• Energy Research
• 13. Climate action close
• 15. Life on land close
• 8. Economic growth close
• US close
• DE close
• UA close

Drawing upon climate change damage functions previously proposed in the literature that we have calibrated to a common level of damages at 2.5 C, we examine the effect upon the social cost of carbon (SCC) of varying the specification of damages in a DICE-like integrated assessment model. In the absence of risk aversion, all of the SCC estimates but one agree within a factor of two. The effect of varying calibration damages is mildly sublinear. With a moderate level of risk aversion included, however, the differences among estimates grow greatly. By combining elements of different damage specifications and roughly taking into account uncertainty in calibration, we have constructed a composite damage function that attempts to approximate the range of uncertainty in climate change damages. In the absence of risk aversion, SCC values calculated with this function are in agreement with the standard quadratic DICE damage function; with a coefficient of relative risk aversion of 1.4, this damage function yields SCC values more than triple those of the standard function.

#### Note: #### An updated version of these data including data on biofuels and fuels from waste is available [here](https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2950291). The extended version also offers a package of R-scripts that have been used to reproduce the statistical analysis presented in [Hötte, Pichler, Lafond (2021): The rise of science in low-carbon energy technologies](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110654). This data publication offers data about low-carbon energy technology (LCET) patents and citations links to the scientific literature. This data publication contains different data sets (in .RData and (long-term archivable) .tsv format). Further information about each data set is provided in more detail below. - "all_papers.RData" : Data on scientific papers from Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG), 3 columns: Paper ID, Paper year, cited (binary 0-1, indicates whether the paper is cited by a patent). - "all_patents.RData" : Data on USPTO utility patents, 6 columns: Patent number, Patent year (grant year), CPC class, Patent date, Patent title, citing_to_science (binary 0-1, indicates whether the patent is citing to science). - "LCET_patents.RData" : Subset of LCET patents, 6 columns: Patent number, Patent year (grant year), Technology type, CPC class, Patent date, Patent title. - "LCET_patent_citations.RData" : Citations from LCET patents to other patents, 2 columns: citing, cited (Patent numbers). - "LCET_subset_with_metainfo_final.RData" : Citations from LCET patents to scientific papers from MAG, complemented by meta-information on patents and papers, 18 columns: Patent number, Paper ID, Patent year, Paper year, Technology type, WoS field, Patent title, Paper title, DOI, Confidence Score, Citation type, Reference type, Journal/ Conf. name, Journal ID, Conference ID, CPC class, Patent date, US patent. ### License and terms of use ### This data is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license. See: [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode) Please find the full license text below. If you want to use the data, do not forget to give appropriate credit by citing this data publication and the following paper. Kerstin Hötte, Anton Pichler, François Lafond: *The rise of science in low-carbon energy technologies*, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 139, 2021 [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110654](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110654) ### LCET definition and concepts ### LCET are defined by Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) codes. CPC offers "tags" that are assigned to patents that are useful for the adaptation and mitigation of climate change. LCET are identified by YO2E codes, i.e. that are assigned to technologies that contribute to the "REDUCTION OF GREENHOUSE GAS [GHG] EMISSIONS, RELATED TO ENERGY GENERATION, TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION". Only the subset of Y02E01 ("Energy generation through renewable energy sources") and Y02E03 ("Energy generation of nuclear origin") technologies are used. 8 different LCET are distinguished: Solar PV, Wind, Solar thermal, Ocean power, Hydroelectric, Geothermal, Nuclear fission and Nuclear fusion. More information about the Y02-tags can be found in: Veefkind, Victor, et al. "A new EPO classification scheme for climate change mitigation technologies." World Patent Information 34.2 (2012): 106-111. DOI: [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2011.12.004](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2011.12.004) ### Data sources and compilation ### The data was generated by the merge of different data sets. 1.) Patent data from USPTO was downloaded here: https://bulkdata.uspto.gov/ 2.) Complementary data on grant year and patent title was taken from: https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-patents-public-datasets-connecting-public-paid-and-private-patent-data 3.) Citations to science come from the Reliance on Science (RoS) data set https://zenodo.org/record/3685972 (v23, Feb. 24, 2020) DOI: [10.5281/zenodo.3685972](10.5281/zenodo.3685972) The directory ("code") offers the R-scripts that were used to process MAG data and to link it to patent data. The header of the R-scripts offer additional technical information about the subsetting procedures and data retrieval. For more information about the patent data, see: Pichler, A., Lafond, F. & J, F. D. (2020), Technological