SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “diverse practical applications”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

275 records · Page 16

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2025

Fostering a Guiding Multiscale Model for the Development of Advanced MgB 2 Hydrogen Storage Materials (Final Technical Report)

Project Goal and Objective. The demand for energy and for an upgraded energy infrastructure has steadily grown, as have the needs for energy independence and alternatives to our reliance on petroleum. Hydrogen is considered the most viable fuels for wide-scale implementation in the near future as it is less-polluting, non-toxic, and has more stored energy than petroleum. It is envisioned that hydrogen can eventually become the prime energy carrier, integrating the transportation, grid, and chemical sectors in a way that improves resiliency, diversifies feedstocks, and affords new economic opportunities. A key remaining challenge is the development materials with enhanced gravimetric and volumetric hydrogen storage capacities that offer a higher performance than compressed gas. These materials would eliminate the need for large-scale compression, thereby dramatically reducing the footprint and cost of gas storage. The high gravimetric and volumetric hydrogen capacities of complex hydrides has prompted an intensive investigation of the potential of this class of materials as hydrogen storage media over the past 25 years. Among the many complex hydrides that have been explored, magnesium borohydride, Mg(BH 4 ) 2 , has been found to possess the best combination of practical thermodynamic properties. These include a gravimetric H 2 density of 14.9 wt% H 2 and thermodynamics for the dehydrogenation of Mg(BH 4 ) 2 to MgB 2 (equation 1) (ΔH° = 39 kJ/mol H 2 , ΔS = 112 J/K mol H 2 ) which lie in the narrow window required Mg(BH 4 ) 2 $\Leftrightarrow$ MgB 2 + 4 H 2 (1) for reversibility under moderate pressure and temperature. However, overcoming the extremely slow kinetics of the reversible release of hydrogen by this material in the solid state is a daunting challenge. At temperatures greater than 400 °C, the borohydride releases up to 14 wt% hydrogen giving MgB 2 . We discovered that the direct re-hydrogenation of MgB 2 to Mg(BH 4 ) 2 can be accomplished under 950 bar H 2 at 400 °C. While this demonstrated that complete reversibility can be achieved, the conditions employed are far too extreme for commercial hydrogen storage applications. More recently, we found through US DOE funded research projects (EERE HyMARC and HySCOR), that hydrogen cycling, can be accomplish at much milder conditions upon modification of the borohydride or boride. Guided by these discoveries these discoveries, the objective of this research project was to obtain key information that will enable the development of a model of reversible hydrogenation of MgB 2 to Mg(BH 4 ) 2 . The ultimate goal of our efforts is to attain a model of this transformation that can be utilized to accelerate development further advanced materials. This project directly follows on discoveries that were made over the course of a US DOE, EERE HyMARC project that was focused on improvement of the hydrogen cycling kinetics of modified MgB 2 . We found that that mechanical milling with graphene results the desired, pronounced kinetic enhancement. The dramatic lowering of the conditions required for the hydrogenation of MgB 2 is a significant step towards overcoming its chemical inertness allowing its development as a practical onboard hydrogen storage material. However, the exact nature of the modification(s) of MgB 2 that is responsible for its activation towards hydrogenation is completely unknown. This situation is not unique, as efforts to develop hydrogen storage materials typically have a narrow focus rather than a comprehensive approach that takes atomic level bonding and structure; molecular dynamics; long range, nano- and mesoscale-structure and their interconnection all into account. The goal of this project was the development of a comprehensive, multi-scale computational model of reversible hydrogenation of MgB 2 to Mg(BH 4 ) 2 that can be utilized for development of higher performance versions of the modified material. Development of the model requires determination of: 1) the bulk, nano-scale, and meso-scale structural changes occurring at elevated pressure following mechano-chemical modification of MgB 2 ; 2) the reaction pathway of the reversible hydrogenation of MgB 2 to Mg(BH 4 ) 2 ; 3) the effect of elevated pressure and mechano-chemical modification on the chemical reaction pathways; 4) the interactions at solid-gas interfaces; and particle surfaces; and 5) the kinetics and thermodynamic parameters associated with each step of the hydrogenation reaction pathway. This investigation required advanced techniques as preliminary, standard XRD, 11 B NMR, and FTIR analysis showed no signs of material modification. In order to gain this level of understanding of modified MgB 2 , required the teaming of a diverse group of experts and state-of-the art experimental capabilities at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM) and collaborating National Laboratories: Craig Jensen , Department of Chemistry (PI and Project Director), solid state, solution, and high pressure NMR spectroscopy; solid-state synthesis; and high pressure hydrogenation (collaboration with SNL); Godwin Severa , Hawaii Natural Energy Institute (co-PI) calorimetry; infrared and Raman spectroscopy (collaboration with NREL); Dera , high pressure X-ray diffraction including in situ experiments (collaboration with ANL); Hope Ishii , Hawaii Institute of Geophysics electron microscopy investigations (collaboration with LBNL); and Joe Brown , Mechanical Engineering , material electronic structure and electric field effects.

