SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
This is the conference paper accompanying an oral presentation made at the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) Western Regional Meeting (WRM) held in Bakersfield, California, April 26–28, 2022. The paper provides the results of a basin-scale CO2 storage modeling project investigating subsurface pressure interference among CO2 injection wells located in proximity to each other.
This data package presents forcing data, model code, and model output for classical machine learning models that predict monthly stream water temperature as presented in the manuscript ‘Stream Temperature Predictions for River Basin Management in the Pacific Northwest and Mid-Atlantic Regions Using Machine Learning’, Water (Weierbach et al., 2022). Specifically, for input forcing datasets we include two files each generated using the BASIN-3D data integration tool (Varadharajan et al., 2022) for stations in the Pacific Northwest and Mid Atlantic Hydrologic regions. Model code (written in python with the use of jupyter notebooks) includes codes for data preprocessing, training Multiple Linear Regression, Support Vector Regression, and Extreme Gradient Boosted Tree models, and additional notebooks for analysis of model output. We include specific model output files which represent modeling configurations presented in the manuscript also presented in an hdf5 format. Together, these data make up the workflow for predictions across three scenarios (single station, regional, and predictions in unmonitored basins) presented in the manuscript and allow for reproducibility of modeling procedures.
Stream temperature (Ts) is an important water quality parameter that affects ecosystem health and human water use for beneficial purposes. Accurate Ts predictions at different spatial and temporal scales can inform water management decisions that account for the effects of changing climate and extreme events. In particular, widespread predictions of Ts in unmonitored stream reaches can enable decision makers to be responsive to changes caused by unforeseen disturbances. In this study, we demonstrate the use of classical machine learning (ML) models, support vector regression and gradient boosted trees (XGBoost), for monthly Ts predictions in 78 pristine and human-impacted catchments of the Mid-Atlantic and Pacific Northwest hydrologic regions spanning different geologies, climate, and land use. The ML models were trained using long-term monitoring data from 1980–2020 for three scenarios: (1) temporal predictions at a single site, (2) temporal predictions for multiple sites within a region, and (3) spatiotemporal predictions in unmonitored basins (PUB). In the first two scenarios, the ML models predicted Ts with median root mean squared errors (RMSE) of 0.69–0.84 °C and 0.92–1.02 °C across different model types for the temporal predictions at single and multiple sites respectively. For the PUB scenario, we used a bootstrap aggregation approach using models trained with different subsets of data, for which an ensemble XGBoost implementation outperformed all other modeling configurations (median RMSE 0.62 °C).The ML models improved median monthly Ts estimates compared to baseline statistical multi-linear regression models by 15–48% depending on the site and scenario. Air temperature was found to be the primary driver of monthly Ts for all sites, with secondary influence of month of the year (seasonality) and solar radiation, while discharge was a significant predictor at only 10 sites. The predictive performance of the ML models was robust to configuration changes in model setup and inputs, but was influenced by the distance to the nearest dam with RMSE <1 °C at sites situated greater than 16 and 44 km from a dam for the temporal single site and regional scenarios, and over 1.4 km from a dam for the PUB scenario. Our results show that classical ML models with solely meteorological inputs can be used for spatial and temporal predictions of monthly Ts in pristine and managed basins with reasonable (<1 °C) accuracy for most locations.
The author has identified the following significant results. Twenty Data Collection Platforms (DCP) are being field installed on USGS water resources stations in the Delaware River Basin. DCP's have been successfully installed and are operating well on five stream gaging stations, three observation wells, and one water quality monitor in the basin. DCP's have been installed at nine additional water quality monitors, and work is progressing on interfacing the platforms to the monitors. ERTS-related water resources data from the platforms are being provided in near real time, by the Goddard Space Flight Center to the Pennsylvania district, Water Resources Division, U.S. Geological Survey. On a daily basis, the data are computer processed by the Survey and provided to the Delaware River Basin Commission. Each daily summary contains data that were relayed during 4 or 5 of the 15 orbits made by ERTS-1 during the previous day. Water resources parameters relays by the platforms include dissolved oxygen concentrations, temperature, pH, specific conductance, well level, and stream gage height, which is used to compute stream flow for the daily summary.
There are no author-identified significant results in this report.
There are no author-identified significant results in this report.
