based on the Active Remote Sensing of Clouds (ARSCL) cloud product by incorporating both cloud fraction (CF) provided by narrow-FOV ceilometer data and FSC from wide-FOV images offered by a Total Sky Imager (TSI). Moreover, our classification allows one to identify impact of instrumentation changes at the SGP site, namely the transition to KAZRARSCL with the updated cloud radar, on the identification of periods with single-layer ShCu. Second, a new approach that resolves cloud area distributions for a given region (up to 4x4 km 2 ) has been suggested and cloud equivalent diameters (CEDs) have been estimated for the first time. These estimations have been performed over a wide range of cloud sizes (about 0.01–3.5 km) with high temporal resolution (30s) using wide-FOV TSI images and cloud base height (CBH) provided by complementary narrow-FOV lidar measurements. Our simple and computationally inexpensive approach offers a previously unavailable dataset for process studies in the convective boundary layer and evaluation of ShCu parameterizations in cloud-resolving models. Third, a long-term integrated record of ShCu macrophysical properties has been developed. The developed record represents the longest available compilation of events with ShCu and includes (i) a novel visualization of the spatial variability in cloud cover both along- and across-wind directions, (ii) updated estimates of narrow-FOV CF and wide-FOV FSC, (iii) updated narrow-FOV CBH, and (iv) complementary data, such as wind speed and direction from the 915-MHz Radar Wind Profiler (RWP) data. The developed record has been used successfully to assess conventional observational estimates of cloud cover and their sensitivity to the following two factors: (i) instrument-dependent cloud detection and data merging criteria and (ii) FOV configuration. Fourth, co-variability of the ShCu macrophysical properties and environmental parameters has been analyzed for a 3-yr period (2016-2018). Our initial analysis includes diurnal changes of FSCs obtained for clouds with small, moderate and large CEDs and several environmental parameters, such as lifted condensation level (LCL) and mixed layer height (zi). Preliminary results of our analysis suggest that the horizontal extent of ShCu is controlled substantially by the sign and magnitude of difference between these two parameters (zi-LCL): the CED tends to grow with increase of this difference (zi exceeds LCL). We have initiated relationships between the ShCu and key atmospheric parameters that control both the development and evolution of ShCu using our new data product, which combines effectively the advantages of narrow-FOV data offered by zenith pointing cloud radars and lidars and wide-FOV TSI images. While the latest instrumentation at the ARM sites may address these challenging relationships in the future, we believe that the historical ARM data at the SGP site has not yet been fully utilized. Overall, our data product can be used by researchers working on a wide range of climate-related projects. These projects may include (i) a comprehensive evaluation of outputs from the Large-Eddy Simulation (LES) and single-column models for their future improvement, (ii) the representativeness of “short-period” results obtained from the previous model and observational studies and (iii) the planning of future field campaigns with focus on improved understanding of the diurnal cycle of cumulus convection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Field and Model Data Associated with the Manuscript “Drivers of Streamflow Intermittency in Humid Regions: 2. Evaluating Controls on Flow Persistence in an Urbanized Catchment”

