Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “gridded data”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 289 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

IS BLOCKCHAIN A SUITABLE TECHNOLOGY FOR ENSURING THE INTEGRITY OF DATA SHARED BY LIGHTING AND OTHER BUILDING SYSTEMS?

Increasing amounts of data are available from lighting and other building systems. In commercial buildings, these data can be used to improve system and energy performance, detect and diagnose faults, and facilitate maintenance. Building data are not only of interest to owners and operators of the building systems, however. Owners and operators of similar buildings, manufacturers of building systems, utilities, and city agencies also have interesting use cases. Energy data can, for example, be used to verify the performance of energy-conservation measures, issue renewableenergy certificates, and financially settle grid services. Increased data sharing, however, significantly expands the cyber-attack surface, creating new challenges. In this work, blockchain is explored as an option for ensuring the integrity of data that are shared by lighting and other building systems. Blockchain fundamentals and variants are briefly reviewed, and value propositions relevant to building systems are discussed. A recently developed blockchain applicability framework (BAF) that builds upon and addresses the limitations of previous applicability models is also briefly reviewed. The BAF is used to assess the suitability of blockchain over other technologies or approaches for building-data applications, using emerging connected lighting systems as an example use case.

blockchain, connected lighting system, data integr↗
DOE OSTI2026

GAT (Grid Analysis Toolkit) [SWR-25-41]

Grid Analysis Toolkit (GAT) is a unified Python API and plotting for power system PCM and CEM results (Sienna, PLEXOS, ReEDS™). It's a toolkit for wrangling data for Bulk Grid Dispatch and Transmission Analysis. GAT aims to provide simplified access to PCM and CEM results in a standard format while also allowing raw data access to underlying datasets specific to the model. This software can also be found on PyPI at For plotting, GAT defaults to standard National Lab of the Rockies (NLR) color schemes and standard styles while allowing customization.

Webb, Micah [National Laboratory of the Rockies (N↗
DOE OSTI2020

Big Data Analytic for Cascading Failure Analysis

With the challenges of increased grid dynamics and more variability of power generation from renewable energy sources, rapidly increasing complexity in the grid model, and abundant data from measurements and simulations, the requirements for computational analysis have also increased dramatically. Power system operators and engineers need to analyze more scenarios, extract meaningful information from a larger set of data, and respond more quickly when faced with these new challenges for large-scale applications, such as contingency analysis. This paper proposes a novel big data analysis approach for power system cascading analysis, prevention, and remediation. The developed techniques will be capable of cascading analysis, better assessment of the system’s vulnerability level, as well as proposing potential remediation. Case studies using IEEE 118-bus system and a 500-bus system, with a comparison against a commercial tool, validate the advantages of the developed big data approach: accurate prediction, and more importantly, faster and effective correction actions.The developed techniques could be further used for other power system applications.

big data, cascading analysis, corrective action, m↗
DOE OSTI2022

Data and Multistage Optimization for the New Grid

Three essential capabilities for using exascale computing resources on next generation power grid applications are: generating large renewable energy datasets, modeling damage and operations during and after extreme events, and employing multi-stage optimization for infrastructure planning. Powerscenarios, developed as part of the ExaSGD project, addresses these capabilities by enabling users to build synthetic wind farms for large test systems using numerical weather prediction-based data sources. We share examples of using Powerscenarios to build out wind farms on the ACTIVSg2000 test system, to enable simulated operations and emergency asset allocation during a hurricane strike, and to compute multi-stage infrastructure buildouts.

economic dispatch↗
DOE OSTI2021

Modeling Framework for Bulk Electric Grid Impacts from HEMP E1 and E3 Effects (Tasks 3.1 Final Report)

