Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Soil characteristics”

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.

410 records · Page 23
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

iButton and Tinytag snow/ground interface temperature measurements at Teller 27 and Kougarok 64 from 2022-2023, Seward Peninsula, Alaska

Snow/ground interface temperature measurements were collected at the NGEE Arctic Teller Road Site at mile marker 27 (TL_MM27) and at the Kougarok Road Site at mile marker 64 (KG_MM64) on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. Data were collected between October 1, 2022 to September 18, 2023 using iButton Link DS1921G-F5# Thermochron miniature temperature sensors (https://www.ibuttonlink.com/products/ds1921g) and Tinytag TGP-4017 internal sensors (https://www.micronmeters.com/product/tgp-4017-internal-sensor-40-to-85-c-40-f-to-185-f) deployed across the Kougarok and Teller sites. These sensors are a cost-efficient way to collect snowpack temperatures at a higher spatial resolution than what is normally achieved. iButton data were collected every 4 hours, while Tinytag data were collected every 30 minutes. In total, data were collected from 196 iButtons and 26 Tinytags. This dataset contains four *.csv files of near-ground surface temperatures at various locations throughout each study site and two *.kml files of sensor locations. Data were collected throughout the snow cover season so that snowpack characteristics could be derived using the temperature data. Sensors were placed both inside and outside of vegetation to better capture the spatial variability of snow properties across each domain.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic) was a 15-year research effort (2012-2027) to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy’s Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Vegetation Warming Experiment: 15N Uptake Experiment Arctagrostis latifolia Canopy Traits, Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska, 2018

This dataset consists of measured Arctagrostis latifolia canopy traits harvested from vegetation warming experiment enclosures and paired control plots located on the BEO, Utqiavik, Alaska. Harvest types include both natural abundance and enriched A. latifolia. Canopy traits measured include leaf area index (LAI), specific leaf area (SLA) and maximum height. Vegetation warming chambers (Zero Power) were deployed on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO), Utqiavik, Alaska. These chambers (Figure 1) consistently elevated air temperatures by approximately 4°C using a self-venting system described by Lewin et al (2017). Five chambers were deployed from June 17, 2018 to September 24, 2018 on the BEO within a 1 km2 area centered on 71.275N, -156.641W. Each chamber was co-located with an ambient plot where temperatures were not manipulated on patches of tundra containing the target species Arctagrostis latifolia. An intensive field campaign in late July investigated the impact of warming had on A. latifolia biomass, chemistry, and uptake of 15N labeled ammonia that was injected into the surface soils for one week. Initial measurements were taken on July 21, 2018. Harvest occurred on July 27, 2018. Water-extractable nutrients in soils were measured in July following harvests of A. latifolia plants and underlying soils. Availability of ammonia, nitrate, and phosphate throughout the growing season was measured by extracting nutrients bound to anion and cation binding resins deployed from July through September. Environmental variables (thaw depth, surface soil temperatures, surface soil moisture) were measured. Leaf traits and root traits of A. latifolia were also measured. This dataset includes one csv file and one pdf file. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

iButton snow temperature measurements at Teller 27 and Kougarok 64, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2019-2020

Snow temperature measurements were collected at the NGEE Arctic Teller Road Site at mile marker 27 (TL_MM27) and at the Kougarok Road Site at mile marker 64 (KG_MM64) on the Seward Peninsula. Data were collected from October 1, 2021 to August 16, 2022 using iButton Link DS1926-F5# Thermochron miniature temperature sensors (https://www.ibuttonlink.com/products/ds1921g) and Tinytag TGP-4017 internal sensors (https://www.micronmeters.com/product/tgp-4017-internal-sensor-40-to-85-c-40-f-to-185-f) deployed across the Kougarok and Teller sites. These sensors are a cost-efficient way to collect snowpack temperatures at a higher spatial resolution than what is normally achieved. iButton data were collected every 4 hours beginning on October 1, 2021. Tinytag data collection began between October 9, 2021 and October 12, 2021 depending on the specific Tinytag and data were collected every 30 minutes. In total, data were collected from 236 iButtons and 30 Tinytags. This dataset contains four *.csv files of near-ground surface temperatures at various locations throughout each study site and four *.shp files of sensor locations. Data were collected throughout the snow cover season so that snowpack characteristics could be derived using the temperature data. Sensors were placed both inside and outside of vegetation to better capture the spatial variability of snow properties across each domain.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a 15-year research effort (2012-2027) to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

iButton and Tinytag snow temperature measurements at Teller 27 and Kougarok 64, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2021-2022

