Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “geospatial,”

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 541 records · Page 30
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Synthetic Streamflow Datasets to Support Emulation of Water Allocations via LSTM

This archive is the data companion to the bonney_et-al_2026_erc metarepo which generates synthetic data, trains an LSTM model, and generates performance metrics on the trained model. While the generation of the synthetic data is fully reprodicible, it is a computationally expensive process. This data archive contains the synthetic datasets needed for training and testing an LSTM model and reproduction of figures and tables. In addition, supplemenatary data products generating and visualizing results is also included, such as geospatial data for the basin. Contents There are two high level directories: `WRAP_archive/` and `repo_data/`. The `WRAP_archive` directory contains compressed intermediate dataproducts from the dataset generation workflow (marked as "I_Dataset_Generation" in the metarepo). These data products are not required by any scripts in the metarepo, but they are archived as they are expensive to generate and may have useful information for other analyses. The `repo_data` directory contains the necessary data for reproducing the workflow in the metarepo and should be decompressed and moved into the top level of the metarepo. Additional details are provided in README.md.

drought↗
DOE OSTI2024

Global Corn Heat Stress: Mean and SD of Degree Days Above 29°C based on NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 Climate Projections

Description This global dataset provides the estimated mean and standard deviation (SD) of corn heat stress (degree days above 29°C) for a set of climate models in NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 at 0.25-degree resolution. The NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 dataset is comprised of global downscaled climate scenarios derived from the General Circulation Model (GCM) runs conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The current dataset includes: Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 The mean and SD are calculated over 1985-2014 for the historical period and over 2035-2064 for future projections. A full description of methods, including growing season, daily temperature distribution, and statistical coefficients, can be found in Haqiqi (2024). The source climate data are obtained from https://ds.nccs.nasa.gov/thredds2/catalog/catalog.html and are described in Thrasher et al (2022). The codes used to create this dataset are available at https://github.com/ihaqiqi/dd29c_nex_cmip6. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics under Cooperative Agreement DE-SC0022141. The data processing, computation, and storage were completed on Purdue Anvil supercomputer and cyberinfrastructure supported by the National Science Foundation HDR award # 2118329: "NSF Institute for Geospatial Understanding through an Integrative Discovery Environment (I-GUIDE)". References Haqiqi. I. (2024). Trade can buffer climate-induced risks and volatilities in crop supply. Environmental Research: Food Systems. https://doi.org/10.1088/2976-601X/ad7d12 Thrasher, B., Wang, W., Michaelis, A., Melton, F., Lee, T., & Nemani, R. (2022). NASA global daily downscaled projections, CMIP6. Scientific Data, 9(1), 262. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01393-4