interdependencies predict innovation dynamics, Working paper pp. 1–33. URL: [https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.00580](https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.00580) For more information about MAG data, see: Marx, Matt, and Aaron Fuegi. "Reliance on science: Worldwide front‐page patent citations to scientific articles." Strategic Management Journal 41.9 (2020): 1572-1594. DOI: [https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3145](https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3145) Marx, Matt and Fuegi, Aaron, Reliance on Science: Worldwide Front-Page Patent Citations to Scientific Articles. Boston University Questrom School of Business Research Paper No. 3331686. DOI: [http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3331686 ](http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3331686 ) ### Detailed information about the data ### - "all_papers.RData" : Data on scientific papers from Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG), 3 columns: Paper ID: Unique paper-identifier used by MAG Paper year: Year of publication cited: binary 0-1, indicates whether the paper is cited by a patent, citation links are made in the text body and front-page of the patent, and added by examiners and applicants. - "all_patents.RData" : Data on USPTO utility patents, 6 columns: Patent number: Number given by USPTO. Can be used for manual patent search in http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm (numeric) Patent year: Year when the patent was granted (numeric) CPC class: Detailed 8-digit CPC code (numeric) Patent date: Exact date of patent granting (numeric) Patent title: Short title (character) citing_to_science: binary 0-1, indicates whether the patent is citing to science as identified by citation links in RoS. (numeric) - "LCET_patents.RData" : Subset of LCET patents, 6 columns: Patent number: (numeric) Patent year: (numeric) Technology type: Short code used to tag 8 different types of LCET (pv, (nuclear) fission, (solar) thermal, (nuclear) fusion, wind, geo(termal), sea (ocean power), hydro) (character) CPC class: Detailed 8-digit CPC code (character) Patent date: (numeric) Patent title: (numeric) - "LCET_patent_citations.RData" : Citations from LCET patents to other patents, 2 columns: citing: Number of citing patent (numeric) cited: Number of cited patent (numeric) - "LCET_subset_with_metainfo_final.RData" : Citations from LCET patents to scientific papers from MAG, complemented by meta-information on patents and papers, 18 columns: Patent number: see above (numeric) Paper ID: see above (numeric) Patent year: see above (numeric) Paper year: see above (numeric) Technology type: see above (character) WoS field: Web of Science field of research, WoS fiels were probabilistically assigned to papers and are used as given by RoS (character) Patent title: see above (character) Paper title: Title of scientific article (character) DOI: Paper DOI if available (character) Confidence Score: Reliability score of citation link (numeric). Links were probabilistically assiged. See Marx and Fuegi 2019 for further detail. Citation type: Indicates whether citation made in text body of patent document or its front page (character) Reference type: Examiner or applicant added citation link (or unknown). (character) Journal/ Conf. name: Name of journal or conference proceeding where the cited paper was published (character) Journal ID: Journal identifier in MAG (numeric) Conference ID: Conference identifier in MAG (numeric) CPC class: see above (character) Patent date: see above (numeric) US patent: binary US-patent indicator as provided by RoS (numeric) #### Note: #### The citation links were probabilistically retrieved. During the analysis, we identified manually some false-positives are removed them from the "LCET_subset_with_metainfo_final.RData" data set. The list is available, too: "list_of_false_positives.tsv" We do not claim to have a perfect coverage but expect a precision of >98% as described by Marx and Fuegi 2019. ### Statistics about the data ### Full data set: - Number of papers in MAG: 179,083,029 - Number of all patents: 10,160,667 - Number of citing patents: 2,058,233 - Number of cited papers: 4,404,088 - Number of citation links from patents to papers: 34,959,193 LCET subset: - Number of LCET patents: 57,530 - Number of citing LCET patents: 16,674 - Number of cited papers: 53,509 - Number of citation links from LCET patents to papers: 151,253 - Number of citation links from LCET patents to other patents: 567,274 Meta-information: Papers: - Publication year, 251 Web-of-Science (WoS) categories, Journal/ conference proceedings name, DOI, Paper title Patents: - Grant year, >250,000 hierarchical CPC classes, 8 LCET types Citation links: - Reference type, citation type, reliability score #### If you have further questions about the data or suggestions, please contact: kerstin.hotte@oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk ### License issues ### Terms of use of the source data: - Reliance on Science data [https://zenodo.org/record/3685972](https://zenodo.org/record/3685972), Open Data Commons Attribution License (ODC-By) v1.0, https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ - "Google Patents Public Data” by IFI CLAIMS Patent Services and Google (https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-patents-public-datasets-connecting-public-paid-and-private-patent-data), Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), https://console.cloud.google.com/marketplace/details/google_patents_public_datasets/google-patents-public-data - USPTO patent data (https://bulkdata.uspto.gov/), see: https://bulkdata.uspto.gov/data/2020TermsConditions.docx