Aquifers are increasingly stressed. Managed aquifer recharge provides a potential solution to mitigate this stress and provide sustainable groundwater resources. Subsurface properties are known to have a strong control on the infiltration rates that can be achieved. However, these properties are often highly heterogeneous and difficult to assess with conventional probing techniques. Here, we show the application of 3D geophysical imaging to assess the recharge potential and its variation across several basins used for managed aquifer recharge. We link in-situ measurements of saturated hydraulic conductivity with the electrical resistivity of the subsurface to establish petrophysical relationships and use those relationships to estimate the distribution of hydraulic conductivity throughout the five recharge basins. Our results show a considerable variability in the hydraulic properties, i.e., soil texture and saturated hydraulic conductivity, that have a direct impact on potential infiltration rates. We use the 3D hydraulic property distributions to model groundwater recharge and provide estimates for infiltration rates and volumes, and use this approach to assess the impact of management activities on groundwater recharge performance. Having such data not only enables us to predict infiltration rates, but also provides means for optimizing such water infrastructure.
This project assesses the value of accessible and usable water data for advancing river basin management in the U.S. This report summarizes the outcomes a stakeholder workshop that was held in May 2021, and a collection of interactive data stories about five river basins across the U.S. (Eel and Russian river basins in California, Wisconsin River basin in Wisconsin, and the Connecticut and Penobscot river basins in the New England region).
The Great Lakes Basin is one of the world’s largest freshwater ecosystems. The Basin harbors over 200,000 acres of wetlands. These wetlands provide a variety of environmental, ecological, and recreational functions to over 30 million people in the region. Some of these functions include improving water quality, mitigating flood impacts, providing wildlife habitat, and housing recreational activities. However, due to anthropogenic activities, habitat conversion and degradation threaten to disrupt or destroy remaining wetland ecosystems. Maps of wetland distribution based on ground surveys are costly and labor-intensive, prohibiting timely evaluations of wetland loss and gain. The Great Lakes Water Resources II team at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory developed the Wetlands Extent Tool 2.0 (WET 2.0) in Google Earth Engine to automate mapping of wetland distribution in the Great Lakes Basin. The team partnered with the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and Ducks Unlimited (DU). WET 2.0 incorporates Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI), Sentinel-1 C-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (C-SAR), and Sentinel-2 Multispectral Instrument (MSI) satellite data. WET 2.0 is trained to classify anywhere in the Great Lakes Basin. Utilizing a Random Forest classifier, WET 2.0 is capable of automatically mapping wetland extent in the entire Great Lakes Basin, achieving a mean overall accuracy of 80.12% when tested in Michigan. Findings and maps produced in WET 2.0 will enable our partners to identify areas of ecosystem degradation and wetland destruction in order to enact environmental practices and policy initiatives to maintain environmental and economic health in the area.
The Great Lakes Basin is one of the world’s largest freshwater ecosystems. The Basin harbors over 200,000 acres of wetlands that provide a variety of environmental, ecological, and recreational functions to over 30 million people in the region. Some of these functions include improving water quality, mitigating flood impacts, providing wildlife habitat, and housing recreational activities. However, due to anthropogenic activities, habitat conversion and degradation threaten to disrupt or destroy remaining wetland ecosystems. Maps of wetland distribution based on ground surveys are costly and labor-intensive, prohibiting timely evaluations of wetland loss and gain. The Great Lakes Water Resources II team at the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory developed the Wetlands Extent Tool 2.0 (WET 2.0) in Google Earth Engine to automate mapping of wetland distribution in the Great Lakes Basin. The team partnered with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, Environmental Protection Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Ducks Unlimited. WET 2.0 incorporates Landsat 8 Operational Land Imager (OLI), Sentinel-1 C-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (C-SAR), and Sentinel-2 Multispectral Instrument (MSI) data. Utilizing a Random Forest classifier, WET 2.0 is capable of automatically mapping wetland extent in the entire Great Lakes Basin, achieving a mean overall accuracy of 80.12% when tested in Michigan.Findings and maps produced by WET 2.0 will enable our partners to identify areas of ecosystem degradation and wetland destruction in order to enact environmental practices and policy initiatives to maintain environmental and economic health in the area.
Streamflow often increases after fire, but the persistence of this effect and its importance to present and future regional water resources are unclear. This paper addresses these knowledge gaps for the western United States (WUS), where annual forest fire area increased by more than 1,100% during 1984 to 2020. Among 72 forested basins across the WUS that burned between 1984 and 2019, the multibasin mean streamflow was significantly elevated by 0.19 SDs (P < 0.01) for an average of 6 water years postfire, compared to the range of results expected from climate alone. Significance is assessed by comparing prefire and postfire streamflow responses to climate and also to streamflow among 107 control basins that experienced little to no wildfire during the study period. The streamflow response scales with fire extent: among the 29 basins where >20% of forest area burned in a year, streamflow over the first 6 water years postfire increased by a multibasin average of 0.38 SDs, or 30%. Postfire streamflow increases were significant in all four seasons. Historical fire–climate relationships combined with climate model projections suggest that 2021 to 2050 will see repeated years when climate is more fire-conducive than in 2020, the year currently holding the modern record for WUS forest area burned. These findings center on relatively small, minimally managed basins, but our results suggest that burned areas will grow enough over the next 3 decades to enhance streamflow at regional scales. Wildfire is an emerging driver of runoff change that will increasingly alter climate impacts on water supplies and runoff-related risks.