Climate Change↗
DOE OSTI2020

HarDWR - Raw 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 - Switched source data from collecting records from each state independently to using the WestDAAT dataset v1.0 - Initial public release Description In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, as well as geospatial data defining the areas in which water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. In addition, while all states make their water rights publicly available, each provides their records in unique formats, meaning that file types, field availability, and terms vary from state to state. This leads to additional challenges to managing resources which cross state lines, or conducting consistent multi-state water analyses. For the first version of HarDWR, we collected the water rights databases from 11 Western States of the United States. In order to preform regional analyses with the collected data, the raw records had to be harmonized into one single format. The Water Data Exchange (WaDE) is a program dedicated to the sharing of water-related data for the Western U.S. in a singular consistent format. Created by the Western States Water Council (WSWC) to facilitate the collection and dissemination of water data among WSWC's member states and the public, WaDE provides an important service for those interested in water resource planning and management in their focus region. Of the services which WaDE provides, the one of the most interesting is the WestDAAT dataset, which is a collection of water rights data provided by the 18 WSWC member states that have been standardized into a single format, much like we had done on a more limited scale with HarDWR v1. For this version of HarDWR we decided to use WestDAAT, specifically a snapshot created in Feburary 2024, as our water rights source data. A full explanation of the benefits gained from this switch can be found in the description of the updated Harmonized Water Rights Records v2.0, but in short it has allowed us to focus more of our efforts on answering research questions and gaining a more realistic understanding of how water rights are allocated. For more information on how the data for WestDAAT was collected, please see the WaDE data summary. Terms of Use While WaDE works directly with the state agencies to collect and standardize the water rights records, the ultimate authority for the water rights data remains the individual states. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. As several of the states update their water rights databases daily, the information provided here is not the latest possible, and should not be used for legal purposes. WestDAAT itself has irregular updates. Additional questions about the data the source states provided should be directed to the respective state agencies (see methods.csv and organization.csv files described below). In addition, although data was presented here was not collected directly from the states, several states requested specifically worked disclaimers when sharing their data. These disclaimers are included here as an acknowledgement from where the water rights data is primarily sourced. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." File Descriptions The unmodified February, 2024 WestDAAT snapshot is composed of nine files. Below is a brief description of each file, as well as how they were utilized for HarDWR. WaDEDataDictionaryTerms.xlsx: As the file's name implies, this is a data dictionary for all of the below named files. This file describes the column names for each of the following files, with the exception of citation.txt which does not have any columns. The descriptions for each file are divided by tab,with the same name as their associated file, within this document. allocationamount.csv: The "main" file of the group, it contains the water right records for each state. Of particular note, each water right is broken down into one or more water allocations. Allocations may be withdrawn from one or more locations, or even multiple allocations associated with a particular location. This is a more subtle and realistic representation of how water is used than what was available in the first version of HarDWR. For the records from some states, this can mean that multiple allocations listed under a single right will appear as rows within this file. citation.txt: A combination of contact information for WaDE personnel, disclaimer about how the data should be used, and guidelines for citing WestDAAT. methods.csv: A file describing the source and method by which WaDE collected water rights data from each state. organization.csv: A file listing the water rights authoritative agencies for each state. sites.csv: This file provides the geographic, and other descriptors, of the physical location of allocations, called 'sites'. To reiterate, it is possible for one allocation to be associated with multiple sites, as well as one site to be associated with multiple allocations. The two descriptors which we were most interested in where the site's coordinates, as well as whether the site was classified as a Point of Diversion (POD) or a Place of Use (POU). As a general rule, PODs are geographic points, while POUs are areas typically represented as property boundaries or irregularly shaped polygons. sites_pouGeometry.csv: For those allocations with a POU site, this file contains the defining points for the associated polygons. variables.csv: A file describing the units in which an allocation's water amount is reported within WestDAAT. This information is essentially a repeat of the 'AllocationFlow_CFS' and 'AllocationVolume_AF' columns within allocationamount.csv, at least for our purposes. watersources: This file describes the source of water from which each site extracts from. For our purposes, this table was used to determine whether the water came from Surface Water, Groundwater, or Unspecified Water.