Snow temperature measurements were collected at the NGEE Arctic Teller Road Site at mile marker 27 (TL_MM27) and at the Kougarok Road Site at mile marker 64 (KG_MM64) on the Seward Peninsula. Data were collected from October 1, 2021 to August 16, 2022 using iButton Link DS1926-F5# Thermochron miniature temperature sensors (https://www.ibuttonlink.com/products/ds1921g) and Tinytag TGP-4017 internal sensors (https://www.micronmeters.com/product/tgp-4017-internal-sensor-40-to-85-c-40-f-to-185-f) deployed across the Kougarok and Teller sites. These sensors are a cost-efficient way to collect snowpack temperatures at a higher spatial resolution than what is normally achieved. iButton data were collected every 4 hours beginning on October 1, 2021. Tinytag data collection began between October 9 and October 12, 2021 depending on sensor installation date. Tinytag data were collected every 30 minutes. In total, data were collected from 236 iButtons and 30 Tinytags. This dataset contains four *.csv files of near-ground surface temperatures at various locations throughout each study site and four *.shp files of sensor locations. Data were collected throughout the snow cover season so that snowpack characteristics could be derived using the temperature data. Sensors were placed both inside and outside of vegetation to better capture the spatial variability of snow properties across each domain. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Assessing Marginal Land Availability Based on Land Use Change Information in the Contiguous United States

Utilization of marginal land for growing dedicated bioenergy crops for second-generation biofuels is appealing to avoid conflicts with food production. This study develops a novel framework to quantify marginal land for the Contiguous United States (CONUS) based on a history of satellite-observed land use change (LUC) over the 2008–2015 period. Frequent LUC between crop and noncrop is assumed to be an indicator of economically marginal land; this land is also likely to have a lower opportunity cost of conversion from food crop to bioenergy crop production. We first present an approach to identify cropland in transition using the time series of Cropland Data Layer (CDL) land cover product and determine the amount of land that can be considered marginal with a high degree of confidence vs with uncertainty across the CONUS. We find that the biophysical characteristics of this land and its productivity and environmental vulnerability vary across the land and lie in between that of permanent cropland and permanent natural vegetation/bare areas; this land also has relatively low intrinsic value and agricultural profit but a high financial burden and economic risk. We find that the total area of marginal land with confidence vs with uncertainty is 10.2 and 58.4 million hectares, respectively, and mainly located along the 100th meridian. Only a portion of this marginal land (1.4–2.2 million hectares with confidence and 14.8–19.4 million hectares with uncertainty) is in the rainfed region and not in crop production and, thus, suitable for producing energy crops without diverting land from food crops in 2016. These estimates are much smaller than the estimates obtained by previous studies, which consider all biophysically low-quality land to be marginal without considering economical marginality. The estimate of marginal land for bioenergy crops obtained in this study is an indicator of the availability of economically marginal land that is suitable for bioenergy crop production; whether this land is actually converted to bioenergy crops will depend on the market conditions. Here, we note the inability to conduct field-level validation of cropland in transition and leave it to future advances in technology to ground-truth land use change and its relationship to economically marginal land.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Model associated with: "Thermodynamic control on the decomposition of organic matter across different electron acceptors"

This model data package is associated with the publication “Thermodynamic control on the decomposition of organic matter across different electron acceptors” submitted to Soil Biology and Biochemistry (Zheng et al., 2023; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2024.109364).In this research, a thermodynamic modeling framework is built to flexibly incorporate both organic matter (OM) molecules and electron acceptors for estimating potential free energy release from various redox reactions and to further predict reaction rates based on Microbial Transition State Theory. The model package includes scripts for thermodynamic modeling and postprocessing. Input Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance (FTICR) data are from a previous experimental study (Boye et al., 2018), and model outputs are free energy predictions and stoichiometric coefficients associated with all possible redox reactions.This data package is associated with the project GitHub repository found at MM_bioenergetic_modeling.This data package contains four folders (Input_FTICR, Model, Output, and Output_processing), a file-level metadata (FLMD) csv, and a data dictionary (dd) csv. Please see Zheng_bioenergetic_modeling_flmd.csv for a list of all files contained in this data package and descriptions for each. The Zheng_bioenergetic_modeling_dd.csv file describes the csv column headers. The “Model” folder contains scripts to run energy balance calculations for each electron acceptor. The “Output” folder contains csv files with stoichiometric information from model simulations. And the "Output_processing" folder contains scripts for reaction rate calculations and to generate plots.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Floodplain Wetland Channel Planform, Cross-Sectional Morphology, and Sediment Characteristics Along an Estuarine to Tidal River Gradient

