Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Carbon Capture Sequestration”

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 19 records

Integrated Mid-Continent Carbon Capture, Sequestration & Enhanced Oil Recovery Project

A consortium of research partners led by the Southwest Regional Partnership on Carbon Sequestration and industry partners, including CAP CO2 LLC, Blue Source LLC, Coffeyville Resources, Nitrogen Fertilizers LLC, Ash Grove Cement Company, Kansas Ethanol LLC, Headwaters Clean Carbon Services, Black & Veatch, and Schlumberger Carbon Services, conducted a feasibility study of a large-scale CCS commercialization project that included large-scale CO{sub 2} sources. The overall objective of this project, entitled the 'Integrated Mid-Continent Carbon Capture, Sequestration and Enhanced Oil Recovery Project' was to design an integrated system of US mid-continent industrial CO{sub 2} sources with CO{sub 2} capture, and geologic sequestration in deep saline formations and in oil field reservoirs with concomitant EOR. Findings of this project suggest that deep saline sequestration in the mid-continent region is not feasible without major financial incentives, such as tax credits or otherwise, that do not exist at this time. However, results of the analysis suggest that enhanced oil recovery with carbon sequestration is indeed feasible and practical for specific types of geologic settings in the Midwestern U.S.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Training Graduate and Undergraduate Students in Simulation and Risk Assessment for Carbon Sequestration

Capturing carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and injecting it into deep underground formations for storage (carbon capture and underground storage, or CCUS) is one way of reducing anthropogenic CO 2 emissions. Gas or aqueous-phase leakage may occur due to transport via faults and fractures, through faulty well bores, or through leaky confining materials. Contaminants of concern include aqueous salts and dissolved solids, gaseous or aqueous-phase organic contaminants, and acidic gas or aqueous-phase fluids that can liberate metals from aquifer minerals. Understanding the mechanisms and parameters that can contribute to leakage of the CO 2 and the ultimate impact on shallow water aquifers that overlie injection formations is an important step in evaluating the efficacy and risks associated with long-term CO 2 storage.

McCray, John↗

Data and interactive visualization for "The economic accessibility of CO2 sequestration through bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS) in the US" submitted to the journal "Land", 2020

Detailed outputs and interactive visualization to accompany the manuscript titled "The economic accessibility of CO2 sequestration through bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (BECCS) in the US" submitted to the journal "Land" in 2020. https://public.tableau.com/profile/billion.ton.2016#!/vizhome/ORNLBECCS2020/CO2EMITANDCAPTURE2

Langholtz, Matthew↗

Multiscale Electricity Modeling for Evaluating Carbon Capture and Sequestration Technologies (Final Report)

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies that can operate with a high degree of operating flexibility could provide necessary electric grid flexibility in a system with high shares of variable renewables. This project examines the deployment and dispatch potential of twelve unique flexible CCS (FLECCS) technologies that encompass post-combustion carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) capture designs, concepts using a storage media to enable energy arbitrage, and hybrid processes that integrate CCS with direct air capture (DAC) for flexibility with net zero or negative CO 2 emissions. FLECCS technology potential is explored with a multi-model, multi-scale framework including the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electric sector capacity expansion model (CEM) and the PLEXOS production cost model (PCM). Innovative methods were developed to represent FLECCS technology operating modes, performance, and cost in the two models. ReEDS was then used to simulate nine scenarios for each FLECCS technology, three CO 2 emissions price futures reaching $\$$150, $\$$225, and $\$$300/tCO 2 in 2050; and three scenarios for FLECCS technology deployment favorability relative to competing technologies. For each CO 2 price and reference FLECCS favorability, the 2050 infrastructures from ReEDS model are downscaled and implemented in PLEXOS to examine hourly dispatch under detailed operational constraints that are not included in ReEDS. FLECCS technologies exhibited a wide range of deployment potential ranging from none to several hundred gigawatts of capacity, with outcomes highly sensitive to input cost and performance parameters that are inherently highly uncertain. When deployed, FLECCS tended to displace a combination of wind, solar, and natural gas-based technologies rather than supporting increased renewable deployment. As a result, CO 2 emissions reductions facilitated by FLECCS deployment tended to come with higher overall system costs and electricity prices. When economically competitive, FLECCS technologies can contribute significant flexible generation and firm capacity to the grid, but continued technology development and an expanded analytical scope are necessary to fully understand FLECCS deployment potential its impact on the electric power sector. Follow-on analysis incorporating captured CO 2 tax credit value from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and other potential policy scenarios could be particularly valuable, as this policy can substantially change the relative competitiveness of FLECCS technologies.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Enhanced Performance Assessment System (EPAS) for carbon sequestration.