Streamflow often increases after fire, but the persistence of this effect and its importance to present and future regional water resources are unclear. This paper addresses these knowledge gaps for the western United States (WUS), where annual forest fire area increased by more than 1,100% during 1984 to 2020. Among 72 forested basins across the WUS that burned between 1984 and 2019, the multibasin mean streamflow was significantly elevated by 0.19 SDs ( P < 0.01) for an average of 6 water years postfire, compared to the range of results expected from climate alone. Significance is assessed by comparing prefire and postfire streamflow responses to climate and also to streamflow among 107 control basins that experienced little to no wildfire during the study period. The streamflow response scales with fire extent: among the 29 basins where >20% of forest area burned in a year, streamflow over the first 6 water years postfire increased by a multibasin average of 0.38 SDs, or 30%. Postfire streamflow increases were significant in all four seasons. Historical fire–climate relationships combined with climate model projections suggest that 2021 to 2050 will see repeated years when climate is more fire-conducive than in 2020, the year currently holding the modern record for WUS forest area burned. These findings center on relatively small, minimally managed basins, but our results suggest that burned areas will grow enough over the next 3 decades to enhance streamflow at regional scales. Wildfire is an emerging driver of runoff change that will increasingly alter climate impacts on water supplies and runoff-related risks.
Abstract The Savannah River Basin (SRB), a highly stressed southeastern river in United States is a conservation priority for State, Federal government, and nongovernment organizations. A four‐stage sustainable development tool was developed in this study using meta‐analysis and the drivers–pressures–state–impacts–responses (DPSIR) framework. Through the synthesis of ~150 references in the SRB this study addressed three research questions: (1) What were the drivers, pressures, state, impacts, and responses (components of DRSIR framework) in SRB (2) Can these components be grouped together from various studies in SRB (3) Can causal chain/loops be developed, and will they be useful for policy and decision making? First in the Stage 1, the state of the SRB was represented (S component of DPSIR), in Stage 2, the drivers–pressures–impacts–responses (DPIR components of DPSIR) were represented, in the third stage (Stage 3) the common units characterizing each DPSIR component were identified. Finally, in Stage 4, the causal chains/loops were developed and organized into scientific research at a level appropriate for building better understanding about SRB and helping stakeholders and policy makers in managing basin sustainability challenges. Although the tool was applied to SRB, the methodology is applicable to other river basins and ecosystems.
The movement of solutes in a watershed is a complex process with multiple interactions and feedbacks across spatial and temporal scales. Modeling the dynamics of solute transport along diverse hydrologic pathways within watersheds – from hillslopes to stream channels and in and out of the hyporheic zones – is challenging but critically important, as these processes integrate and contribute to the biogeochemical functioning of the river corridor up to the river network scale. Here we use results from a long-term network-scale tracer test at the H.J. Andrews experimental forest in western Cascade Mountains, Oregon, USA to inform a multiscale framework for transport in stream corridors. The framework uses a Lagrangian-based subgrid model to represent the effects of hyporheic exchange flow and advective transport at stream network scales. The spatially and temporally resolved stream discharge needed for the transport model is imputed across the river system by an entity-aware long short-term memory network. Modeled concentrations show good agreements with the observations and exhibit power scaling laws indicative of a very wide range of timescales over which hyporheic exchange flow occurs. Our results demonstrate a data-informed modeling framework that links dynamical processes occurring at small scales to a network context to help understand how changes at reach scale cascade into network-scale effects, providing a useful tool for sustainable river basin management.
The change in the global energy production mix towards variable renewable energy sources requires efficient utilization of regulated rivers to optimise hydropower operations meet the needs of a changing energy market. However, the flexible operation of hydropower plants causes non-natural, sub-daily fluctuating flows in the receiving water bodies, often referred to as ‘hydropeaking’. Drastic changes in sub-daily flow regimes undermine attempts to improve river system health. Environmental decision makers, including permitting authorities and river basin managers facing the intense and increasing pressure on river environments, should consider ecosystem services and biodiversity issues more thoroughly. The need for research innovations in hydropeaking operation design to fulfil both the water and energy security responsibilities of hydropower is highlighted. Our paper outlines optimized hydropeaking design as a future research direction to help researchers, managers, and decision-makers prioritize actions that could enable better integration of river science and energy system planning. The goal of this is to find a balanced hydropower operation strategy.