The formation of wetland channel networks on coastal river floodplains is affected by spatial transitions in tidal-fluvial processes. This study evaluated sedimentation patterns in tidal marshes on the 147-km tidal Columbia River and its 87-km estuary and characterized the cross-sectional geometry and planform morphometry of tidal wetlands along the estuarine to riverine gradient. Tidal marshes were predominantly depositional (median 0.7 cm yr-1, primarily silt), consistent with late-Holocene rates. Marsh sediment accretion rate increased with annual maximum 7-day average daily maximum water depth. Elevation was negatively correlated with accretion rate in the tidal river and positively correlated with total organic carbon (TOC%) in the tidal river and estuary. TOC% was greater in the estuary and, like percent fines, greater farther from the main-channel Columbia River. For four single-channel and six channel-network planforms of tidal marsh, shrub-dominated, and forested wetlands: (1) Spatial patterns of cross-sectional morphology conformed to typical coastal wetland morphology in estuarine reaches up to the tidal river. (2) Reach-based and common slope linear models for channel perimeter on wetland area were predictive in the estuary (R2 > 0.81) and differed between island (n = 144) and mainland (n = 164) wetlands. No planform linear models were predictive for the entire study area or the tidal river. No models for channel outlets were acceptable. (3) Channel perimeter, surface area, and outlets were all highly variable within and among estuarine–riverine reaches. Analyses of sediment, cross-section, and planform support the use of a “natural network paradigm” for wetland-restoration design on tidal river floodplains.

channel morphology↗
DOE OSTI2021

Tribal Revegetation Project Final Project Report: 92-Acre Area, Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Complex, Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

Nuwu (Southern Paiute), Newe (Western Shoshone), and Nuumu (Owens Valley Paiute) are linguistically related, Numic-speaking peoples who are part of the broader Uto-Aztecan language group. Numic peoples view the land as a holistic, living, sentient being with feelings and purpose. The land is personified with human characteristics and it needs to be experienced to be understood through “learning by doing.” Numic peoples do not support ground disturbing activities within their ancestral lands, including activities tied to the storage of low-level radioactive waste or classified materials on the NNSS, which they view as culturally inappropriate. These deep-rooted ancestral connections are the impetus for reinforcing Numic responsibility for healing disturbed areas by integrating respect and patience with consistent Tribal interaction. Tribal Ecological Knowledge (TEK) is the science of describing Tribal approaches for understanding natural resources. Numic TEK is embedded in traditional teachings learned incrementally over time though experience and it evolves through lessons learned and responses to environmental changes over millennia. Therefore, TEK can broaden and enhance Western scientific knowledge associated with revegetation, especially in highly disturbed areas. The project blended TEK with Western scientific ecological methods to create a vegetative cover within test plots on the 92-Acre Area located at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) located in Area 5 on the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). The vegetated test plots were systematically created for the Department of Energy (DOE) in tandem with the existing Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) with the Nevada Department of Environmental Protection (NDEP). Three previous contractor-lead attempts at revegetation, one targeting full cover revegetation and two targeting test plot revegetation, did not achieve the anticipated results at this location. When presented to the 16 American Indian Tribal nations and affiliated groups with cultural and historical ties to the NNSS, the group appointed a Tribal Revegetation Committee (TRC) that included six expert Tribal knowledge holders to collaborate with an ethnoecologist/cultural anthropologist and two biologists. Project design, planning, seed and outplant selection, spiritual land preparation, and methodology were guided by the TRC and an ethnoecologist/cultural anthropologist from Portland State University (PSU) and biologists from Desert Research Institute (DRI). Using TEK, the TRC recommended a specific seed mixture that contained nine native plant species and three species of outplants. The revegetation effort included preparing and planting thirty 10 m × 10 m (32.8 ft × 32.8 ft) seeded plots, twelve of which also included outplants; and eight 10 m × 100 m (32.8 ft × 328 ft) plots that only received outplants, all atop a waste cell cover. The TRC and the project team creatively adapted TEK with Western scientific methods so that the planned revegetation efforts could occur within the safety and security parameters of the RWMC. Test plots were subjected to one of five soil treatments with varying combinations of straw or mulch applications, soil amendment, and/or outplant planting and one of two watering treatments (watered or unwatered). Planting was divided into two events: one in the fall season and another during the subsequent spring season based on TEK and a corresponding recommendation from the TRC. Monitoring and spiritual management was conducted by the TRC to evaluate plant progress on a monthly basis (in conjunction with the biologist and anthropologist) during each respective growing season for a period of three years after planting. This approach allowed Tribal members the opportunity to conduct traditional blessings and other culturally appropriate activities to restore balance to the land in accordance with Tribal protocols. Following TEK-guided methods, successful plant establishment from seed stock and outplants was observed in many plots. Overall, plots planted in the spring, as recommended by the TRC, showed higher rates of outplant survival and native seedling emergence than those planted in the fall. This finding is significant because it is contrary to the original guidance and previous approaches provided for planting in this region. The TRC believes the frequent co-occurrence of native seedlings near surviving outplants indicates an important symbiotic relationship understood by Tribal communities and overlooked by others. Watered outplants displayed much higher survivability than unwatered plants, even after watering was reduced after the plants were established. Soil amendments and mulch created higher densities of native plants from seed. Many native seedlings showed significant delays in germination, which is considered a normal adaptation to desert climates. Some native plants did not germinate until the third growing year, whereas others germinated during the first growing year, which demonstrates the complexity of the desert environment. Evidence of native insects, reptiles, mammals, and birds, as well as native plants that were not part of the planted species, were noted and considered culturally significant. Despite the presence of non-native plants, native outplants continued to thrive and the incidence of native plant germination from seed increased over time. These successful revegetation results where previous efforts were unsuccessful reinforce the importance of integrating regionally appropriate, TEK-guided methodology with Western science to achieve positive results and the necessity of integrating Tribal involvement in all stages of the revegetation effort. Expanded approaches coupled with Tribal knowledge and tools from Western science addressed a complex problem tied to revegetating atop a low-level radioactive waste cell. The level of Tribal participation serves as a progressive model for building collaborative relationships and addressing ecological challenges on the NNSS.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
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 OSTI2025