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is an option to mitigate impacts of atmospheric carbon emission. Numerous factors are important in determining the overall effectiveness of long-term geologic storage of carbon, including leakage rates, volume of storage available, and system costs. Recent efforts have been made to apply an existing probabilistic performance assessment (PA) methodology developed for deep nuclear waste geologic repositories to evaluate the effectiveness of subsurface carbon storage (Viswanathan et al., 2008; Stauffer et al., 2009). However, to address the most pressing management, regulatory, and scientific concerns with subsurface carbon storage (CS), the existing PA methodology and tools must be enhanced and upgraded. For example, in the evaluation of a nuclear waste repository, a PA model is essentially a forward model that samples input parameters and runs multiple realizations to estimate future consequences and determine important parameters driving the system performance. In the CS evaluation, however, a PA model must be able to run both forward and inverse calculations to support optimization of CO{sub 2} injection and real-time site monitoring as an integral part of the system design and operation. The monitoring data must be continually fused into the PA model through model inversion and parameter estimation. Model calculations will in turn guide the design of optimal monitoring and carbon-injection strategies (e.g., in terms of monitoring techniques, locations, and time intervals). Under the support of Laboratory-Directed Research & Development (LDRD), a late-start LDRD project was initiated in June of Fiscal Year 2010 to explore the concept of an enhanced performance assessment system (EPAS) for carbon sequestration and storage. In spite of the tight time constraints, significant progress has been made on the project: (1) Following the general PA methodology, a preliminary Feature, Event, and Process (FEP) analysis was performed for a hypothetical CS system. Through this FEP analysis, relevant scenarios for CO{sub 2} release were defined. (2) A prototype of EPAS was developed by wrapping an existing multi-phase, multi-component reservoir simulator (TOUGH2) with an uncertainty quantification and optimization code (DAKOTA). (3) For demonstration, a probabilistic PA analysis was successfully performed for a hypothetical CS system based on an existing project in a brine-bearing sandstone. The work lays the foundation for the development of a new generation of PA tools for effective management of CS activities. At a top-level, the work supports energy security and climate change/adaptation by furthering the capability to effectively manage proposed carbon capture and sequestration activities (both research and development as well as operational), and it greatly enhances the technical capability to address this national problem. The next phase of the work will include (1) full capability demonstration of the EPAS, especially for data fusion, carbon storage system optimization, and process optimization of CO{sub 2} injection, and (2) application of the EPAS to actual carbon storage systems.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Potential Impacts of Electric Power Production Utilizing Natural Gas, Renewables and Carbon Capture and Sequestration on U.S. Freshwater Resources

Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) has important implications relative to future thermoelectric water use. A bounding analysis is performed using past greenhouse gas emission policy proposals and assumes either all effected capacity retires (lower water use bound) or is retrofitted (upper bound). The analysis is performed in the context of recent trends in electric power generation expansion, namely high penetration of natural gas and renewables along with constrained cooling system options. Results indicate thermoelectric freshwater withdrawals nationwide could increase by roughly 1% or decrease by up to 60% relative to 2009 levels, while consumption could increase as much as 21% or decrease as much as 28%. To identify where changes in freshwater use might be problematic at a regional level, electric power production has been mapped onto watersheds with limited water availability (where consumption exceeds 70% of gauged streamflow). Results suggest that between 0.44 and 0.96 Mm3/d of new thermoelectric freshwater consumption could occur in watersheds with limited water availability, while power plant retirements in these watersheds could yield 0.90 to 1.0 Mm3/d of water savings.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Near-term deployment of carbon capture and sequestration from biorefineries in the United States