This report presents a framework to evaluate the impact of a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) event on a bulk electric power grid. This report limits itself to modeling the impact of EMP E1 and E3 components. The co-simulation of E1 and E3 is presented in detail, and the focus of the paper is on the framework rather than actual results. This approach is highly conservative as E1 and E3 are not maximized with the same event characteristics and may only slightly overlap. The actual results shown in this report are based on a synthetic grid with synthetic data and a limited exemplary EMP model. The framework presented can be leveraged and used to analyze the impact of other threat scenarios, both manmade and natural disasters. This report d escribes a Monte-Carlo based methodology to probabilistically quantify the transient response of the power grid to a HEMP event. The approach uses multiple fundamental steps to characterize the system response to HEMP events, focused on the E1 and E3 components of the event. 1) Obtain component failure data related to HEMP events testing of components and creating component failure models. Use the component failure model to create component failure conditional probability density function (PDF) that is a function of the HEMP induced terminal voltage. 2) Model HEMP scenarios and calculate the E1 coupled voltage profiles seen by all system components. Model the same HEMP scenarios and calculate the transformer reactive power consumption profiles due to E3. 3) Sample each component failure PDF to determine which grid components will fail, due to the E1 voltage spike, for each scenario. 4) Perform dynamic simulations that incorporate the predicted component failures from E1 and reactive power consumption at each transformer affected by E3. These simulations allow for secondary transients to affect the relays/protection remaining in service which can lead to cascading outages. 5) Identify the locations and amount of load lost for each scenario through grid dynamic simulation. This can be an indication of the immediate grid impacts from a HEMP event. In addition, perform more detailed analysis to determine critical nodes and system trends. 6) To help realize the longer-term impacts, a security constrained alternating current optimal power flow (ACOPF) is run to maximize critical load served. This report describes a modeling framework to assess the systemic grid impacts due to a HEMP event. This stochastic simulation framework generates a large amount of data for each Monte Carlo replication, including HEMP location and characteristics, relay and component failures, E3 GIC profiles, cascading dynamics including voltage and frequency over time, and final system state. This data can then be analyzed to identify trends, e.g., unique system behavior modes or critical components whose failure is more likely to cause serious systemic effects. The proposed analysis process is demonstrated on a representative system. In order to draw realistic conclusions of the impact of a HEMP event on the grid, a significant amount of work remains with respect to modeling the impact on various grid components.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Multi-Agent Graph-Attention Deep Reinforcement Learning for Post-Contingency Grid Emergency Voltage Control

Grid emergency voltage control (GEVC) is paramount in electric power systems to improve voltage stability and prevent cascading outages and blackouts in case of contingencies. While most deep reinforcement learning (DRL)-based paradigms perform single agents in a static environment, real-world agents for GEVC are expected to cooperate in a dynamically shifting grid. Moreover, due to high uncertainties from combinatory natures of various contingencies and load consumption, along with the complexity of dynamic grid operation, the data efficiency and control performance of the existing DRL-based methods are challenged. To address these limitations, we propose a multi-agent graph-attention (GATT)-based DRL algorithm for GEVC in multi-area power systems. Here, we develop graph convolutional network (GCN)-based agents for feature representation of the graph-structured voltages to improve the decision accuracy in a data-efficient manner. Furthermore, a cutting-edge attention mechanism concentrates on effective information sharing among multiple agents, synergizing different-sized subnetworks in the grid for cooperative learning. We address several key challenges in the existing DRL-based GEVC approaches, including low scalability and poor stability against high uncertainties. Test results in the IEEE benchmark system verify the advantages of the proposed method over several recent multi-agent DRL-based algorithms.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Recent Development of Frequency Estimation Methods for Future Smart Grid

The frequency estimated by the Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) is a critical index of power system status and supports many smart grid applications. The future smart grid features high penetration of renewables and more fast-moving power electronics inverters but raises challenges to the reliable frequency estimation. This article presents three methods to address these challenges. First, an enhanced zero-crossing algorithm was developed to track the fast-changing frequency in system dynamics. Second, we propose a technology that can tolerate the system transient and suppress the outliers. Third, an algorithm was developed to export high time-resolution frequency estimations with minimum computational effort. All of the proposed methods are realized in hardware and compared with classical frequency estimation methods. The testing results indicate that the proposed methods have excellent performance. They can be used in future PMUs and provide reliable and high time resolution data for smart grid applications.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Satellite-Derived Upper-Ocean Stratification Data Set for the Tropical North Atlantic With Potential Applications for Hurricane Intensity Prediction