08 HYDROGEN↗

DOE OSTI2020

Atomically Precise Membranes for the Separation of Gases

Industrial separations require enormous amounts of energy, accounting for approximately half the industrial energy use and 10–15% of the total energy consumption. Distillation alone accounts for about half the energy demand for industrial separations. If these processes could be replaced by an energy-efficient membrane separation process, this energy demand could be reduced by 90%. However, although some membrane processes have made inroads into thermal distillation, for membrane-based separations to replace the distillation process to a far more significant and practical level, new membranes with higher robustness, selectivity, and flux still need be developed. In this membrane development program, we leveraged Temple University’s prior work in spiroligomers to develop robust membrane structures. These structures can be formed into atomically precise pores by controlling the chemical synthesis and the oligomer building blocks to first build precisely controlled macrocycles and then subsequently crosslinking these macrocycles to produce a membrane. Furthermore, through the highly controllable chemistry of our molecular building blocks, not only can we integrate pores with highly controllable and reproducible size and morphology, but we can also target internal functionalization. By using a range of scalable membrane synthesis approaches, combined with control of each and every pores internal chemistry and molecular conformation we can achieve membrane structures that can display the ultimate in high selectivity and permeance. The Mainstream-Temple University membranes can be designed to achieve ultra-selective separations based on the key factors of molecular size, shape, and functionality. In our approach to fabricate scalable atomically precise membranes, we used our molecular Lego nanostructures. We demonstrated an approach to create atomically precise pores within the membrane with pores that are the dimensions of the molecule we are trying to separate. Moreover, in addition to controlling the morphology of the membrane structure by controlling the size of every pore, we can also decorate every pore with precisely targeted and placed functional groups. These accurately placed functional groups can provide selective binding to molecules and provide enhanced selectivity via a facilitated transport mechanism. In Phase II, the Mainstream-Temple University team demonstrated the scalable synthesis of oligomers and the ability to control the pore internal and external functionality, or chemistry, to allow the fabrication of a thin-film membrane. The initial steps of the spiroligomer synthesis to produce the two key bis-amino enantiomer building blocks were scaled from the gram scale to the kilogram scale, obtaining 25 kg of the materials by transferring the procedure to a toll manufacturer. Finally, we successfully optimized the fabrication of these macrocycles into robust membranes. We successfully transitioned from a laboratory based, hard-to-scale Langmuir trough synthesis to a highly scalable, roll-to-roll applicable, interfacial polymerization process. During this Phase II program, we established a platform of atomically precise membranes where our highly controllable, atomically precise macrocycles served as a scaffold with precisely and uniformly controlled pores. Furthermore, this layer can be tailored to accommodate a diverse range of functional groups, which both further controlled the pore size to enhance the sieving effect as well as imparting precisely controlled targeted selectivity through biomimetic molecular interactions. In this Phase II, we established and scaled up a platform approach to both tune the pore size and chemistry as well as scale it to produce membranes that can be applied to a wide range of industries. In future development, the project team expects to scale up both the macrocycle building block production and interfacial polymerization process to produce the atomically precise membrane with targeted pore sizes and pore chemistries.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2020

Hydropower Geotechnical Foundations: Current Practice and Innovation Opportunities for Low-Head Applications

Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to challenges frequently encountered with traditional approaches. With this understanding, it is critically important to understand and document the current state of practice for hydropower geotechnical foundations, identify key challenges, and define opportunities for innovative solutions. To this end, this report documents the current state of practice across the three main phases of geotechnical foundation development: (1) geotechnical site assessment, (2) design, and (3) construction for hydropower systems. It also describes the major challenges with conventional approaches and identifies opportunities for innovation to reduce hydropower foundations costs, timelines, and risks. Key takeaways from this report include the following: Approximately 80% of available low-head sites are expected to have foundations on soil beds rather than rock beds, suggesting that rockfill and earthfill dams may be the most cost-effective conventional dam type for new projects.; Geotechnical and geologic investigation activities are time-consuming and expensive but are essential to define the parameters and criteria needed for foundation design.; Certain riverbed soil and bedrock types present significant technical challenges or require expensive foundation construction, which can prove financially prohibitive for low-head project development.; Modular hydropower design and prefabricated modular foundations represent a promising but unproven paradigm for new hydropower development. Design and construction approaches using optimized and highly repeatable, reliable components would benefit project cost, time, and risk but require additional research and development.; Temporary construction features for foundations, including cofferdams, water diversion, and water control systems, can prove costly and have inherent construction risk.; For economically viable development, hydropower geotechnical foundations should be limited to 4 to 15% of the project’s total initial capital costs. Many proposed projects have experienced cost overruns attributable to foundation difficulties or surprises during construction. These overruns may have been due to inadequate investigations, lack of adequate engineering effort to tailor the structures to site geology and topography, and/or contractual terms, among other considerations.; Challenges for hydropower foundations and opportunities for innovative technology solutions are identified in the following areas (consistent with the three main phases of foundation development): Geotechnical site assessment, Foundation design and materials, Construction methods and technology. Ultimately, this report aims to provide information about geotechnical foundations for low-head hydropower and to motivate transformative technologies to support hydropower growth.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Failure Analysis for Molten Salt Thermal Energy Storage Tanks for In-Service CSP Plants