Significance Carbon dioxide removal through the permanent sequestration of biogenic CO 2 is a critical technique for climate change mitigation, but most bioenergy with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technologies are technically immature or commercially unavailable. In contrast, examples of CCS of biogenic CO 2 resulting from fermentation emissions already exist at scale. Here, we evaluate low-cost, commercially ready sequestration opportunities for existing biorefineries in the United States. We find that existing and proposed financial incentives suggest a substantial near-term opportunity to catalyze the growth of CCS infrastructure, improve the impacts of conventional biofuels, support development of carbon-negative biofuels, and satisfy low-carbon fuel policies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Carbon Capture and Sequestration: A Regulatory Gap Assessment

Though a potentially significant climate change mitigation strategy, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) remains mired in demonstration and development rather than proceeding to full-scale commercialization. Prior studies have suggested numerous reasons for this stagnation. This Report seeks to empirically assess those claims. Using an anonymous opinion survey completed by over 200 individuals involved in CCS, it concludes that there are four primary barriers to CCS commercialization: (1) cost, (2) lack of a carbon price, (3) liability risks, and (4) lack of a comprehensive regulatory regime. These results largely confirm previous work. They also, however, expose a key barrier that prior studies have overlooked: the need for comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, CCS regulation. The survey data clearly show that the CCS community sees this as one of the most needed incentives for CCS deployment. The community also has a relatively clear idea of what that regulation should entail: a cooperative federalism approach that directly addresses liability concerns and that generally does not upset traditional lines of federal-state authority.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Carbon Capture and Sequestration: A Regulatory Gap Assessment

Though a potentially significant climate change mitigation strategy, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) remains mired in demonstration and development rather than proceeding to full-scale commercialization. Prior studies have suggested numerous reasons for this stagnation. This Report seeks to empirically assess those claims. Using an anonymous opinion survey completed by over 200 individuals involved in CCS, it concludes that there are four primary barriers to CCS commercialization: (1) cost, (2) lack of a carbon price, (3) liability risks, and (4) lack of a comprehensive regulatory regime. These results largely confirm previous work. They also, however, expose a key barrier that prior studies have overlooked: the need for comprehensive, rather than piecemeal, CCS regulation. The survey data clearly show that the CCS community sees this as one of the most needed incentives for CCS deployment. The community also has a relatively clear idea of what that regulation should entail: a cooperative federalism approach that directly addresses liability concerns and that generally does not upset traditional lines of federal-state authority.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

The energy-water nexus and the role of carbon capture and sequestration.

There is growing evidence of human induced climate change. Various legislation has been introduced to cap carbon emissions. Fossil powered electric generation is responsible for over 30% of the U.S. emissions. Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) technology is water and energy intensive. The project's objectives are: (1) Explore water consumption implications associated with full deployment of a Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) future; (2) Identify vulnerable areas in which water resources may be too limited to enable full deployment of CCS technology; and (3) Implement project with the cooperation of the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) and DOE Office of Policy and International Affairs. Thermoelectric consumption projected to increase by 3.7 BGD due to CCS by 2035, a doubling over 2004. This increase is equivalent to projected growth in consumption by all other sectors. Demand is not equally distributed across the U.S. 18.5% of this future demand is located in watershed prone to surface and groundwater stress. 30% of current and future demand is located in watersheds prone to drought stress.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Multiscale Electricity Modeling for Evaluating Carbon Capture and Sequestration Technologies (MEME-CCS)

This effort employs and adapts a rigorous multiscale electricity modeling platform at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and negative emissions technologies (NET) from the ARPA-E FLECCS program. NREL's modeling platform includes the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electric sector capacity expansion model, which projects future electricity generation mixes at sub-state-level resolution that are downscaled to the unit-level to enable hourly, zonal or nodal electricity production cost modeling in the PLEXOS model. The ReEDS-PLEXOS modeling suite is well-established for examining electric sector futures with high renewable energy penetrations, energy storage, electrification, and distributed generation. The key advancement proposed herein utilizes collaboration with CCS experts at the University of Wyoming (U.WY) and the FLECCS technology development teams to create innovative methods for representing CCS and NET in the ReEDS and PLEXOS models. Expanded technology options and new operational parameterizations are integrated into these models to allow an unprecedented combination of scope and resolution for exploring the future of CCS and NET. The resulting capabilities permit wide-ranging scenario analysis to assess CCS and NET deployment under alternative scenarios of CO2 prices and competitiveness of flexible CCS and NET technologies. We demonstrate sample deployment and operational outcomes to show how these models are being used to assess the future potential for FLECCS technologies and their impacts on the U.S. electricity system. These products will help an emerging CCS/NET industry in the United States by providing economics-driven guidance to technology developers while informing policy and investment decisions in the public and private sectors.

