Systems for Monitoring and Analytics for Renewable Transportation Fuels from Agricultural Resources and Management (SMARTFARM SBIR/STTR)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “carbon farming”
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.
Quantifying direct yield benefits of soil carbon increases from cover cropping
Cropland management practices that restore soil organic carbon (SOC) are increasingly presented as climate solutions that also enhance yields. But how often these benefits align at the farm level—the scale of farmers’ decision making—remains uncertain. Here we examined concurrent SOC and yield responses to cover cropping, including their direct connection, with a global meta-analysis. Cover cropping simultaneously increased yields and SOC in 59.7% of 434 paired observations. Increases in SOC directly increased crop yields in soils with initial SOC concentrations below 11.6 g kg-1; for example, a change from 5 g kg -1 to 6 g kg -1 increased yields by +2.4%. These yield benefits of SOC did not decline as nitrogen inputs increased or when legume cover crops were used, suggesting fertility inputs cannot substitute for SOC effects. Regardless of direct effects of SOC increases on yields, integrating legume cover crops into systems with simplified rotations or with nitrogen inputs < 157 kg ha -1 season -1 N led to the largest yield increases (up to +24.3%), with legumes also increasing SOC more than non-legumes (up to +1.5 g kg -1 ). By simultaneously increasing yields and SOC, cover cropping provides an opportunity to benefit both food security and climate, including via direct yield benefits from SOC increases on low carbon soils.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
Organic Matter Concentration and Composition in November 2021 and April 2022 from 12 Streams Impacted by the 2020 Holiday Farm Fire (v2)
This dataset represents results from a field study aiming to understand storm induced transport of pyrogenic materials to streams impacted by varying degrees of burn severity. Time series samples were collected at 5 sites within the McKenzie River Watershed (Oregon, USA) whose catchment were each completely engulfed by the 2020 Holiday Farm Fire. An additional 7 sites were sampled once during the storm. The samples were collected during storm events in November 2020, January 2021, November 2021, and April 2022. Samples were characterized for benezenepolycarboxylic acids (BPCA), ultra-high resolution mass spectrometry, dissolved organic carbon and optics (absorbance and fluorescence). Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTICR) and dissolved organic carbon data from the November 2020 (referred to as “EWEB_2020”) sampling can be found in a separate data package (doi: 10.15485/1869708). NOTE: The 2020 samples were run on FTICR-MS in two unique instances. The first run can be found in the previous data package (EWEB_2020). The second run is included in this data package. These samples were run for a second time so that the data were more directly interoperable with the other samples in this data package. We have not done any investigation into the differences/similarities between these datasets and the previously ran/published data in the other data package. This data package was originally published in November 2024. It was updated in April 2025 (v2; new and modified files). See the change history section below for more details. For details on how to navigate data packages generated by this project, see https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/PNNLRiverCorridorSFA/About. This dataset contains (1) file-level metadata; (2) data dictionary; (3) data package readme; (4) metadata; (5) methods information; (6) dissolved organic carbon (DOC, measured as non-purgeable organic carbon, NPOC) data; (7) excitation emission matrix (EEM) methods; and (8) a sub-folder with processed EEM data (9) benzene polycarboxylic acid (BPCA) concentration data; (10) Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FTICR-MS) methods; and (11) folder of high-resolution characterization of organic matter via 12 Tesla FTICR-MS generated through the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory (EMSL; https://www.pnnl.gov/environmental-molecular-sciences-laboratory). The EEMs sub-folder contains two additional folders; the Absorbance and Fluorescence folders which contain the processed EEMs absorbance and fluorescence data respectively. This package contains the following file types: csv, xml, pdf.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
AmeriFlux US-Mi1 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 1
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mi1 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 1. Site Description - This Farm was a privately owned farm in Ohio Leased to Aloterra Energy Corporation out of Texas, The crop was Miscanthus grown continually originally for alternative Ethanol production but eventually for fiber as absorbant material. Miscanthus grows upwards of 15 ft tall each year.
Goslee, Sarah↗
AmeriFlux US-Mi2 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 2
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mi2 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 2. Site Description - This Farm was a privately owned farm in Ohio Leased to Aloterra Energy Corporation out of Texas, The crop was Miscanthus grown continually originally for alternative Ethanol production but eventually for fiber as absorbant material. Miscanthus grows upwards of 15 ft tall each year.
