SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This report documents an electricity planning study "Energy Roadmap to 240" for the community of New Shoreham, Rhode Island (aka Block Island), conducted under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Technology Innovation Partnership Project (ETIPP) by a national laboratory analysis team comprising staff from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
This progress report (Level 3 Milestone Number M3SF-25LL010302052) summarizes research conducted at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) within the Crystalline Host Rock Properties & Processes - LLNL Number SF-25LL01030205. Observed changes in radionuclide sorption after bentonite/clay heating have implications for radionuclide diffusive transport through engineered barriers and must be considered when designing waste disposal repositories. Recent research performed at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) has provided key insights regarding the hydrothermal alteration behavior of bentonite backfill in the presence of repository materials (steel, concrete, etc.). We are examining how this mineral alteration affects retardation behavior of a suite of radionuclides of interest to repository performance assessment. Sorption experiments and data analysis for 233 U were initiated in FY24 following earlier experiments performed on 243 Am, 90 Sr, 137 Cs. In FY25, we completed the 233 U study and initiated and completed a study of 237 Np sorption. Below, we summarize the results and potential impacts of hydrothermal alteration on radionuclide retardation and assess the importance of this process to radionuclide migration from a GHRDC. We also use statistical tools (i.e. PCA) to help us determine the major drivers in affecting changes in measured Kd values induced by hydrothermal alteration. These experiments also allow us to test the predictive ability of our component additivity approach to surface complexation and ion exchange. Our guiding hypothesis is that a robust surface complexation/ion exchange model and associated database can effectively predict changes in radionuclide sorption behavior resulting from the hydrothermal alteration of mineralogy in a repository near field. In November 2024 the paper “Selenium interaction with iron minerals: Quantitative comparison of sorption and coprecipitation impacts on mobility” was published in Applied Geochemistry. A short update of results to date is presented below. In FY25, we also actively supported the DITUSC project, which is part of the EURADII initiative, as associate partners. We are executing the Migration2025 conference and support associated the NEA-TDB and Thermochimie workshops that will provide critical international engagements and develop consensus and synergy in thermodynamics as it relates to supporting the US nuclear waste repository program.
Electric utilities, regulators, and stakeholders face increasing risks of severe storms, freezes, floods, and heat waves damaging grid infrastructure and causing power outages—and increasing risks of utility equipment igniting wildfires. At the same time, customer electricity rates have risen substantially in recent years, due in part to replacing aging infrastructure and improving resilience to natural hazards and physical threats. To address these challenges, utilities are beginning to move beyond traditional, siloed planning processes to balance resilience with other fundamental grid objectives such as affordability, reliability, safety, and serving new loads. This study presents a framework for states and utilities that want to advance integration of resilience and distribution planning processes to improve planning efficiency, better prioritize cost-effective grid expenditures, and balance planning objectives. The framework includes 7 key integration points between these planning processes: -Strategy process -Data -Threat assessments -Solution identification and prioritization -Optimization opportunities -Consideration of other grid needs -Metrics Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory reviewed utility distribution system plans and interviewed subject matter experts to identify emerging practices for each of the 7 integration points. This report presents these practices, which can be used as a guide toward more holistic planning and cohesive investment strategies. It also includes 3 case studies to provide practical examples of how utilities apply such integrated planning processes: two pole hardening programs and one microgrid planning effort. The report concludes by identifying opportunities for future research.