capacity expansion↗

Multiscale Electricity Modeling for Evaluating Carbon Capture and Sequestration Technologies (MEME-CCS)

This effort employs and adapts an existing, rigorous multiscale electricity modeling platform at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and negative emissions technologies (NET) from the ARPA-E FLECCS program. NREL's modeling platform includes the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electric sector capacity expansion model, which projects future electricity generation mixes at sub-state-level resolution that are downscaled to the unit-level to enable hourly, zonal or nodal electricity production cost modeling in the PLEXOS model. The resulting hourly price data from PLEXOS is provided to technology developers under the ARPA-E FLECCS program to enable technology-specific economic analysis. The ReEDS-PLEXOS modeling suite is well-established for examining electric sector futures with high renewable energy penetrations, energy storage, electrification, and distributed generation. The key advancement proposed herein utilizes collaboration with CCS experts at the University of Wyoming and the FLECCS teams to create innovative methods for representing CCS and NET in the ReEDS and PLEXOS models. Expanded technology options, new operational parameterizations, and detailed data defining CO2 capture, transportation, and storage systems are being integrated into these models to allow an unprecedented combination of scope and resolution for exploring the future of CCS and NET. The resulting capabilities will take advantage of high-performance computing resources to permit wide-ranging scenario analysis to assess CCS and NET deployment under alternative CO2 prices, fossil fuel prices, electricity demand growth, and other electric sector characteristics. Final outcomes will include publicly available hourly grid operation and price data for any U.S. region of interest along with open-access capacity expansion tools for evaluating CCS/NET systems. These products will help an emerging CCS/NET industry in the United States by providing economics-driven guidance to technology developers while informing policy and investment decisions in the public and private sectors.

air capture↗

Integrating Carbon Capture, Utilization, & Sequestration into Chemical Pulp Mills

The U.S. pulp and paper industry presents a unique and largely untapped opportunity for large- scale carbon dioxide removal (CDR). Unlike most industrial sectors, pulp mills rely heavily on biomass, meaning that much of their carbon emissions originate from atmospheric CO₂ that was recently captured by plants. If this biogenic CO₂ can be captured and permanently stored, pulp mills can be transformed from carbon emitters into net carbon removal facilities. This project was motivated by that opportunity and aimed to develop and evaluate integrated, low-cost strategies for capturing, utilizing, and sequestering CO₂ within existing chemical pulping operations. The scope of this work focused on four complementary innovations designed to integrate seamlessly into kraft pulp mill infrastructure: (1) in situ CO₂ capture within the recovery cycle, (2) oxy-fuel retrofitting of the rotary lime kiln to produce a high-purity CO₂ stream, (3) ex situ CO₂ capture and mineralization using pulp mill residues (dregs, grits, and lime mud), and (4) beneficial reuse of these residues as mineral carbonate fertilizers. The project combined process modeling, laboratory experimentation, life cycle assessment (LCA), and field trials to evaluate the technical feasibility, economic viability, and environmental impact of these approaches. The results demonstrate that pulp mills can serve as effective platforms for carbon removal when equipped with integrated carbon capture systems. Process modeling showed that combining sodium spiking with oxy-fuel calcination significantly enhances CO₂ capture efficiency while reducing costs by up to 31% compared to conventional configurations. Experimental work further revealed that calcination behavior in high-CO₂ environments differs substantially from traditional systems, leading to the development of a new kinetic model that predicts reaction rates under these conditions. This model provides essential design guidance for next-generation decarbonized lime kilns. In parallel, the project demonstrated that alkaline mineral residues generated during pulping operations can be repurposed as a sustainable alternative to agricultural lime. Across a wide range of soils in the southeastern United States, these materials performed equivalently to commercial lime in adjusting soil pH while offering lower greenhouse gas emissions and reduced cost. Field and greenhouse studies confirmed that crop and tree growth responses were comparable, supporting their viability as a drop-in replacement. This co-product pathway provides a practical utilization strategy that offsets costs and improves overall system economics. A major contribution of this project is the first comprehensive life cycle assessment of carbon removal in pulp and paper systems across multiple system boundaries. Results show that retrofitted mills can achieve carbon removal efficiencies ranging from 12% to 92%, depending on how the system is defined. This finding highlights a critical issue in carbon accounting: reported performance is highly sensitive to methodological choices. By explicitly quantifying these differences, this work provides valuable guidance for policymakers, carbon registries, and project developers working to standardize carbon removal metrics. From a commercialization perspective, the technologies investigated in this project are well- aligned with existing industrial infrastructure, minimizing the need for entirely new facilities. 3 DE-EE0009413 Industry engagement throughout the project—including collaboration with pulp and paper companies, equipment manufacturers, and carbon removal developers—has accelerated the transition from research to deployment. Notably, a commercial developer is actively pursuing carbon capture projects at pulp mills in the southeastern United States and has cited this research as a contributing foundation. The emergence of voluntary carbon markets and long-term offtake agreements further strengthens the business case for implementation. The broader public benefits of this work are significant. By enabling large-scale carbon removal using existing industrial systems, this approach offers a near-term pathway to reduce atmospheric CO₂ concentrations while supporting domestic manufacturing and rural economies. The reuse of industrial residues as fertilizers reduces reliance on mined materials, lowers costs for farmers, and decreases environmental impacts associated with conventional lime production. In addition, the project has supported workforce development by training graduate students and researchers in carbon capture technologies, helping to build capacity in a critical area of national interest. In conclusion, this project demonstrates that integrated carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration in pulp mills is both technically feasible and economically promising. By combining process innovation, experimental validation, and systems-level analysis, the work advances the understanding of how biomass-based industries can contribute to climate mitigation. The findings provide a strong foundation for commercial deployment and offer a scalable solution for transforming a major U.S. industry into a source of durable carbon removal.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Demonstration of Carbon Capture and Sequestration of Steam Methane Reforming Process Gas Used for Large-Scale Hydrogen Production