This package contains field data, modeling files, and scripts supporting the investigation of the drivers of streamflow intermittency in an urbanized catchment. It includes the field data collected from electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) surveys, distributed temperature sensing (DTS), continuous self-potential (SP) monitoring, groundwater and stilling well. In addition, it contains the data and results of the coupled water- and electrical-flow model developed using the COMSOL Multiphysics and Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS), as well as software files and Jupyter notebooks used to process the data and generate figures in the manuscript submitted for peer review. The data archive is organized in the following directories: 1) Climate Includes hourly precipitation and daily evapotranspiration time series (2024 – 2025) provided as CSV files, alongside a text file detailing dataset units. 2) Coupled_model Field_Application subfolder contains the ATS XML input scripts, data files, output data for the SP site. It also contains the Jupyter notebook (Plot_final_calib.ipynb) to visualize the results of the modeled SP, stream-groundwater exchange and moisture content. The flow model simulation is executed using the ATS XML scripts and the included Python script (generate_data_set.py) to convert ATS output to COMSOL-ready input. COMSOL Multiphysics template (.m can only be used with COMSOL with MATLAB) is executed using the ATS output data to simulate the potential field. 3) Discharge Includes the electrical conductivity (EC) time series (provided as CSV files) from salt slug injections. It also includes the Jupyter notebook (Discharge_process.ipynyb) used to estimate discharge. All discharge measurements collated into rating_curve_processed.csv 4) DTS Contains collated DTS data including raw Stokes and anti-Stokes measurement (provided as .h5 file). It also includes DTS processing.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook for calibrating the DTS data using dts_calibration Python package. cooler_calibration.csv is the DTS calibration CSV used in the calibration sequence. 5) ERT Contains raw resistivity data (provided as CSV files), spatial location of each of the electrodes (provided as CSV files), and files used for the resistivity inversion. 6) Slug_test Includes the slug test data at all the groundwater wells provided as CSV files, as well as the Jupyter notebook (Slug_test.ipynb) for calculating hydraulic conductivity. 7) SP Contains the SP data collected in field at the SP sites (provided as CSV files). 8) Well_data Contains two subfolders: 1) Raw, which provides unprocessed pressure, electrical conductivity and temperature timeseries downloaded from the loggers in all the groundwater and stilling wells, and 2) Processed, which contains sorted, QA/QC timeseries data for each well. The data archive also contains data_process.ipynb, a Jupyter notebook used for field data analysis and generating figures (plotting well, SP, climate, and discharge data, as well as calculating head gradient at sites with nested groundwater wells). Note: Code files (.ipynb, .py, .xml) can be opened in any standard code editor, .exo file can be viewed using Paraview, .h5 files can be opened using HDFView software and h5py Python package, and .resipy file can be opened with the open-source ResIPy software.

ATS↗
DOE OSTI2020

NGEE Arctic Plant Traits: Plant Community Composition, Kougarok Road Mile Marker 64, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2016