The characterization of Hamiltonians and other components of open quantum dynamical systems plays a crucial role in quantum computing and other applications. Scientific machine learning techniques have been applied to this problem in a variety of ways, including by modeling with deep neural networks. However, the majority of mathematical models describing open quantum systems are linear, and the natural nonlinearities in learnable models have not been incorporated using physical principles. We present a data-driven model for open quantum systems that includes learnable, thermodynamically consistent terms. The trained model is interpretable, as it directly estimates the system Hamiltonian and linear components of coupling to the environment. We validate the model on synthetic two and three-level data, as well as experimental two-level data collected from a quantum device at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
Eucalyptus is a novel code developed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to incorporate uncertainty quantification into Fault Tree Analysis (FTA). This tool addresses the challenge of imperfect knowledge in “grey-box” systems by allowing analysts to incorporate and propagate uncertainty from component-level assessments to system-level effects. Eucalyptus facilitates a consistent evaluation of the impact of subject matter expert judgment and knowledge gaps on overall system response by Monte Carlo generation of possible system fault trees, sampling probabilities of the existence of subsystems and components. Here, the code supports the specification of fault trees through text and allows export to various formats, including auto-generated images, easing analysis and reducing errors. It has undergone extensive verification testing, demonstrating its reliability and readiness for deployment, and leverages on-node parallelism for rapid analysis. Example analyses are shown that include the identification of system failure paths and quantification of the value of further information about system components.
Synthetic Aviation Turbine Fuels (SATFs) are promising for reducing soot emissions from the aviation sector and diversifying Jet Fuel (JF) sources. Accurately predicting the combustion and emissions behavior of SATFs (and other JFs) necessitates robust experimental databases to elucidate the chemistry of long-chain iso-paraffins, which can compose up to two-thirds of SATF blends and whose behavior is considered to be well-represented by that of iso-dodecane isomers. Here, this study characterizes two laminar non-premixed Planar Mixing Layer Flames (PMLFs) with mild soot loads fueled by nitrogen-diluted ethylene, pure and doped with 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethyl-heptane, respectively. The two PMLFs have the same stoichiometric mixture fraction and total hydrocarbon mole fraction in the fuel stream (X F,F =X C2H4,F +X C12H26,F = 0.260), resulting in nearly the same maximum temperature (T max ≈1800 K) and simple identification of the effects of doping. Importantly, any horizontal PMLF cross-section has a self-similar structure that can be modeled as an equivalent One-Dimensional Counterflow Flame (1D-CF) with vanishingly small strain rate (a). The cross-section at a Height Above the Burner (HAB) of 50 mm is characterized in terms of C 0 -C 18 gas species using capillary sampling followed by GC-MS analyses. Laser-Induced Emission Spectroscopy (LIES) quantifies the soot volume fraction (ƒ v ) profiles at HAB=25 and 50 mm where Elastic Laser Light Scattering (E-LLS) is performed to determine the a of the equivalent 1D-CFs and the profile of the E-LLS equivalent diameter ( d 6,3 ) of soot. The substitution of 1500 ppm of ethylene with 2,2,4,6,6-pentamethyl-heptane causes an increase of ≈1.5 in the concentrations of several polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and fv. Concurrently, the measured d 6,3 doubles in the oxidizer stream, yet remains the same in the fuel stream, at HAB=50 mm. Instead, at HAB= 25 mm, the iso-dodecane doping does not affect the d 6,3 profile in either stream. The experimental results partially validate the chemical reactions and soot formation kinetic model developed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and provide directions to further improve its predictions.