Lisk, Matthew↗
DOE OSTI2024

Urban morphology and urban water demand evolution in the Los Angeles region

Detailed description of the dataset sources used in this study, the experimental workflow, and plotting for the paper figures provided at the associated GitHub Meta Repo: https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/Ferencz_et_al_2024_ERL The future water demand projections from this study are hypothetical future water demands that reflect the population and urban land cover changes represented by the scenarios considered. The intent and emphasis of this work is investigating the interactions between population change, evolution of urban morphology, and water demand. These projections are not meant to be likely future demands for specific water providers or the LA region and should not be interpreted as such. The folders contain input and output data for each step of the "Recreate my Experiment" workflow described in the associated GitHub meta-repository as well as data used for plotting Figures for the paper that this dataset supports. Description of each folder's contents and use: Step_1a: Inputs to the associated python script provided on the GitHub repo. Step_1b: Inputs (downscaled population rasters) used by the associated python script provided on the GitHub repo. Original 1-km squared rasters that were downscaled also provided. Step_1c: Urban growth projection rasters corresponding to SSP3 and SSP5 population scenarios are provided in separate subfolders as well as the water provider boundaries used for analysis. Outputs of data processing also provided. Associated python script provided on GitHub. Step_1d: Description of Inputs used by the QGIS Model Builder GUI that automates geospatial processing and clipping the of the high-resolution 60 cm land cover data for each urban land class footprint within a defined polygon boundary. The Model Builder is provided on the GitHub repo and can be used by QGIS. The outputs of this step are in "Clipped Provider Hi Res Landcover". If the user wants to use The Model Builder for different regions of LA or to test our outputs, they will need to download the hi resolution landcover raster listed in the Readme and in Ref [2] of the GitHub Page. Step_1e: All necessary inputs to generate average monthly demand over the 2017-2021 period and the minimum and maximum demands over the 2014-2021 for each water provider. Associated python scripts are on GitHub. Step 2: Output data about land cover metrics (areas and fractions) for each urban land class for each water provider. Associated python script on GitHub. Uses outputs from Step 1d "Clipped Provider Hi Res Landcover" Step 3: Both the Inputs for and Outputs from the urban projection raster analysis Python script on GitHub. The inputs are urban land class rasters for specific SSP and zoning scenarios (low, medium, high) from Step 1c. The outputs are rasters of urban pixels that were converted to a higher land class and the number of land class units that changed (Values of 1, 2, or 3). For example, a value of 2 could be LC 21 -> 23 or LC 22 -> 24. These maps are label "intensification." The other outputs are "urban growth" rasters showing the conversion of non urban to urban land, which are indicated by pixel values of 1. These are used for the urban growth change maps in Figure 3. Step 4: Output projections of indoor and outdoor annual and monthly demands for each water provider for the average, minimum, and maximum monthly demand scenarios for each of the four urban growth scenarios (SSP3 med, SSP5 low, SSP5 med, and SSP5 high). The outputs also include metrics on each water provider used for the demand sensitivity analysis presented in Figure 8. Outputs from Step 4 are used for Figures 4 - 8 of the paper. Figures: This folder has data used for plotting Figures 1 through 5, and 8. Data for Figures 6 and 7 are sourced directly from folders associated with the Processing and Analysis Steps 1 - 4. The GitHub meta repository provides descriptions of how each figure was made and the associated plotting scripts used.

Los Angeles↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) Model: High-Resolution Power Plant Siting

Abstract This presentation gives an overview of the geospatial power plant siting model CERF. CERF (Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility) is an open source Python package developed under the Integrated Multisector Multiscale Modeling (IM3) Project at PNNL. This presentation covers an overview of how the CERF model works, walks through various power plant siting analyses, and discusses future research opportunities for the model. The CERF model can be accessed at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf. PNNL Information Release Number: PNNL-SA-207336 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds Developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2026

Sensitivity Analysis of Drivers Water Shortage in the Los Angeles Region During Drought