This data release contains the boundaries of assessment units and input data for the assessment of undiscovered gas resources of the Sacramento Basin province in California. The Assessment Unit is the fundamental unit used in the National Assessment Project for the assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The Assessment Unit is defined within the context of the higher-level Total Petroleum System. The Assessment Unit is shown herein as a geographic boundary interpreted, defined, and mapped by the geologist responsible for the province and incorporates a set of known or postulated oil and (or) gas accumulations sharing similar geologic, geographic, and temporal properties within the Total Petroleum System, such as source rock, timing, migration pathways, trapping mechanism, and hydrocarbon type. The Assessment Unit boundary is defined geologically as the limits of the geologic elements that define the Assessment Unit, such as limits of reservoir rock, geologic structures, source rock, and seal lithologies. The only exceptions to this are Assessment Units that border the Federal-State water boundary. In these cases, the Federal-State water boundary forms part of the Assessment Unit boundary. Methodology of assessments are documented in USGS Data Series 547 for continuous assessments (https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/547) and USGS DDS69-D, Chapter 21 for conventional assessments (https://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-d/REPORTS/69_D_CH_21.pdf). See supplemental information for a detailed list of files included this data release.

This data release contains the boundaries of assessment units and input data for the assessment of Oil and Gas Resources in the Mancos-Menefee Composite and Underlying Todilto Total Petroleum Systems of New Mexico and Colorado. The Assessment Unit is the fundamental unit used in the National Assessment Project for the assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The Assessment Unit is defined within the context of the higher-level Total Petroleum System. The Assessment Unit is shown herein as a geographic boundary interpreted, defined, and mapped by the geologist responsible for the province and incorporates a set of known or postulated oil and (or) gas accumulations sharing similar geologic, geographic, and temporal properties within the Total Petroleum System, such as source rock, timing, migration pathways, trapping mechanism, and hydrocarbon type. The Assessment Unit boundary is defined geologically as the limits of the geologic elements that define the Assessment Unit, such as limits of reservoir rock, geologic structures, source rock, and seal lithologies. The only exceptions to this are Assessment Units that border the Federal-State water boundary. In these cases, the Federal-State water boundary forms part of the Assessment Unit boundary. Methodology of assessments are documented in USGS Data Series 547 for continuous assessments (https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/547) and USGS DDS69-D, Chapter 21 for conventional assessments (https://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-d/REPORTS/69_D_CH_21.pdf). See supplemental information for a detailed list of files included this data release.

Data from: 30 Years Brings Changes to the Arthropod Community of Kibale National Park, Uganda by Opito, E.A., T. Alanko, U. Kalbitzer, M. Nummelin, P. Omeja, A. Valtonen, and Colin A. Chapman. 2023, Biotropica, Article DOI: 10.1111/btp.13206

We monitored golden-cheeked warbler territories in 10 plots within an urban preserve to determine abundance, delineate territories, and document breeding success. We determined environmental conditions across the study period to examine temporal and landscape effects. We then used these data to estimate adult survival and productivity and relate these vital rates to environmental conditions experienced during our study period. We used supported covariates to predict potential effects on this population 25 years into the future. These data and code are associated with the publication in Ecosphere entitled "Urban land cover and El Nino events negatively impact population viability of an endangered North American songbird." We performed an integrated population model to evaluate the effect of climate patterns and urban land cover on the viability of an endangered wood-warbler breeding in central Texas. We used territory monitroing data from 2011–2019 to predict viability of the population 25 years into the future. We assembled and conducted the analysis in R.