This study introduces advancements to the numerical solutions employed in the processing of nuclear data for fusion applications. It leverages the convolution theorem and Fourier transform techniques to enhance computational efficiency and broaden applicability. Building upon a previously reported discrete Hankel transform approach for Doppler broadening, this work refines the solution of convolution integrals central to these applications. The methodology provides a general and unified framework for evaluating any convolution operation, regardless of whether the underlying problem involves temperature effects in nuclear reactions. The applicability to the nuclear data processing for fusion is demonstrated by deriving the convolution integrals for some of the fusion-related quantities. As before, the convolution operation utilizes a Gaussian-based kernel; however, the discrete Hankel transform of order $𝛼$ = $\frac{1}{2}$ is now applied to the forward Fourier transform of the nonkernel argument, rather than the inverse Fourier transform. This modification eliminates the need for the integration of the nonkernel, cross section–based function, which is a step that posed challenges for certain pointwise cross-section representations. It also removes the requirement for cross-section linearization. Optimized for graphics processing unit architectures, the approach significantly improves computational performance. These advancements are currently under evaluation as the foundation for the next-generation thermonuclear data file processing codes being developed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
Here, it is shown that spectra measured as part of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Pulsed Sphere (LPS) program offer decisive information to locate formatting or physics issues in nuclear data of key interest for fusion reactor simulations. However, experiments from this measurement series are not benchmarks. For instance, their uncertainties are incomplete. There are also many open questions—e.g., on the setup, the detector response, and whether LPS are accurately modeled—that cannot be answered anymore given the limited documentation and that many of the experimenters are no longer actively working. This limited knowledge has implications when one tries to adjust nuclear data to LPS spectra. Usually, one adjusts to benchmarks representing an application with the hope to get more precise nuclear data for the application of interest where differential data might be scarce and/or to reduce nuclear data uncertainties in the application simulations. However, it is demonstrated that adjustment with LPS spectra without accounting for missing uncertainties and modeling potential biases in the experimental data leads to adjusted data that are highly unphysical. That means adjusted data differ significantly from evaluated data based on information from differential experiments; also, application quantities predicted with the adjusted data deviate distinctly from experimental ones. While we can approximate our limited knowledge on these experiments with Gaussian processes in the adjustment process, this modeling of bias is arbitrary rather than based on a physics explanation, calling into doubt the validity of resulting adjusted data. Thus, we discuss here the need for a new measurement series, learning from the strengths and weaknesses of the LPS program, to yield decisive and well-benchmarked integral experiments to support fusion reactor research.
Inertial confinement fusion (ICF) experiments rely on complex multi-physics simulation codes such as the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory-developed HYDRA to guide design work. However, these simulations have several dozen tunable parameters and can be computationally expensive. This makes searching the parameter space challenging and time-consuming. Recently developed automated tools utilize Bayesian optimization to search these high-dimensional parameter spaces for optimal designs. The optimization tools run 2D integrated simulations in HYDRA to converge on a design that produces specified scalar or vector outputs. In this paper, we apply the Bayesian optimization tools to two common tuning scenarios. First, we tune simulation inputs to match measurements of a well-characterized experiment at the National Ignition Facility. This type of tuning is commonly performed to compensate for the use of simplified simulation settings (e.g. reduced resolution) or to account for missing physics in the simulations. Second, we search for an ICF simulation design that has a particular radiation drive profile. These optimizations replicate the kinds of tuning researchers routinely perform, but do so with significantly reduced manual effort. This approach demonstrates a powerful and efficient pathway toward autonomous, high-fidelity design optimization for future ICF experiments.
Modern nuclear safeguards require detection and characterization capabilities suitable for a wide variety of radiation sources and applications. Field-deployable detection systems have also had to modernize to meet changing needs. Recent developments in organic scintillator technology have resulted in the creation of an organic glass scintillator (OGS) at Sandia National Laboratory which is composed of a 9:1 mixture of glass compounds C42H36Si and C51H44Si. The novel scintillator composition was implemented into the design for a dual-particle capable imaging system at the University of Michigan. This work presents new results from two experiments demonstrating the gamma-ray and fast-neutron imaging capabilities of the organic glass system. Gamma spectroscopy was also performed using CeBr3 scintillators that are part of the imager design. Measurements were performed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory using 232Th metal hemishells and an encapsulated 244Cm oxide source. Successful gamma-ray imaging of the 232Th distributed sources is demonstrated with the glass imager, but there were no appreciable neutrons from the 232Th for neutron imaging. Promising neutron and gamma-ray imaging results of 244Cm are demonstrated despite limited imaging event statistics available in this measurement. Gamma-ray spectroscopy results were able to identify 232Th using prominent emissions at 239, 338, 583, and 911 keV. 244Cm was identified from emissions of 43, 99, and 153 keV. These results demonstrate the potential of organic glass imaging for nuclear nonproliferation or characterization efforts.