Goslee, Sarah↗
AmeriFlux US-Mi3 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 3
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-Mi3 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) Miscanthus 3. Site Description - This Farm was a privately owned farm in Ohio Leased to Aloterra Energy Corporation out of Texas, The crop was Miscanthus grown continually originally for alternative Ethanol production but eventually for fiber as absorbant material. Miscanthus grows upwards of 15 ft tall each year.
Goslee, Sarah↗
The case for cellulose production on Mars
From examining the consequences of not requiring that all wastes from life support be recycled back to the food plants, it is concluded that cellulose production on Mars could be an important input for many nonmetabolic material requirements on Mars. The fluxes of carbon in cellulose production would probably exceed those in food production, and therefore settlements on Mars could utilize cellulose farms in building a Mars infrastructure.
Volk, Tyler↗
Wake Effects in Lower Carbon Future Scenarios
In August 2022, the U.S. Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which intended to accelerate U.S. decarbonization, clean energy manufacturing, and deployment of new power and end-use technologies. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory has examined possible scenarios for growth by 2050 resulting from the IRA and other emissions reduction drivers and defined several possible scenarios for large-scale wind deployment. These scenarios incorporate large clusters of turbines operating as wind farms grouped around existing or likely transmission lines which will result in wind farm wakes. Using a numerical weather prediction (NWP) model, we assess these wake effects in a domain in the U. S. Southern Great Plains for a representative year with four scenarios in order to validate the simulations, estimate the internal wake impact, and quantify the cluster wake effect. Herein, we present a validation of the ”no wind farm” scenario and quantify the internal waking effect for the ”ONE” wind farm scenario. Future work will use the “MID” scenario (more than 8000 turbines) and the “HI” scenario (more than 16,000 turbines) to quantify the effect of cluster wakes or inter-farm wakes on power production.
17 WIND ENERGY↗
AmeriFlux US-UiC University of Illinois Maize-Soy
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-UiC University of Illinois Maize-Soy. Site Description - Agricultural field planted with maize in a three year rotation with soy (maize-maize-soy). The first soy rotation year was 2010. This field is typically planted in May and harvested in October. This site is located at an experimental farm approximately 2 miles south of the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign and is colocated with (500-1000m distance) all other Us-Ui sites.
Bernacchi, Carl J↗
AmeriFlux US-UC1 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) EC1
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-UC1 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) EC1. Site Description - Upper Chesapeake Bay farm is privately owned. The farming that took place was performed by the Farm Owner. The ground is rolling terrain, next to wooded areas, private resdiences and other large fields maintained by private land owners. At the time of this collection period, the site housed another Eddy Covariance System and a two Phenocams. Crop has been continuous corn with plans to rotate to alfalfa grass mixture.
Goslee, Sarah↗
AmeriFlux US-UC2 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) EC2
This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-UC2 LTAR UCB (Upper Chesapeake Bay) EC2. Site Description - Upper Chesapeake Bay farm is privately owned. The farming that took place was performed by the Farm Owner. The ground is rolling terrain, next to wooded areas, private resdiences and other large fields maintained by private land owners. At the time of this collection period, the site housed another Eddy Covariance System and a two Phenocams. Crop has been continuous corn with plans to rotate to alfalfa grass mixture.
Goslee, Sarah↗
DOE SBIR Ph I Spatial Excitation Emission Matrix Spectroscopy (SEEMS) Bioimager Instrument Final Scientific Technical Report
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
Potential of U.S. Marine and Offshore Wind Energy to Power Marine Carbon Dioxide Removal
The goal of this project was to provide a preliminary feasibility assessment of powering different marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR), carbon capture (mCC), and carbon sequestration (mCS) strategies with marine energy. The investigation focused on methods with clear power requirements at sea beyond monitoring such as artificial upwelling, deep ocean storage, electrochemical (eChem) mCDR and mCC, offshore microalgae cultivation, and seaweed farming and sinking. The project found that eChem mCDR powered by marine energy and offshore wind energy available in the United States could meet global CDR scales needed by 2040 and 2050 to limit warming to 1.5 degrees C by 2100 and marine energy alone could greatly contribute to reaching scales needed by 2040. Note that this preliminary estimate assumes that it is possible to harvest all the marine and offshore wind resources available in the United States with existing technology options. Though the biological methods were limited in scale they still hold promise in developing carbon negative fuels and products which can reduce emissions in the short term.