For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. 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, along with the geospatial data describing the spatial units where water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. We collected water rights databases from 11 western United States states either by downloading them from publicly accessible web portals, or by contacting state water management representatives; detailed descriptions of where and when the data was collected is provided in the README.txt, as well as Lisk et al.(in review). This collection of data are those raw water rights. Each state formats their data differently, meaning that file types, field availability, and names vary from state to state. Note, the data provided here reflects the state of the water rights databases at the time we collected the data; updates have likely occurred in many states. Some pieces of information are common among all states. These are: priority date, volume or flow of water allowed by the right, stated water use of the right, and some means of identifying the geography and source of the water pertaining to the right - typically the coordinates of the Point of Diversion (PoD) of a waterbody or well. Arizona regulates water in a different way than the other 10 states. Outside of some relatively small critical agricultural areas called Active Management Areas (AMAs), Arizona does not maintain any water rights. However, the state does require registration of surface and groundwater pumping devices, which includes disclosing the mechanical specifics of the devices. We used these records as a proxy for water rights. 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. In addition, the following states have requested specifically worded disclaimers to be included with their data. 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." The available data is provided as a series of compressed files, which each containing the full data collected from each state. Some of the files have been renamed, to more easily know which state the data belongs to. The file renaming was also required as some files from different states had the same name. In other cases, the data for a state has been placed in a folder indicating which state it belongs to - as the state organized its data by selected subregions. Below is a brief description of the format of the collected data from each state. ArizonaRights_StatementOfClaimants: A folder containing a database of interconnected CSV files. The soc_erd.pdf file contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with SOC_MAIN.csv in the center of the page. ArizonaRights_SurfaceWaterRightsData: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 10 associated CSVs. SurfaceWater.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with ADWR_SW_APPL_REGRY.csv. ArizonaRights_Well55Registry: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 59 associated CSVs. Wells55.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with WellRegistry.shp. CaliforniaRights_eWRIMS_directDatabase: A folder containing a collection of four "series" Microsoft Excel files, as either XLS or XLSX. The four "series": byCounty, byEntity (what type of legal entity holds the right), byUse (stated water use), and byWatershed, are various methods by which the California water rights are organized within the state's database. However, it was observed that by only collecting a single series, not all water rights were being provided. So, essentially, the majority of records within each "series" are copies of each other, with each "series" containing some unique records. ColoradoRights_NetAmounts: A folder containing 78 CSV files, with one file per Colorado Water District. IdahoRights_PointOfDiversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Idaho. IdahoRights_PlaceOfUse: A Shapefile containing the Place of Use polygons for the entire state of Idaho. MontanaRights_WaterRights: A Geodatabase file containing the Points of Diversion and Places of Use for the entire state of Montana. The name of the Points of Diversion Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WRDIV", and the name of the Places of Use Feature Layer is "WRPOU". NevadaRights_POD_Sites: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Nevada. NewMexicoRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of New Mexico. OregonRights_state_shp: A folder containing 36 Shapefiles and are split between "pod" (Point of Diversion) and "pou" (Place of Use) for each water management basin within Oregon. In other words, each basin has one "pod" file and one "pou" file. The "pod" files are point shapes, and the "pou" files are polygons. UtahRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Utah. WashingtonRights_WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD: A Geodatabase file containing both the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Washington. The name of the Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD". WyomingRights: A folder containing four subdirectories, one for each Wyoming Water Division. Each Division directory includes a varying number of subdirectories for each Wyoming Water District. Each District folder contains two copies of the Point of Diversion records for that area, with one copying being in CSV and one copy in Microsoft Excel XLS format.
Procedures were developed and tested for using KA-80A optical bar camera panoramic photography for timber typing forest land and classifying nonforest land. The study area was the south half of the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit. Final products from this study include four timber type map overlays on 1:24,000 orthophoto maps. The following conclusions can be drawn from this study: (1) established conventional timber typing procedures can be used on panoramic photography if the necessary equipment is available, (2) The classification and consistency results warrant further study in using panoramic photography for timber typing; and (3) timber type mapping can be done as fast or faster with panoramic photography than with resource photography while maintaining comparable accuracy.
This report consists of an analysis of: ERTS-1 Multispectral Scanner imagery obtained 10 August 1973; Skylab 3 S190A and S190B photography, track 29, taken 21 September 1973; and RB-57 high-altitude aircraft photography acquired 26 September 1973. These data products were acquired on three cloud-free days within a 47-day period. The objectives of this study were: (1) to make quantitative comparisons between high-altitude aircraft photography and satellite imagery, and (2) to demonstrate the extent to which high resolution (S190A and B) space-acquired data can be used for land use/vegetation mapping and management of drainage basins.