The code and detailed step-by-step instructions for generating the model output data, processing results, and analysis and plotting are provided at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/Ferencz_et_al_2026_ER_Water. The PyArtes model is a python adaptation of the Artes model. PyArtes uses many of the same input data and optimization model architecture as Artes. Documentation for the PyArtes model is provided in the Supplement to the paper. The primary data product are simulated monthly water shortages for indoor and outdoor demand under a large ensemble of drought scenarios (>13,000). The droughts are hypothetical and are not based on historical time series data of supply sources - though historical data did help inform ranges explored for supply parameters. Demands are informed by recent 2017-2021 water supply data. Demands used for the model can be accessed at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/Ferencz_et_al_2026_ER_Water. Simulations resolve demand for over 90 water providers in the study region. The results report 36 months of water shortage data for each indoor and outdoor demand node. The study also developed a multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural network trained on a subset of the simulated shortage ensemble to emulate worst annual water shortage for a given set of parameter multipliers -- provided the parameter values fall within the ranges sampled in the ensemble. Emulated water shortages for synthetic ensembles are in the MLP-generated shortages folder. The MLP model was used to generate larger ensembles to support Sobol analysis that would have been extremely computationally expensive to simulate. Datasets provided in this repository*: Simulated shortages. These results are used for the analysis for Figures 5, 8, and 9 in the paper, and also to train the MLP emulator. .zip file containing outputs for the 13,312 scenario ensemble. Separate .csv files for indoor and outdoor shortage for each scenario. Rows = demand ids (~100), Columns = months (36) Units = acre-feet/month of shortage (shortage = monthly demand - supply). 1 acft = 1233.48 m^3 .csv files of aggregated shortages derived from the 13,312 ensemble Rows = scenarios (13,312), Columns = demand ids (~100) Units = acre-feet/year (either worst annual shortage or total shortage over the 3-year drought) .csv file of the parameter multipliers scenarios for the ensemble .csv file of the parameter ranges and baseline values the multipliers were applied to MLP-generated shortages. These results are used for Figures 4, 6, and 7 in the paper. mwd higher folder: scenario ensembles, emulated worst year total shortages (acft), and Sobol results Emulated shortages. Rows = scenarios, columns = demand ids, units acft Sobol results. Rows = demand ids, columns Sobol (S1, ST, or 95% confidence interval) value for each parameter mwd lower folder: scenario ensembles, emulated worst year total shortages (acft), and Sobol results same organization as mwd higher MLP performance: performance metrics (R^2, RMSE, BIAS, MAPE) for the testing subset (20% or 2,662 scenarios) and simulated vs emulated worst year shortage (acre-feet/year) for every demand node, MWD wholesale regions, and the entire study region (LAC). Supporting data for figures. Figure plotting scripts in the associated GitHub repo. These files support analysis and visualization. Geospatial Data used for plotting simulated water shortages and Sobol results. Dictionary of full names for demand nodes in the model and estimates of water supply by source type informed by Artes input files and California Urban Water Management Planning data: https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/Urban-Water-Use-Efficiency/Urban-Water-Management-Plans *Readme files provided for each folder.

drought↗
DOE OSTI2026

Summertime methane and carbon dioxide emission rates and associated variables from a national-scale survey of 146 reservoirs in the United States, 2016-2023

Reservoirs are globally important sources of greenhouse gases, but the magnitude of their emissions is highly uncertain. Here we present data for 146 reservoirs from two surveys of reservoir methane and carbon dioxide emissions, one at the regional scale in the midwestern United States and one at the national scale in the conterminous United States, plus data from one reservoir in Washington and another in Puerto Rico. At all reservoirs, ebullitive and diffusive emissions and basic physiochemistry were measured at 15-70 locations during one 22 to 64-hour period during the summers of 2016-2023, with four reservoirs revisited a second time. Concomitant water chemistry measurements were also made at an index site. The dataset is comprised of two geospatial files and seven .csv files containing greenhouse gas emissions, water chemistry, morphology, and other relevant data. These data comprise the largest multi-reservoir emissions dataset ever assembled using consistent measurement methods.

Beaulieu, Jake [University of Notre Dame, IN]↗
DOE OSTI2026

Automated Classification of Vehicle Movements at Signalized Intersections Using Vehicle Trajectories