afforestation↗
A Tutorial on the Control of Floating Offshore Wind Turbines: Stability Challenges and Opportunities for Power Capture
Climate change is a serious threat facing humanity. The United States (U.S.) and many other countries are increasing the amount of electrical power generated from renewable energy sources in an effort to combat climate change and ensure energy independence. The U.S. has set goals to achieve a 100% decarbonized electric grid by 2035 and a net-zero emissions economy by no later than 2050. Renewable energy currently accounts for about 20% of the U.S. power grid. According to the U.S. Department of Energy and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), in the U.S. in 2021, wind and solar photovoltaic generation supplied 9.1% and 4% of total electricity generation, respectively, and the latest publicly available data show that hydropower represented 6.6% of all electricity generated in the U.S. in 2019. As wind farms have been built in many of the best wind resource areas on land, the U.S. and many other countries are turning to offshore wind for further growth of wind power capacity. Further, the U.S. has committed to deploy 30 GW of offshore wind by 2030, a significant increase from the 0.04 GW of installed offshore wind in the country as of the end of 2023. Many other countries have also established ambitious goals or plans to increase the amount of installed offshore wind power.
17 WIND ENERGY↗
FUN-BioCROP model with litter decomposition parameters derived from the LIDET dataset
This repository contains the code and data necessary to run the FUN-BioCROP (Fixation and Uptake of Nitrogen-Bioenergy Carbon, Rhizosphere, Organisms, and Protection) model with litter decomposition parameters derived from a modified Monte Carlo simulation that used the Long-term Intersite Decomposition Experiment Team dataset. Related publication:Juice, S.M., Ridgeway, J.R., Hartman, M.D., Parton, W.J., Berardi, D.M., Sulman, B.N., Allen, K.E., & Brzostek, E.R. Reparameterizing litter decomposition using a simplified Monte Carlo method improves litter decay simulated by a microbial model and alters bioenergy soil carbon estimates. Description of Files: FUNBioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd R code with FUN-BioCROP model that can be run with 10 different sets of parameters for litter decomposition (Baseline, LIDET, or eight other best parameter sets identified in the modified Monte Carlo simulation. CORPSE Functions_Bioenergy_V2.R Code with CORPSE model functions, called by FUNBioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd Model Input Data: bulk.csv, bulk_till.csv, rhizo.csv, rhizo_till.csv, litter.csv Initial C and N (kg C or N/m2) pool values for each soil compartment, final values from spin up. All five files have the same columns: (Column - Description - Units) uFastC - Unprotected fast decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 uSlowC - Unprotected slow decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 uNecroC - Unprotected necromass carbon - kg carbon/m2 pFastC - Protected fast decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 pSlowC - Protected slow decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 pNecroC - Protected necromass carbon - kg carbon/m2 livingMicrobeC - Carbon in living microbial biomass - kg carbon/m2 uFastN - Unprotected fast decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 uSlowN - Unprotected slow decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 uNecroN - Unprotected necromass nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pFastN - Protected fast decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pSlowN - Protected slow decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pNecroN - Protected necromass nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 inorganicN - Inorganic nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 CO2 - Carbon in carbon dioxide - kg carbon/m2 livingMicrobeN - Nitrogen in living microbial biomass - kg nitrogen/m2 Model Input Data: FluxTower_AvgSoilT.csv: Average daily soil temperature (oC) at 10 cm depth at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) Energy Farm flux tower from 7/2008-3/2016. (One year of averaged data) Model Input Data: FluxTower_AvgSoilVWC.csv: Average daily soil volumetric water content (VWC) at 10 cm depth at UIUC Energy Farm flux tower from 7/2008-3/2016. (One year of averaged data) Model Input Data: input_CCS_LIDET Study.csv: This file has daily data to run FUN-BioCROP (Column - Description - Units): yr - calendar year - year doy - day of year (1 to 365) (no leap year) - day anpp - aboveground NPP (DayCent) - kg C/m2/day bnpp - belowground NPP (DayCent) - kg C/m2/day aglivc - live aboveground biomass carbon (DayCent) - kg C/m2 bglivcj - live juvenile fine root biomass carbon (DayCent) - kg C/m2 bglivcm - live mature fine root biomass carbon (DayCent) - kg C/m2 aglivn - live aboveground biomass nitrogen (DayCent) - kg N/m2 bglivnj - live juvenile fine root biomass nitrogen (DayCent) - kg N/m2 bglivnm - live mature fine root biomass nitrogen (DayCent) - kg N/m2 nyr - simulation year - year cult - indicates a cultivation event (0 or 1) crop - indicates a new crop (0 or 1) fert - indicates a fertilizer event (0 or 1) frst - indicates the first day of the growing season (0 or 1) harv - indicates a harvest event (0 or 1) last - indicates the end of the growing season (0 or 1) croptype - crop type (0=none; 1=alfalfa; 2=corn; 3=grass clover pasture; 4=soybean; 5=wheat) cropsrl - crop specific root length - mm/g root cultrhizmix - fraction of rhizosphere mixed with bulk soil during cultivation (0.0-1.0) - fraction cultlitmix - fraction of litter mixed with bulk soil during cultivation (0.0-1.0) - fraction harvremov - fraction of above ground biomass removed during harvest (0.0-1.0) - fraction fertamt - fertilization amount - g N/m2 lifehist - plant life history (0 = annual, 1 = perennial) froot_turnover_c - amount of C in fine root turnover - kg C/m2 froot_turnover_n - amount of N in fine root turnover - kg N/m2 agrd_turnover_c - amount of C in aboveground biomass turnover - kg C/m2 agrd_turnover_n - amount of N in aboveground biomass turnover - kg N/m2 leaf_litter_fastfrac - Fast decomposing fraction of leaf litter (0.0-1.0) - fraction root_litter_fastfrac - Fast decomposing fraction of root litter (0.0-1.0) - fraction root_diameter - root diameter - mm root_length - root length - mm root/m2 rhizo_frac - fraction of total soil volume that is rhizosphere (0.0 - 1.0) - fraction date - date in format YYYY-MM-DD Instructions: Save the model code ("FUN-BioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd") and accompanything files (data streams and CORPSE function code) in the same folder. In model code "Chunk 3: Load CORPSE Data Streams" set the working directory (setwd) to the folder with the files saved in step #1. In "Chunk 5: Define LIDET parameter sets" select the litter decomposition parameter set to be used in the run, and comment out all other sets. If changing any parameter values, edit them in "Chunk 6: Load parameters." Run all chunks up to and including "Chunk 10: Prepare Data for Export." In "Chunk 11: Export Output Data" edit data frames for export and filenames, as necessary. "Chunk 12: Graph Total Soil C" makes a figure of C remaining over the model run period. Description of each model chunk (in file FUN-BioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd): Chunk 1: Remove all functions, clear memory. Removes all functions from R environment, clears the memory. Chunk 2: Load Packages. Loads packages necessary to run the code. Chunk 3: Load CORPSE Data Streams. Sets the working directory and loads the data files necessary to run CORPSE. Chunk 4: Load CORPSE Functions. Loads the R script with CORPSE functions from the working directory, "CORPSE Functions_Bioenergy_V2.R". Chunk 5: Define LIDET parameter sets. Has ten different parameter sets for litter decomposition tested in this study: Baseline parameters, LIDET parameters, and the other 8 best performing parameter sets identified in the modified Monte Carlo. To run the model, all but one parameter set must be commented out. Chunk 6: Load Parameters. Loads all fixed parameters to run the model. Data frame with definitions of parameters is in the CORPSE function script "CORPSE Functions_Bioenergy_V2.R" Chunk 7: Prepare Data Streams. Takes data streams loaded in Chunk 3 and puts them in the format necessary to run the model. The model is coded to run at least two sites at a time, so if only one site is being run it must be run in duplicate. Individual data tables of daily values are created in this chunk from the input data file. Chunk 8: Set Initial Conditions. Creates data tables of soil C and N pools for each soil compartment (rhizo_till, rhizo, bulk_till, bulk, litter) and loads initial values into the data tables. Creates lists for each soil compartment to hold model output. Chunk 9: Load FUN Data and Set Up Matrices. Uses DayCent data to calculate FUN input data: root and leaf N demand, total N demand, plant CN, leaf N available for retranslocation, and litter production. Creates matrices for FUN model outputs. Chunk 10: Run Model. Runs the model. Chunk 11: Prepare Data for Export. Combines data from each day saved as lists into data frames for each soil compartment. Adds values from all soil compartments together to calculate total soil values, creates separate data frames for each soil C and N pool (e.g., protected slow C) for the total soil value. Adds different C and N pools together to calculate total soil C and N for all layers. Creates data frame of ratio of protected to unprotected SOC. Organizes FUN data for export. Chunk 12: Export Results. Exports CSV files of model results to the working directory. Chunk 13: Graph Total Soil C. Makes figure of C remaining over time. Related Links: Original FUN-BioCROP model: https://github.com/BrzostekEcologyLab/FUN-BioCROP LIDET dataset: https://andlter.forestry.oregonstate.edu/data/abstract.aspx?dbcode=TD023
Juice, Stephanie↗