This dataset reports the characteristics of the dominant vegetation communities at the NGEE Arctic Kougarok field site, Kougarok Road Mile Marker 64 on the Seward Peninsula. Selected plots were surveyed from 18-23 July 2016. Environmental data (e.g., elevation, slope, soil moisture regime, disturbance type and degree, mean canopy height, etc.) were also recorded for each plot. Elevation measurements were updated 2020-08-18. All plant species (vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens) were recorded along with their percent cover in the plots as determined visually by the lead author. Plots were chosen subjectively in areas of homogeneous and representative vegetation and varied in size from 1-25 m2 depending on canopy structure and height. The site is an east-facing hillslope with vegetation that varies from the summit to the toeslope. The 30 total plots were selected as five replicate plots sampled from each of the six identified habitat types: 1) non-acidic mountain complex at the hillcrest, 2) dwarf-shrub lichen tundra on the shoulder, 3) alder shrublands predominantly on an elevational band across the backslope, 4) willow-birch tundra on the upper backslope, 5) tussock tundra on the footslope in inter-water tracks, and 6) tussock tundra mixed with willow-birch tundra or alder savanna in poor developed water tracks on the footslope. This dataset is comprised of two comma-separated (*.csv) files containing species and environmental data for the plant community composition plots. It also contains seven zipped folders of plot photographs, one map showing plot locations (*.pdf), one blank datasheet with the key to codes used in the field (*.pdf), select photos organized in a (*.pdf), and one User file (*.pdf). The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation: Model Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation (in prep), which introduces a watershed decomposition and parameterization method for large scale permafrost hydrology simulation. With this dataset, this study aims to address the research question: whether a computationally efficient hillslope-based modeling framework can reliably simulate discharge at Arctic river-basin scales. This dataset contains model input and output data for five modeling scenarios at a study site located in the Sagavanirktok River basin. The five modeling scenarios include three modeling cases under temperate conditions using full 3D, decomposed 3D, and decomposed 2D modeling strategies; and two modeling cases under actual Arctic conditions with permafrost using full 3D and decomposed 2D modeling strategies. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.6 for three temperate scenarios and v1.5 for two Arctic scenarios), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model with cryo-hydrology features. For the three temperate models, simulations were conducted for the period of 10/01/1993 - 09/30/2002; and for the two Arctic models, simulations were conducted for the period of 01/01/1994 - 12/31/2002. To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized hierarchically. The dataset contains: (1) Mesh files (.exo) for full 3D model, decomposed 3D models, and decomposed 2D models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/mesh/. Mesh files can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python. (2) Climate forcings (.h5) for full 3D model and decomposed 3D/2D models are located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/daymet_onePiece/, and huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/vp_pr_revised_daymet_1980_2006_with_wind/ separately. Accessible by Python. (3) Raw measured gage discharge (.csv) from USGS, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/gaged_basin15906000_discharge_usgs/. Accessible by Python. (4) Delineated subdomain raster (.tif) and shape files (.shp), and the final parameterized results (.npy) for decomposed models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/data_preprocessed-meshing. Accessible by Python. (5) Temperate models are located in nonpermaf_huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes three cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_0*-hillslope_*), decomposed 3D models (inside model_1*-subcatchment_*), and full 3D model (inside model_2*-onepiece_*). Two step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_*1-*_spinup_steadystate and model_*2-*_spinup_cycle, separately, which are used to initialize real transient models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the real transient models are located in model_*3-*_transient/. Especially, for two example hillslope models (ID=-11 and 11), additional h5py files are included in model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope-11/, model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope11, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment-11/, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment/11, respectively, which are used to plot the saturation figure (Figure 5) in the manuscript. Accessible by Python. (6) Arctic models are located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes two cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_04-hillslope_transient), and full 3D model (inside model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra). Three step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_01-column_freezeup/, model_02-column_spinup/, model_03-hillslope_spinup/, respectively, which are used to initialize real 2D transient hillslope models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of transient 2D hillslope models are located in model_04-hillslope_transient/. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the full 3D transient model is located in model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra/. The full 3D transient model is initialized by model_02-column_spinup/. Accessible by Python. (7) The MOSART routed discharge results (.csv) under Arctic conditions is located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/MOSART/. Accessible by Python. (8) All Python codes (.py) used to parameterize full 3D model to decomposed 2D models are located in script/. These codes fit with watershed workflow (a watershed delineation tool) v1.4 under the branch gaob/v1.4 from https://github.com/gaobhub/watershed-workflow.git.

EARTH SCIENCE > CRYOSPHERE↗
DOE OSTI2017

The Green Ocean Amazon Experiment (GoAmazon2014/5) Observes Pollution Affecting Gases, Aerosols, Clouds, and Rainfall over the Rain Forest

The Observations and Modeling of the Green Ocean Amazon 2014–2015 (GoAmazon2014/5) experiment took place around the urban region of Manaus in central Amazonia across 2 years. The urban pollution plume was used to study the susceptibility of gases, aerosols, clouds, and rainfall to human activities in a tropical environment. Many aspects of air quality, weather, terrestrial ecosystems, and climate work differently in the tropics than in the more thoroughly studied temperate regions of Earth. GoAmazon2014/5, a cooperative project of Brazil, Germany, and the United States, employed an unparalleled suite of measurements at nine ground sites and on board two aircraft to investigate the flow of background air into Manaus, the emissions into the air over the city, and the advection of the pollution downwind of the city. Here in this paper, to visualize this train of processes and its effects, observations aboard a low-flying aircraft are presented. Comparative measurements within and adjacent to the plume followed the emissions of biogenic volatile organic carbon compounds (BVOCs) from the tropical forest, their transformations by the atmospheric oxidant cycle, alterations of this cycle by the influence of the pollutants, transformations of the chemical products into aerosol particles, the relationship of these particles to cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) activity, and the differences in cloud properties and rainfall for background compared to polluted conditions. The observations of the GoAmazon2014/5 experiment illustrate how the hydrologic cycle, radiation balance, and carbon recycling may be affected by present-day as well as future economic development and pollution over the Amazonian tropical forest.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