Litter Production and Foliar Nutrient Resorption in Pioneer and Non-Pioneer Species in a Selective Logging Experiment in the Central Amazon, BIONTE, ZF-2, Manaus, 2022-23

This dataset was collected near the city of Manaus, Brazil, at the Experimental Station of Tropical Forestry (EEST, aka “ZF2”), inside the BIONTE (BIOmass and NuTrient Experiment). The experiment included three levels of increasing selective logging intensity, along with control, with 1-hectare permanent plots (12 total) located at the center of 4-hectare treatment plots. The vegetation has a high floristic diversity, the soils of the region are poor in nutrients, and the topography is characterized by plateaus (where BIONTE is located), and also valley bottoms and slopes. Three treatments of differing logging intensities were applied in the BIONTE experiment (T1, T2 and T3). The study was conducted in Treatment 3 (Block I – permanent plot), which represents the most intensive logging treatment, with 69% of the basal area (m²∙ha⁻¹) removed in 1988. The present dataset spans the period from May 1, 2022, to May 1, 2023. The data package includes leaf_nutrient_data, litterfall_total_data, leaf_litterfall_species_specific_data, and species_info, all provided in .csv format. These formats allow users to process and analyze the data in various software applications and programming languages, such as Python and R. This dataset was collected to advance knowledge on nutrient cycling in Amazonian forests, specifically distinguishing between species with two distinct functional traits: fast-growing and slow-growing. It also aims to improve Earth System Models, such as the E3SM Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES). Additionally, it was used in a paper currently in preparation (Carvalho et al., in prep.), which aims to quantify seasonal litter production and foliar nutrient resorption in pioneer (fast-growing) and non-pioneer (slow-growing) tree species in the central Amazon. Specifically, it seeks to answer two key questions: 1) Is there a difference in leaf litter production, leaf nutrient flux and leaf nutrient concentration between pioneers and non-pioneers species? Is there a difference in the efficiency of foliar nutrient resorption between pioneers and non-pioneers species?