The quality of organic amendments affects soil microbiome and nitrogen-cycling bacteria in an organic farming system
Organic amendments are applied in organic farming systems to provide nutrients for crop uptake and to improve soil health. Compost is often favored over fresh manure for food safety reasons, while fresh manure can be a valuable source of readily available nitrogen (N). However, the potential for fresh versus composted manure to differentially affect soil microbial and N-cycling functional communities over multiple seasons remains unknown. We compared the effect of composted vs. fresh cattle manure on soil microbial communities using taxonomic and functional approaches. Soils were collected from field plots with three organic N treatments: control (no amendment), composted manure (compost, 224 kg/ha total N), and fresh manure (manure, 224 kg/ha total N) in an organic production system. Illumina amplicon sequencing was used to comprehensively assess the bacterial community (16S rRNA genes), fungal community (ITS), ureolytic community ( ureC ), chitinolytic community ( chiA ), bacterial ammonia oxidizers (AOB amoA ), and nitrite oxidizers ( Nitrospira nxrB ). The results showed that both compost and manure treatment significantly changed the soil microbial communities. Manure had a stronger effect than compost on soil bacterial and fungal community composition, as well as on the ureolytic and chitinolytic communities, while compost treated soils had higher microbial richness than manure treated soils. Both taxonomic and functional approaches showed that the microbial community was more responsive to fresh manure than to compost. Manure treated soil also had more complex microbial interactions than compost treated soil. The abundance and community composition of N-cycling functional groups often played more limited roles than soil chemical properties (soil organic carbon, extractable organic carbon, and pH) in driving N-cycling processes. Results from our study may guide strategies for the management of organic amendments in organic farming systems and provide insights into the linkages between soil microbial communities and soil function.
Ouyang, Yang↗
Economics of land‐based carbon mitigation
Agricultural land holds tremendous potential to contribute to net zero greenhouse gas emission goals by providing low carbon renewable energy to displace fossil fuels and by serving as a sink for sequestering carbon in the soil with climate‐smart practices. This potential is, however, far from being realized. This paper examines the economic incentives and barriers to implementing land‐based carbon mitigation strategies and discusses the specific features of land‐based carbon mitigation practices on carbon emissions that need to be considered in designing policy incentives to induce adoption. Although a carbon price‐based policy is socially efficient, the more commonly observed policies to promote land‐based carbon mitigation include practice‐based conservation programs, technology mandates, and sector‐specific standards. The paper discusses the rationale for these alternative policy approaches and concludes with a discussion of emerging opportunities for designing policy and market‐based approaches for promoting land‐based carbon‐mitigation and future directions for economics research.
additionality↗
Integrating an Industrial Source and Commercial Algae Farm with Innovative CO 2 Transfer Membrane and Improved Strain Technologies
This report describes the overall findings of the research project “Integrating an Industrial Source and Commercial Algae Farm with Innovative CO 2 Transfer Membrane and Improved Strain Technologies”. The motivation and goal for this project were to increase the carbon utilization efficiency (CUE) and areal productivity for algal cultivations, thereby reducing CO 2 costs to cultivation operations and improving economics. This was achieved through a combination of enhanced delivery of inorganic carbon and improved strains of Nannochloropsis oceanica capable of higher rates of bicarbonate uptake and metabolism. The project succeeded in these goals. First, a bubble-free, membrane-based technology was developed for delivering CO 2 to cultivations, which increased the CUE from the 15-20% that is standard in the industry to more than 65%. In addition, N. oceanica was modified to express a bicarbonate transporter protein, BicA, which enabled the cells to grow more quickly. In addition, advances were made in the protein engineering of carbonic anhydrase (CA) for enhanced stability and catalytic performance, the computational fluid dynamics modeling of algal cultivation systems, and in the life-cycle assessment and technoeconomic analysis of algal production. Together, these outcomes contribute to advancing algal cultivation as an economically viable platform for production of fuels, materials, and other chemical products. The project results aid in addressing the dual challenges of reducing atmospheric CO 2 levels and achieving green energy solutions.
09 BIOMASS FUELS↗