The large-scale, on-purpose production of hydrogen in the United States (i.e., ~4600 million standard cubic feet per day) represents one of the most significant industrial sources of CO 2 emissions within the chemical industry. Most of the hydrogen is produced by the steam methane reforming (SMR) process, through which methane and water are converted to H 2 and CO 2 , and virtually all of the co-produced CO 2 is emitted to the atmosphere. However, the process streams in the SMR plants contain CO 2 at concentrations that are amenable to utilization of conventional adsorption and emerging CO 2 capture technologies. If implemented commercially, these technologies could represent an early and sizeable impact in reducing industrial CO 2 emissions. Therefore, Air Products, working closely with the Department of Energy, has conducted a carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) project to demonstrate a first-of-a-kind retrofit system to capture CO 2 from large-scale industrial SMR plants. Working with the support of Denbury Onshore, LLC (“Denbury Onshore”) and its affiliate, Denbury Green Pipeline-Texas, LLC (“Denbury Green Pipeline”), Air Products designed, constructed and continues to operate a state-of-the-art system located at the Valero Port Arthur Refinery in Port Arthur, TX. This system concentrates the CO 2 from two SMR waste streams and delivers it into the Green Pipeline-Texas for transport to and use in the West Hastings Unit enhanced oil recovery (EOR) project. The CO 2 removal units were designed by Air Products and utilize vacuum swing adsorption (VSA) units that were retrofitted into each of the SMR trains upstream of existing pressure swing adsorption (PSA) units. This project is unique because the site has two large-scale, highly integrated SMRs located in proximity to one another. The CO 2 from this project is concentrated from 15% in the SMR waste stream to at least 98%, then flowed into the Green Pipeline-Texas along the eastern Gulf Coast. The Green Pipeline collects CO 2 from a variety of sources that is utilized for tertiary oil recovery in Texas. This project alone can prevent over 1 million tons per year of CO 2 from being emitted into the atmosphere, and thus play a major role in significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

08 HYDROGEN↗

Present Early Test Results @ NETL Annual Carbon Sequestration and Capture Meeting [Slides]