Thermal Energy Storage (TES) is a fundamental component in concentrating solar power (CSP) plants to increase the plant's dispatchability, capacity factor, while reducing the levelized cost of electricity. In central receivers CSP plants, nitrate molten salts have been used for several years for operation temperatures of up to 565 degrees C. Despite many efforts to advance nitrate salt to higher operation temperatures (even considering a replacement with molten chloride salts) to achieve higher energy conversion efficiencies, the 565 degrees C temperature is currently considered the state-of-the art. Although molten salt tanks have been broadly deployed in commercial CSP plants worldwide, several failures have been reported in these tanks after a few months or years of operation, causing significant economic loss and mistrust in CSP technologies. Most of these failures are associated with the infancy of the technology and multiple issues related to tank design, fabrication, commissioning, and aggressive operation. A technical standard dedicated to the design and fabrication of molten nitrate TES tanks does not exist today. Current in-service molten salt tanks have been generally designed based on the American Petroleum Institute's (API) 650 and ASME Section II standards. The API 650 code provides guidelines for dimensions and fabrication for oil storage tanks up to 260 degrees C. The ASME standard provides allowable stress values for various materials at a range of temperatures and conditions. Both standards seem to be limited for molten salt TES tanks where high temperatures, thermal cycling, and transient conditions are expected. In 2020, NREL released the Concentrating Solar Power Best Practices Study (NREL/TP-5500-75763) that summarized multiple issues in CSP plants, along with potential alternatives and recommendations to address those issues based on information collected from participants representing about 80% of operating CSP plants in the world. One of the recommendations from this study was the development of accurate and validated models to evaluate the plant's transient operation, capable of capturing the effect of short-term clouds and operator response, while being flexible in being adapted to various spatial and temporal resource data. The "Failure Analysis for Molten Salt Thermal Energy Tanks for In-Service CSP Plants" project was inspired on this recommendation and was focused on (1) the development and validation of a physics-based model for a representative, commercial-scale molten salt tank, (2) performing simulations to evaluate the behavior of the tank as a function of typical plant operation conditions, (3) understanding tank failures mechanisms, (4) determining the residual stress and distortion in the tank floor after welding fabrication and evaluating their impact in the stresses developed in the tank during operation, (5) assessing the impact of key operation parameters on the temperature and stress distribution, (6) conduct a preliminary evaluation of design features to reduce stress and improve tank's reliability, and (7) estimate the tank's service life based on the stress developed under diverse operation scenarios. From the analysis conducted in the project and presented in this report, it was found that maximum stresses surpassing the yield strength point of the stainless steel (SS) 347H are developed on the tank floor near the perimeter. These large stresses are strongly influenced by the initial residual stresses and distortion of the tank floor after welding fabrication. During operation, large stresses are developed in the tank floor at high operation temperatures with large salt inventory levels during transient operation. High stresses are also related to elevated temperature gradients in the tank floor that could be attributed to insufficient mixing within the salt inflow and the salt inventory. Based on the analysis, creep is the predominant failure mechanism. However, the large stress levels could favor the plastic deformation into buckles, and crack formation due to stress relaxation cracking during cycle operation. A lifetime below 3 years was estimated for the typical plant operation conditions and a specific initial residual stress and deformation distribution of the tank floor. The estimated life agrees with the service time to failure reported in several commercial molten salt tanks. Desing and operation guidelines can be extracted from the analysis presented in this report, which could be adopted by tank manufacturers and CSP operators to advance toward an ultimate solution for tank failures by reducing residual and operational stresses to achieve a tank service life of more than 30 years. Addressing failures in molten salt TES tanks is fundamental for the CSP industry's survivability, but it is also important for other industrial and power generation applications using this technology, including nuclear and concentrating solar thermal.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