Upper-ocean stratification strongly impacts vertical mixing and the heat flux between the ocean and atmosphere, especially under extreme conditions of tropical cyclones (TCs). Knowledge of prestorm stratification is important for accurate TC intensity prediction. In situ observations of the tropical ocean have significantly increased in the past decade. However, they are still too sparse to resolve ocean stratification variability in near-real time and on small spatial scales. Here, in this study, based on long-term observations and an ocean reanalysis data set from 2004–2017, we investigate the possibility of retrieving upper-ocean stratification from sea surface temperature (SST), sea surface salinity (SSS), and sea surface height (SSH) using a simple regression method. It is found that more than 90% of the mean seasonal cycle and about 30% to 80% of temperature and salinity stratification anomalies can be reconstructed using surface data from either observations or an ocean reanalysis. Simple regression can be used with satellite observations to create a high-resolution, near-real-time-gridded ocean stratification data set that successfully reproduces both the large and mesoscale variability of ocean stratification. When used in a simple expression for TC-induced SST cooling, the satellite-derived stratification shows improvements over an ocean analysis in terms of variance explained of SST cooling, offering promise as a near-real-time indicator of the ocean's impact on TC intensification.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hardware-Based Randomized Encoding for Sensor Authentication in Power Grid SCADA Systems

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems are utilized extensively in critical power grid infrastructures. Modern SCADA systems have been proven to be susceptible to cyber-security attacks and require improved security primitives in order to prevent unwanted influence from an adversarial party. One section of weakness in the SCADA system is the integrity of field level sensors providing essential data for control decisions at a master station. In this paper we propose a lightweight hardware scheme providing inferred authentication for SCADA sensors by combining an analog to digital converter and a permutation generator as a single integrated circuit. Through this method we encode critical sensor data at the time of sensing, so that unencoded data is never stored in memory, increasing the difficulty of software attacks. We show through experimentation how our design stops both software and hardware false data injection attacks occurring at the field level of SCADA systems.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Lightning Climatology Derived from World Wide Lightning Location Network (WWLLN) for US East Coast and European North Sea

This dataset contains gridded (1x1 km) data of lightning stroke observations during 2020, 2021, and 2022 over the US East Coast and European North Sea. Data processing involved intersecting each of the ~26 million lightning strokes over the US East Coast and ~365 thousand strokes over the North Sea within a corresponding 1x1 km grid, resulting in each grid reporting a 'strokes per square kilometer' and 'energy per square kilometer'. For the US, these results are presented as annual averages for 2020, 2021, and 2022, while for the North Sea results are presented as a 3-year annual average.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Lightning Climatology Derived from World Wide Lightning Location Network (WWLLN) for US East Coast and European North Sea

This dataset contains gridded (1x1 km) data of lightning stroke observations during 2020, 2021, and 2022 over the US East Coast and European North Sea. Data processing involved intersecting each of the ~26 million lightning strokes over the US East Coast and ~365 thousand strokes over the North Sea within a corresponding 1x1 km grid, resulting in each grid reporting a 'strokes per square kilometer' and 'energy per square kilometer'. For the US, these results are presented as annual averages for 2020, 2021, and 2022, while for the North Sea results are presented as a 3-year annual average.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Quantitatively Monitoring Bubble-Flow at a Seep Site Offshore Oregon: Field Trials and Methodological Advances for Parallel Optical and Hydroacoustical Measurements

Two lander-based devices, the Bubble-Box and GasQuant-II, were used to investigate the spatial and temporal variability and total gas flow rates of a seep area offshore Oregon, United States. The Bubble-Box is a stereo camera–equipped lander that records bubbles inside a rising corridor with 80 Hz, allowing for automated image analyses of bubble size distributions and rising speeds. GasQuant is a hydroacoustic lander using a horizontally oriented multibeam swath to record the backscatter intensity of bubble streams passing the swath plain. The experimental set up at the Astoria Canyon site at a water depth of about 500 m aimed at calibrating the hydroacoustic GasQuant data with the visual Bubble-Box data for a spatial and temporal flow rate quantification of the site. For about 90 h in total, both systems were deployed simultaneously and pressure and temperature data were recorded using a CTD as well. Detailed image analyses show a Gaussian-like bubble size distribution of bubbles with a radius of 0.6–6 mm (mean 2.5 mm, std. dev. 0.25 mm); this is very similar to other measurements reported in the literature. Rising speeds ranged from 15 to 37 cm/s between 1- and 5-mm bubble sizes and are thus, in parts, slightly faster than reported elsewhere. Bubble sizes and calculated flow rates are rather constant over time at the two monitored bubble streams. Flow rates of these individual bubble streams are in the range of 544–1,278 mm 3 /s. One Bubble-Box data set was used to calibrate the acoustic backscatter response of the GasQuant data, enabling us to calculate a flow rate of the ensonified seep area (~1,700 m 2 ) that ranged from 4.98 to 8.33 L/min (5.38 × 10 6 to 9.01 × 10 6 CH 4 mol/year). Such flow rates are common for seep areas of similar size, and as such, this location is classified as a normally active seep area. For deriving these acoustically based flow rates, the detailed data pre-processing considered echogram gridding methods of the swath data and bubble responses at the respective water depth. The described method uses the inverse gas flow quantification approach and gives an in-depth example of the benefits of using acoustic and optical methods in tandem.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