Contents include the following presentations: 1) Large Scale CO 2 Storage in the Lower Tuscaloosa Massive Sand Formation, December 12, 2007; 2) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships Initiative Review Meeting, October 7-9, 2008; 3) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships Annual Review Meeting, November 18, 2009; 4) Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships Annual Review Meeting Development Phase Field Tests, October 5, 2010; 5) Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership, November 15, 2011; 6) SECARB’s Early Test at Cranfield, Mississippi; 7) Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Early Test at Cranfield Status, August 18-20, 2015.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with Mongird et al. (in prep) organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSI+RP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_ep_score_raster.tif solar_msi_ep_score_raster.tif wind_msi_ep_score_raster.tif 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. 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

Agriculture↗

Marginal Soils Index Analysis & Geospatial Data

This data package contains output files associated with the Mongird et al. paper entitled "Can US power grid expansion avoid prime agricultural lands?" and is organized into four dataset directories. Each dataset is described in more detail below. 1. Marginal Soils Index Analysis Description: This folder contains a csv file with land needs and availability by state, power generating technology type, and scenario in 2050 when suitable siting areas are additionally constrained to areas with increasing levels of soil marginality. Files: msi_constrained_siting_availability_2050.csv Variables: Scenario - Projected 2050 scenario name State - US state abbreviation Technology - Generating technology type solar = solar photovoltaic gas_cc_re = natural gas combined cycle (recirculating cooling) wind = onshore wind gas_cc_ccs_re = natural gas combined cycle with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) gas_cc_dry = natural gas combined cycle with (dry cooling) gas_cc_pond = natural gas combined cycle with (pond cooling) coal_conv_ccs_re = conventional coal with carbon capture sequestration (recirculating cooling) Req_Capacity_MW - The amount of rated capacity required in 2050 of the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario from the capacity expansion plan Req_Capacity_Factor - The assumed capacity factor (fraction between 0 and 1) for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario by the capacity expansion plan Req_Land_km2 - The amount of land required (in km-squared) to host the required generating capacity that is capable of meeting the specified capacity factor for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario Req_Energy_TWh - Product of Req_Capacity_MW, Req_Capacity_Factor, and 8760/1e6 for the given technology type in the given state and under the given scenario MSI_Case - The level of MSI that siting the given technology is additionally constrained to, where >0 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than 0 >=1 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 1 >=2 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 2 >=3 means siting is additionally constrained to suitable land areas that have an MSI value greater than or equal to 3 Soil Attribute Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files for individual soil parameters upscaled to the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of non-missing 30m resolution values. All raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. Files: avg_cond_raster_ .tif - Average conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm max_cond_raster_ .tif - Maximum conductivity of the saturation extract across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches, measured in mmhos/cm min_ph_raster_ .tif- Min pH values across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. avg_ph_raster_ .tif - Average pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. max_ph_raster_ .tif- Max pH value across all soil horizons within a depth of 40 inches. erosion_factor_raster_ .tif - Product of k-factor and percent slope flood_freq_raster_ .tif - Number of months of the year during which the area is commonly, frequently, or very frequently flooded. max_sar_raster_ .tif - Maximum sodium adsorption ratio across all horizons within a depth of 40 inches rock_frac_raster_ .tif - Fraction of the upper 6 inches of soil composed of rock fragments larger than 3 inches. temp_regime_raster_ .tif - Soil temperature regime with the following key: 0 = pergelic 1 = gelic 2 = cryic 3 = frigid 4 = isofrigid 5 = mesic 6 = isomesic 7 = thermic 8 = isothermic 9 = hyperthermic 10 =isohyperthermic Marginal Soils Index Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index at the listed grid resolution (30m or 1 km). 1 km resolution files are a spatial average of 30m resolution. Both raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. A value of 0 indicates that there were no soil attributes present that indicate marginal soil. NA values indicate that data was unavailable or bodies of water. Files: marginal_soils_index_30m_raster.tif marginal_soils_index_1km_raster.tif Marginal Soils Index Resource Potential Rasters Description: This folder contains geospatial raster files of the Marginal Soils Index + Resource Potential (MSIxRP) score at 1km resolution for geothermal, solar, and wind technologies. Raster files use the USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) projection. NA values indicate that the location is not suitable for siting the given technology due to policy, environmental, socioeconomic, topological, and other constraints regardless of soil marginality level. Areas with values greater than or equal to zero represent the product of the normalized MSI value and the normalized resource potential value. Files: geothermal_msi_rp_score_raster.tif solar_msi_rp_score_raster.tif wind_msi_rp_score_raster.tif 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. 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

Agriculture↗