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Microtopographic and Depth Controls on Active Layer Chemistry in Arctic Polygonal Ground: Supporting Data

Polygonal ground is a signature characteristic of the Arctic, and permafrost thaw can potentially generate substantial feedbacks to Arctic ecosystems and climate. This study describes the first comprehensive spatial examination of active layer biogeochemistry that extends across high- and low-centered polygons and their features, including depth. Water chemistry measurements were made on active layer water samples collected near Barrow, Alaska during summer, 2012. Several significant differences in chemistry were observed between high- and low-centered polygons suggesting polygon types may be useful for landscape-scale geochemical classification. However, differences were found for polygon features (centers and troughs) for analytes that were not significant for type, suggesting that finer scale features control biogeochemistry in a different way than polygon type. Depth variations were also significant, demonstrating important multi-dimensional aspects of polygonal ground biogeochemistry. These results have major implications for understanding how polygonal ground ecosystems function, and how they may respond to future change. This data package includes one *.csv data file and one *.pdf user guide. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Ground surface temperature derived Snow Cover Properties, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2019-2023

Snow-ground interface temperatures have been collected at the Teller mile marker 27 and Kougarok mile marker 64 field sites on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska from 2019 through 2023 (with data missing from Fall 2020 through Summer 2021 due to COVID). Temperatures were measured using iButton Link DS1921G-F5# Thermochron miniature temperature sensors and Tinytag TGP-4017 internal sensors deployed across the Kougarok 64 and Teller 27 field sites. These sensors are a cost-efficient way to collect snow-ground interface temperatures at a high spatial resolution, and when paired with air temperature data these measurements can provide insight into fine-scale variability in snowpack characteristics across the study sites. From this data, snow process metrics were calculated at each sensor location based on the methods outlined in Staub and Delaloye, 2017. Metrics are calculated daily for each sensor as well as over the entire season. These metrics include ground surface temperature (°C), the number of days under snow cover (number of days), the insulation effect of snow (unitless), the length of the transitional snow periods (number of days), as well as intermediaries such as temperature variability. Calculating these snow processes relies on the assumption that when snow covers a temperature sensor, it is buffered from diurnal fluctuations in air temperature by the insulating snow layer. More information on the calculated metrics can be found in the User Guide of this dataset, as well as in Staub and Delaloye’s 2017 publication Using Near-Surface Ground Temperature Data to Derive Snow Insulation and Melt Indices for Mountain Permafrost Applications. This dataset includes one daily and one seasonal *.csv file of metrics for every year of data, a daily and a seasonal *.csv data dictionary, and one User Guide document (*.pdf) describing data collection and processing.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Laboratory time series moisture manipulative experiment from sediment across San Antonio, Texas: time series aerobic respiration and geochemistry

This dataset supports a broader study examining the effects of wetting and drying on hyporheic zone respiration. The dataset provides data generated from a laboratory moisture manipulation experiment. The contents include time series aerobic respiration and moisture; dissolved oxygen; sediment geochemistry data; and field metadata (including qualitative information on instream and river corridor characteristics). Samples were collected as part of the WHONDRS Allison Veach collaboration (AV1). The data package associated with the AV1 study is available at https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/2529428. AV1 sampling occurred across 7 perennial and 7 intermittent streams in San Antonio, Texas. Each stream/site was visited both in summer during base flow (July-September 2023) and winter during peak flow (January-February 2024). This study uses subsamples from a subset of AV1 samples. The original field samples were labeled as AV1_###. Subsequent subsamples for this study were labeled as EV_###. The labels from the field samples and the EV subsamples can be mapped directly based on the digits following the prefix and underscore (i.e., EV_001 is a subsample from AV1_001). See the critical details section below for more details on sample naming. For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About. This dataset is comprised of one main data folder containing (1) file-level metadata; (2) data dictionary; (3) field metadata; (4) readme; (5) field protocol; and a (6) a subfolder with sediment sample data from the incubation experiment. The sample data subfolder contains (1) effect size; (2) iron (II); (3) gravimetric moisture; (4) respiration rates; (5) raw dissolved oxygen values and plots; (6) specific conductance; (7) pH; (8) temperature; (9) a summary containing mean, median, and standard deviation values of each data type for each treatment (wet and dry); and (10) methods codes. All files are .csv or.pdf.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Pantex Plant Ogallala Aquifer and Perched Groundwater Contingency Plan