ADMS Test Bed Updates

This webinar will present results from a joint project with utility partner Xcel Energy in which we evaluated their ADMS application for volt-var optimization using different levels of model quality. We were able to help Xcel Energy understand the trade-offs of telemetry measurements and model quality when managing a feeder's voltage profile to maximize energy conservation. We simulated scenarios with varying levels of model quality and measurement density to evaluate Xcel's options for best using its ADMS. The results help Xcel and other utilities understand how network data affects voltage management as grid operations see continued growth in solar photovoltaic (PV) systems and electric vehicles (EVs).

ADMS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Technical Impacts of Light-Duty and Heavy-Duty Transportation Electrification on a Coordinated Transmission and Distribution System

In this study, we propose a strategy to model the required spatiotemporal charging demand from light-duty (LD) and medium- and heavy-duty (MHD) electric vehicles (EVs) using actual transportation data by mapping the demand for the required EV charging to a realistic and coordinated distribution and transmission electric grid at the predicted times of the day to study their impact on the power system in a variety of load, weather, and EV penetration scenarios. This work is the first study that includes the actual weather data and transportation data with realistic and coordinated distribution and transmission grid data in a large industry-scale level study. The main goal of this study is to identify possible issues and required upgrades in the electric grid, caused by an increase in EV integration. The transmission case study is a large grid with 6717 buses over a Texas footprint, and the distribution grid is over Houston, a city in Texas, covering over three million customers. The resulting overloads and voltage violations experienced in the system are discussed, and required planning upgrades to avoid these issues are suggested.

AC optimal power flow (AC-OPF)↗
DOE OSTI2020

Distribution Transformer Health Monitoring using Smart Meter Data

The distribution electric grid has become a highly complex and intelligent network with changing load and customer types. This has generated unprecedented challenges and opportunities for utility companies–opportunities especially in the area of asset health/performance management. Moreover, several utilities are increasingly moving from the traditional reactive and time-based asset monitoring approach to a more proactive condition based method. However, this needs to be done in a low-cost and efficient manner. Here, this paper explores how existing sensor infrastructure such as smart meters can be utilized to provide utility operators with more visibility into the health and operation of their assets. The paper focuses primarily on service transformers.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Power System Waveform Datasets for Machine Learning

The desire for increased visibility across the electricity grid will necessarily increase the deployment of sensing and measurement devices and associated data management needs to unprecedented levels. For the existing sensing and measurement infrastructure, there remains a great amount of “value” yet to be extracted through advanced data management and analytics. Availability of more data will not, by itself, lead to changes in grid visibility, security, and resiliency. To create the predictive and prescriptive environment required to enable new markets and transactions for customer revenue and a reliable grid, the data must be collected, organized, evaluated, and analyzed using sophisticated algorithms to provide actionable information allowing operators and customers to reliably manage an increasingly complex grid. Progress in artificial intelligence (AI) has been largely driven by large, publicly available datasets that can be used to train AI algorithms such as MNIST, a database of handwritten images of digits, and ImageNet, an image database of everyday objects. These types of publicly available databases of real-world training datasets have been largely credited for advancement of image processing, computer vision, and deep learning algorithms that these use cases deploy. However, in the power systems industry to date, there are few databases with proper event labeling, and data access to a publicly available collection of power system event waveforms that will allow users to interact with grid signature data. Publicly available datasets of power system event waveforms, such as the DOE/EPRI dataset, often lack critical metadata or contain limited examples of each event type, and data formats vary widely across these datasets.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