Understanding sources of organic aerosol during CalNex-2010 using the CMAQ-VBS

Abstract. Community Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) model simulations utilizing the traditional organic aerosol (OA) treatment (CMAQ-AE6) and a volatility basis set (VBS) treatment for OA (CMAQ-VBS) were evaluated against measurements collected at routine monitoring networks (Chemical Speciation Network (CSN) and Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE)) and those collected during the 2010 California at the Nexus of Air Quality and Climate Change (CalNex) field campaign to examine important sources of OA in southern California. Traditionally, CMAQ treats primary organic aerosol (POA) as nonvolatile and uses a two-product framework to represent secondary organic aerosol (SOA) formation. CMAQ-VBS instead treats POA as semivolatile and lumps OA using volatility bins spaced an order of magnitude apart. The CMAQ-VBS approach underpredicted organic carbon (OC) at IMPROVE and CSN sites to a greater degree than CMAQ-AE6 due to the semivolatile POA treatment. However, comparisons to aerosol mass spectrometer (AMS) measurements collected at Pasadena, CA, indicated that CMAQ-VBS better represented the diurnal profile and primary/secondary split of OA. CMAQ-VBS SOA underpredicted the average measured AMS oxygenated organic aerosol (OOA, a surrogate for SOA) concentration by a factor of 5.2, representing a considerable improvement to CMAQ-AE6 SOA predictions (factor of 24 lower than AMS). We use two new methods, one based on species ratios (SOA/ΔCO and SOA/Ox) and another on a simplified SOA parameterization, to apportion the SOA underprediction for CMAQ-VBS to slow photochemical oxidation (estimated as 1.5 × lower than observed at Pasadena using −log(NOx : NOy)), low intrinsic SOA formation efficiency (low by 1.6 to 2 × for Pasadena), and low emissions or excessive dispersion for the Pasadena site (estimated to be 1.6 to 2.3 × too low/excessive). The first and third factors are common to CMAQ-AE6, while the intrinsic SOA formation efficiency for that model is estimated to be too low by about 7 × . From source-apportioned model results, we found most of the CMAQ-VBS modeled POA at the Pasadena CalNex site was attributable to meat cooking emissions (48 %, consistent with a substantial fraction of cooking OA in the observations). This is compared to 18 % from gasoline vehicle emissions, 13 % from biomass burning (in the form of residential wood combustion), and 8 % from diesel vehicle emissions. All "other" inventoried emission sources (e.g., industrial, point, and area sources) comprised the final 13 %. The CMAQ-VBS semivolatile POA treatment underpredicted AMS hydrocarbon-like OA (HOA) + cooking-influenced OA (CIOA) at Pasadena by a factor of 1.8 compared to a factor of 1.4 overprediction of POA in CMAQ-AE6, but it did capture the AMS diurnal profile of HOA and CIOA well, with the exception of the midday peak. Overall, the CMAQ-VBS with its semivolatile treatment of POA, SOA from intermediate volatility organic compounds (IVOCs), and aging of SOA improves SOA model performance (though SOA formation efficiency is still 1.6–2 × too low). However, continued efforts are needed to better understand assumptions in the parameterization (e.g., SOA aging) and provide additional certainty to how best to apply existing emission inventories in a framework that treats POA as semivolatile, which currently degrades existing model performance at routine monitoring networks. The VBS and other approaches (e.g., AE6) require additional work to appropriately incorporate IVOC emissions and subsequent SOA formation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

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

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

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