The Pantex Plant Ogallala Aquifer and Perched Groundwater Contingency Plan has been developed in accordance with the requirements identified in the: • Interagency Agreement for the Pantex Superfund Site, Article 8.5 Work to be Performed, • Compliance Plan Provision of Hazardous Waste Permit No. 50284, and • Record of Decision for Groundwater, Soil, and Associated Media, Pantex Plant. A Long‐Term Monitoring System Design has been designed to monitor conditions in the perched groundwater including changes in the perched aquifer as a result of implementing the response actions. Monitoring is required for verifying the effectiveness of perched groundwater response actions (i.e., conditions in the perched aquifer are being affected as intended) and for confirming that the perched aquifer and Ogallala Aquifer characterization as defined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation Report and the Corrective Measure Studies/Feasibility Study remains accurate. If monitoring results obtained through the monitoring network identify an unexpected condition or deviation, contingent actions will be considered and implemented as necessary to ensure continued protection of the Ogallala Aquifer and human health and the environment. Potential deviations to expected technology performance may be encountered for each of the four primary response actions that compose the selected remedy for perched groundwater; Playa 1 Pump and Treat System, Southeast Area Pump and Treat System, Southeast Area In‐Situ Bioremediation System (comprised of the Southeast In‐Situ Bioremediation System Original System, Southeast Area In‐Situ Bioremediation System Extension System, Offsite In‐Situ Bioremediation System, Perchlorate/Chromium ISB, Northeast ISB and County Road 8 ISB), and Zone 11 In‐Situ Bioremediation System. Monitoring will also be conducted to determine if there are deviations to the expected characterization, e.g., contaminants not expected as a result of the RCRA Facility Investigation characterization. Deviations to expected conditions in the Ogallala Aquifer could also be encountered if the response actions in the perched groundwater are not performing as expected, i.e., preventing contaminants from migrating to the Ogallala Aquifer. Currently, Pantex has begun investigation of detections of high explosives above groundwater protection standards in wells on the Texas Tech University property and a plume that is moving to the northeast from that area. Due to those detections, this Plan recognizes the fact that future detections in the Ogallala will be focused on first‐ time detections of analytes. After a remedy is determined, this Plan will require modification to address-deviations and contingent actions. This Plan was developed to identify the contingent actions necessary to mitigate impacts resulting from deviations to site conditions or response action performance. The Plan defines the environmental problem being addressed by the response actions, clarifies the expected conditions and objectives of the response actions, and identifies the potential deviations to the response actions (due to site conditions or technology performance) that could be encountered. The deviations were evaluated to determine the likelihood of occurrence, potential impact, and time to respond to avoid impact. The Plan also identifies the monitoring outlined in the Long‐Term Monitoring System Design Report (Consolidated Nuclear Security, 2024) and Sampling Analysis Plan (PanTeXas Deterrence, 2024) that will be used to detect the deviations. Lastly, the Plan specifies the contingent actions that could be implemented in response to the deviations. Because each response focuses on a discrete portion of the perched aquifer and contaminant plume, each response action has a different set of expected conditions, and therefore differing impacts from deviations to the site and technology expectations. As a result, the contingent actions are identified for each response action and potential deviation including specific constituents, location, and conditions. If deviations are encountered that impact the ability of the response action to meet performance objectives, the contingent actions will be focused on ensuring the response action can meet the performance objective. Contingent actions may be implemented as interim actions (ISMs/removal actions) in accordance with the Record of Decision, Interagency Agreement, and Hazardous Waste Permit‐50284, if warranted by the specific circumstances. For deviations to site characterization expected conditions, the contingent action will focus on determination of the source of the deviation, determination of the appropriate response, and evaluation of additional work to be completed. However, if the deviation to characterization impacts the performance of the response action, the contingent action will again focus on ensuring performance objectives can be met. Early source term removals and cleanup actions have been implemented to protect the Ogallala Aquifer. Because of these actions and based on modeling results, the expected conditions in the Ogallala Aquifer are that constituents of concern will not be detected above the Groundwater Protection Standards (GWPSs) nor will they reach potential points of exposure above the GWPS. The primary deviation of concern for the Ogallala is if constituents are detected in the Ogallala Aquifer near or above GWPSs. If it occurs, this change in expected conditions would require further evaluation of site and contaminant characteristics to determine an appropriate course of action. The evaluation would include additional monitoring, source identification, implementation of interim protective measures (if necessary), and delineation of extent. These evaluations are necessary to determine an appropriate response action for the Ogallala. The primary goal of the Plan is to provide for the continued protection of the Ogallala Aquifer and the health of its consumers. In recognition, this Plan presents a flexible and rational approach for making future decisions associated with confirming the change in perched and Ogallala aquifer conditions and identifying a response (technical activities, changes to response actions, regulatory oversight, and public involvement).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