Accurate vehicle movement classification through signalized intersections is of paramount importance to the analysis of intersection performance and the optimization of traffic control strategies. Conventional techniques for tracking vehicle turning movements depend on infrastructure-based strategies like human counts, loop detectors, and video analytics, all of which are costly, prone to errors, and spatially constrained. High-frequency trajectory data can be utilized to determine vehicle movement patterns in a scalable and infrastructure-independent method due to the adoption of connected vehicles (CVs). In recent years, several studies have utilized connected vehicle data to generate performance measures. Most of the trajectory-based performance measures approaches, however, require map matching-i.e., extracting geospatial references from maps to identify the movements that individual vehicles make at a signalized intersection. These approaches are often time-consuming and hinder scalability since geographic features need to be provided for an analysis to be conducted. Map matching methods are prone to errors as different map versions change these geographic features. This research presents a novel automatic classification pipeline that uses CV trajectory data to classify vehicle movements at signalized crossings, specifically pass-through left-turn and right-turn maneuvers. The process starts by filtering trips that cross a spatial bounding box that has been defined at the target intersection. Approach and departure headings for each trajectory crossing the boundary are computed and are clustered together to identify dominant movements. The proposed algorithm is used to classify the movement of vehicles at 10 intersections in the state of California, and the results indicate that the algorithm can classify movements at these intersections with varying traffic volumes and road network configurations, all in a map-less framework with no need for conflation of vehicle trajectories to a digital base map.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2020

Mummified baboons reveal the far reach of early Egyptian mariners

The Red Sea was witness to important events during human history, including the first long steps in a trade network (the spice route) that would drive maritime technology and shape geopolitical fortunes for thousands of years. Punt was a pivotal early node in the rise of this enterprise, serving as an important emporium for luxury goods, including sacred baboons ( Papio hamadryas ), but its location is disputed. Here, we use geospatial variation in the oxygen and strontium isotope ratios of 155 baboons from 77 locations to estimate the geoprovenance of mummified baboons recovered from ancient Egyptian temples and tombs. Five Ptolemaic specimens of P. anubis (404–40 BC) showed evidence of long-term residency in Egypt prior to mummification, consistent with a captive breeding program. Two New Kingdom specimens of P. hamadryas were sourced to a region that encompasses much of present-day Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Djibouti, and portions of Somalia and Yemen. This result is a testament to the tremendous reach of Egyptian seafaring during the 2nd millennium BC. It also corroborates the balance of scholarly conjecture on the location of Punt.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
NASA NTRS2002

The Use of Remote Sensing for Monitoring, Prediction, and Management of Hydrologic, Agricultural, and Ecological Processes in the Northern Great Plains

The NASA-EPSCoR program in South Dakota is focused on the enhancement of NASA-related research in earth system science and corresponding infrastructure development to support this theme. Hence, the program has adopted a strategy that keys on research projects that: a) establish quantitative links between geospatial information technologies and fundamental climatic and ecosystem processes in the Northern Great Plains (NGP) and b) develop and use coupled modeling tools, which can be initialized by data from combined satellite and surface measurements, to provide reliable predictions and management guidance for hydrologic, agricultural, and ecological systems of the NGP. Building a partnership network that includes both internal and external team members is recognized as an essential element of the SD NASA-EPSCoR program. Hence, promoting and tracking such linkages along with their relevant programmatic consequences are used as one metric to assess the program's progress and success. This annual report first summarizes general activities and accomplishments, and then provides progress narratives for the two separate, yet related research projects that are essential components of the SD NASA-EPSCoR program.

Farwell, Sherry O.↗
NASA NTRS2003

The University of Mississippi Geoinformatics Center (UMGC)

The overarching goal of the University of Mississippi Geoinformatics Center (UMGC) is to promote application of geospatial information technologies through technology education, research support, and infrastructure development. During the initial two- year phase of operation the UMGC has successfully met those goals and is uniquely positioned to continue operation and further expand the UMGC into additional academic programs. At the end of the first funding cycle, the goals of the UMGC have been and are being met through research and educational activities in the original four participating programs; Biology, Computer and Information Science, Geology and Geological Engineering, and Sociology and Anthropology, with the School of Business joining the UMGC in early 2001. Each of these departments is supporting graduate students conducting research, has created combination teaching and research laboratories, and supported faculty during the summer months.