The performance of the NOAA High-Resolution Rapid Refresh (HRRR) model for capturing low-level winds near a wind energy production site during summer 2019 is evaluated. This study catalogs the ability of HRRR to predict boundary layer dynamics relevant to wind energy interests over complex terrain, which has presented challenges for weather and energy forecasting. Performance is evaluated by comparing HRRR output to wind-profiling Doppler lidars at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Site 300. HRRR captured the diurnal profile of horizontal winds in the observed 150-m layer, despite strong underpredictions (∼4 m s −1 ) during evening and nighttime hours. These underpredictions may be a result of local speedup flows observed by the lidars, which were unresolved in HRRR due to their small spatial extent. HRRR bias magnitude relative to observations was found to be minimal during days with synoptic-scale troughs and strong 850-hPa geopotential gradients, while bias magnitude was maximal during days with synoptic ridging and weak 850-hPa geopotential gradients. To translate wind speed predictions to energy forecasting, generic turbine models were used to estimate power generation for turbines characteristic of the nearby Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area. Results show that HRRR-based energy estimates predicted daytime power generation adequately relative to lidar-based estimates with an 18-h lead time (bias magnitude < 0.4 MW from 0900 to 1400 LT) but overpredicted power during the rest of the diurnal cycle (bias > 1 MW). These results demonstrate conditions under which HRRR performs well for wind energy applications in complex terrain, while highlighting biases that require further investigation to support usage of a high-resolution model for wind energy forecasts.
Two stacks of thin Zr foils were irradiated with 30 and 50 MeV deuterons, respectively, using the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 88-Inch Cyclotron, and 19 excitation functions for nat Zr(d,x) reactions were measured over a beam energy range of 6.3–47.64 MeV, where the independent cross sections for nat Zr(d,x) 88 Nb and nat Zr(d,x) 86m,g Y were measured for the first time. The well-characterized nat Fe(d,x) 56 Co, nat Ni(d,x) 56 Co, nat Ni(d,x) 58 Co, nat Ni(d,x) 61 Cu, nat Ti(d,x) 46 Sc and nat Ti(d,x) 48 V monitor reactions were used to determine the deuteron beam current throughout the stacks. All cross sections were determined using High Purity Germanium (HPGe) detector γ-ray spectroscopy. A variance minimization technique was employed to simultaneously constrain the deuteron beam currents with multiple monitor reactions, thus reducing systematic uncertainties. An additional 16 channels are reported for reactions on the nickel, titanium, and iron monitor foils, leading to a total of 35 excitation functions, with seven reaction channels reported for the first time in this work. The measured excitation functions are compared to calculations provided by the reaction modeling codes TALYS – 2.0, ALICE – 2020, CoH – 3.5.3 and EMPIRE – 3.2.3, as well as the TENDL – 2023 data library. The degree of agreement between theory and experiments is discussed. The possible production of the important PET radionuclide 86g Y via the nat Zr(d,x) route was critically examined. The physical yields for nat Zr(d,x) 86 Y and other yttrium isotopes produced were calculated and compared to other production pathways. Due to high-level of associated radionuclide impurities, this route cannot deliver 86g Y suitable for medical applications.