Easson, Gregory L.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Achievements of the DOT-NASA Joint Program on Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies: Application to Multimodal Transportation

This report presents three-year accomplishments from the national program on Commercial Remote Sensing and Geospatial Technology (CRSGT) application to transportation, administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) in collaboration with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The joint program was authorized under Section 5113 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). This is the first national program of its type focusing on transportation applications of emerging commercial remote sensing technologies. U.S. DOT's Research and Special Programs Administration manages the program in coordination with NASA's Earth Science Enterprise's application programs. The program focuses on applications of CRSGT products and systems for providing smarter and more efficient transportation operations and services. The program is performed in partnership with four major National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation (NCRST). Each consortium focuses on research and development of products in one of the four priority areas for transportation application, and includes technical application and demonstration projects carried out in partnership with industries and service providers in their respective areas. The report identifies products and accomplishments from each of the four consortia in meeting the goal of providing smarter and more efficient transportation services. The products and results emerging from the program are being implemented in transportation operations and services through state and local agencies. The Environmental Assessment and Application Consortium (NCRST-E) provides leadership for developing and deploying cost effective environmental and transportation planning services, and integrates CRSGT advances for achieving smarter and cost effective corridor planning. The Infrastructure Management Consortium (NCRST-I) provides leadership in technologies that achieve smarter and cheaper ways of managing transportation infrastructure assets, operation, and inspection, and integrates CRSGT advances for achieving infrastructure security. The Traffic Flow Consortium (NCRST-F) provides leadership to develop new tools for regional traffic flow management including heavy vehicles and intermodal flow of freight, and integrates CRSGT advances for complementing and extending the reach of ITS user services. The Safety, Hazards and Disasters (NCRST-H) provides leadership for deploying remote sensing technology to locate transportation hazards and improve disaster recovery, and integrates CRSGT advances for application to protect transportation systems from terrorism. The DOT-NASA team is proud to present this report of accomplishments on products and results emerging from the joint program for application to transportation practice.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2002

NASA's Agricultural Program: A USDA/Grower Partnership

Ag20/20 is a partnership between USDA, NASA, and four national commodity associations. It is driven by the information needs of U.S. farmers. Ag20/20 is focused on utilization of earth science and remote sensing for decision-making and oriented toward economically viable operational solutions. Its purpose is to accelerate the use of remote sensing and other geospatial technologies on the farm to: 1) Increase the production efficiency of the American farmer; 2) Reduce crop production risks; 3) Improve environmental stewardship tools for agricultural production.

McKellip, Rodney↗
NASA NTRS2003

Disaster Response and Preparedness Application: Emergency Environmental Response Tool (EERT)

In 2000, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Environmental Office at the John C. Stennis Space Center (SSC) developed an Environmental Geographic Information Systems (EGIS) database. NASA had previously developed a GIS database at SSC to assist in the NASA Environmental Office's management of the Center. This GIS became the basis for the NASA-wide EGIS project, which was proposed after the applicability of the SSC database was demonstrated. Since its completion, the SSC EGIS has aided the Environmental Office with noise pollution modeling, land cover assessment, wetlands delineation, environmental hazards mapping, and critical habitat delineation for protected species. At SSC, facility management and safety officers are responsible for ensuring the physical security of the facilities, staff, and equipment as well as for responding to environmental emergencies, such as accidental releases of hazardous materials. All phases of emergency management (planning, mitigation, preparedness, and response) depend on data reliability and system interoperability from a variety of sources to determine the size and scope of the emergency operation. Because geospatial data are now available for all NASA facilities, it was suggested that this data could be incorporated into a computerized management information program to assist facility managers. The idea was that the information system could improve both the effectiveness and the efficiency of managing and controlling actions associated with disaster, homeland security, and other activities. It was decided to use SSC as a pilot site to demonstrate the efficacy of having a baseline, computerized management information system that ultimately was referred to as the Emergency Environmental Response Tool (EERT).

Smoot, James↗