The anion data for the East River Watershed, Colorado, consist of fluoride, chloride, sulfate, nitrate, and phosphate concentrations collected at multiple, long-term monitoring sites that include stream, groundwater, and spring sampling locations. These locations represent important and/or unique end-member locations for which solute concentrations can be diagnostic of the connection between terrestrial and aquatic systems. Such locations include drainages underlined entirely or largely by shale bedrock, land covered dominated by conifers, aspens, or meadows, and drainages impacted by historic mining activity and the presence of naturally mineralized rock. Developing a long-term record of solute concentrations from a diversity of environments is a critical component of quantifying the impacts of both climate change and discrete climate perturbations, such as drought, forest mortality, and wildfire, on the riverine export of multiple anionic species. Such data may be combined with stream gauging stations co-located at each monitoring site to directly quantify the seasonal and annual mass flux of these anionic species out of the watershed. This data package contains (1) a zip file (anion_data_2014_2025.zip) containing a total of 386 files: 387 data files of anion data from across the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (SFA) which is reported in .csv files per location and a locations.csv (1 file) with latitude and longitude for each location; (2) a file-level metadata (v7_20260901_flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata; (3) a data dictionary (v7_20260901_dd.csv) file that contains terms/column_headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type; and (4) a anion MDL fact sheet (anion_MDLs_202608 in PDF and docx formats). Missing values within the anion data files are noted as either "-9999" or "0.0" for not detectable (N.D.) data. There are a total of 47 locations containing anion data. Update on 2022-06-10: versioned updates to this dataset was made along with these changes: (1) updated anion data for all locations up to 2021-12-31, (2) removal of units from column headers in datafiles, (3) added row underneath headers to contain units of variables, (4) restructure of units to comply with CSV reporting format requirements, and (5) the addition of the file-level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (dd.csv) were added to comply with the File-Level Metadata Reporting Format. Update on 2022-09-09: Updates were made to reporting format specific files (file-level metadata and data dictionary) to correct swapped file names, add additional details on metadata descriptions on both files, add a header_row column to enable parsing, and add version number and date to file names (v2_20220909_flmd.csv and v2_20220909_dd.csv). Update on 2022-12-20: Updates were made to both the data files and reporting format specific files. Conversion issues affecting ER-PLM locations for anion data was resolved for the data files. Additionally, the flmd and dd files were updated to reflect the updated versions of these files. Available data was added up until 2022-03-14. Update on 2023-08-08: Updates were made to both the data files and reporting format specific files. New available anion data was added, up until 2023-05-19. The file level metadata and data dictionary files were updated to reflect the additional data added. Update on 2024-03-11: Updates were made to both the data files and reporting format specific files. New available anion data was added, up until 2023-09-11. Further, revisions to the data files were made to remove incorrect data points (from 1970 and 2001). The reporting format specific files were updated to reflect the additional data added. Update on 2025-05-15: Updates were made to both the data files and reporting format specific files. New available anion data was added, up until the end of WY2024 (September 30, 2024). International Generic Sample Numbers (IGSNs), when registered, were added to the data files. The reporting format specific files were updated to reflect the additional data added. Update on 2026-09-01: Updates were made to both the data files and reporting format specific files. New available anion data was added, up until the end of WY2025 (September 30, 2025). An anion MDL document was included in this update.
Time-lapse imagery was collected using an automated RGB camera mounted on a pole at the base of the northeast-facing hillslope at the Lower Montane site in the East River Watershed, Colorado. The imagery was intended to support a better understanding of plant dynamics and their controls during the growing season. The dataset includes RGB images archived in four zip files (containing imagery in JPEG format), corresponding to photos taken from the hillslope and the adjacent floodplain during 2017 and 2018. A fifth zip file contains a few AVI movies that compare imagery between the two years. The AVI files can be read with most media players applications. The archive contains a total of five *.zip files and three csv metadata files (flmd.csv, dd.csv, and locations.csv).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.
This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.
This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.
The synoptic nitrate (NO3) dataset in the Slate River Watershed, Colorado consists of NO3 data collected at 19 locations three times during the summer of 2022. Stream samples were collected in early summer (early July), mid summer (late August), and late summer (late September). The samples include mainstem, tributary, and point source input water samples. These data were collected to evaluate spatiotemporal variability in stream NO3 during the summer, and evaluate anthropogenic controls on stream NO3 dynamics. This data package contains: (1) a csv of all NO3 samples and (2) a csv of locations for each sampling site. The dataset additionally includes a file-level metadata (flmd.csv) file that lists each file contained in the dataset with associated metadata; and a data dictionary (dd.csv) file that contains column/row headers used throughout the files along with a definition, units, and data type. 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.
Retail electricity rates are at the center of supply- and demand-side changes in future power systems and influence system costs and DER adoption decisions, all with important implications for system reliability, resiliency, and energy affordability. Building on decades of research experience and analytical insights at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the report identifies key near-term analysis questions, enhancements to existing capabilities, and longer-term new capabilities to provide actionable insights for electricity system decision-makers, including state utility regulators, electric and gas utilities, ratepayer advocates, and DER solution providers.