Project: Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) datasets - These data have been generated as part of the internationally-coordinated Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6; see also GMD Special Issue: http://www.geosci-model-dev.net/special_issue590.html). The simulation data provides a basis for climate research designed to answer fundamental science questions and serves as resource for authors of the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR6). CMIP6 is a project coordinated by the Working Group on Coupled Modelling (WGCM) as part of the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP). Phase 6 builds on previous phases executed under the leadership of the Program for Climate Model Diagnosis and Intercomparison (PCMDI) and relies on the Earth System Grid Federation (ESGF) and the Centre for Environmental Data Analysis (CEDA) along with numerous related activities for implementation. The original data is hosted and partially replicated on a federated collection of data nodes, and most of the data relied on by the IPCC is being archived for long-term preservation at the IPCC Data Distribution Centre (IPCC DDC) hosted by the German Climate Computing Center (DKRZ). The project includes simulations from about 120 global climate models and around 45 institutions and organizations worldwide. Summary: These data include the subset used by IPCC AR6 WGI authors of the datasets originally published in ESGF for 'CMIP6.ScenarioMIP.DKRZ.MPI-ESM1-2-HR.ssp126' with the full Data Reference Syntax following the template 'mip_era.activity_id.institution_id.source_id.experiment_id.member_id.table_id.variable_id.grid_label.version'. The MPI-ESM1.2-HR climate model, released in 2017, includes the following components: aerosol: none, prescribed MACv2-SP, atmos: ECHAM6.3 (spectral T127; 384 x 192 longitude/latitude; 95 levels; top level 0.01 hPa), land: JSBACH3.20, landIce: none/prescribed, ocean: MPIOM1.63 (tripolar TP04, approximately 0.4deg; 802 x 404 longitude/latitude; 40 levels; top grid cell 0-12 m), ocnBgchem: HAMOCC6, seaIce: unnamed (thermodynamic (Semtner zero-layer) dynamic (Hibler 79) sea ice model). The model was run by the Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum, Hamburg 20146, Germany (DKRZ) in native nominal resolutions: aerosol: 100 km, atmos: 100 km, land: 100 km, landIce: none, ocean: 50 km, ocnBgchem: 50 km, seaIce: 50 km.

The ecological impacts of multiple stressors are hard to predict but important to understand. When multiple stressors influence foundation species, the effects can cascade throughout the ecosystem. Gulf of Mexico seagrass ecosystems are currently experiencing a suite of novel stressors, including warmer water temperatures and increased herbivory due to tropicalization and conservation efforts. We investigated the impact of warming temperatures and grazing history on plant performance, morphology, and palatability by integrating a mesocosm study using the seagrass Thalassia testudinum with feeding trials using the sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus. Warming temperatures negatively impacted T. testudinum tolerance traits, reducing belowground biomass by 34%, productivity by 74%, shoot density by 10%, and the number of leaves per plant by 24%, and negatively impacted resistance traits through 13% lower toughness of young leaves and a trend for reduced leaf carbon:nitrogen. Lytechinus variegatus individuals preferred to consume plants grown under heated conditions, which supports findings of enhanced palatability. Simulated turtle grazing impacted more plant traits than grazing by other herbivores, potentially diminishing plant resilience to future disturbances through reduced rhizome non-structural carbohydrate concentrations and increasing palatability through reduced fiber content and 23% lower leaf carbon:phosphorus. Simulated turtle, simulated parrotfish, and urchin grazing reduced leaf carbon:nitrogen by 11%, also potentially increasing nutritive value. Interactions between warming temperatures and grazers on plant traits were additive for 16 out of 19 response variables. However, the stressors non-additively impacted the number of leaves per plant, fiber content, and epiphyte load. We suggest that the impacts of grazers on leaf turnover rate and leaf age may vary based on water temperature, potentially driving these interactions. Overall, increased temperatures and grazing pressure will likely reduce seagrass resilience, structure, and biomass, potentially impacting feedback systems and producing negative consequences for seagrass cover, associated species, and ecosystem services.

This data release contains the boundaries of assessment units and input data for the assessment of undiscovered continuous oil and gas resources in the Smackover formation in the U.S. Gulf Coast. The Assessment Unit is the fundamental unit used in the National Assessment Project for the assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources. The Assessment Unit is defined within the context of the higher-level Total Petroleum System. The Assessment Unit is shown herein as a geographic boundary interpreted, defined, and mapped by the geologist responsible for the province and incorporates a set of known or postulated oil and (or) gas accumulations sharing similar geologic, geographic, and temporal properties within the Total Petroleum System, such as source rock, timing, migration pathways, trapping mechanism, and hydrocarbon type. The Assessment Unit boundary is defined geologically as the limits of the geologic elements that define the Assessment Unit, such as limits of reservoir rock, geologic structures, source rock, and seal lithologies. The only exceptions to this are Assessment Units that border the Federal-State water boundary. In these cases, the Federal-State water boundary forms part of the Assessment Unit boundary. In addition to the shapefile, for U.S. assessments, allocation tables are provided that enumerate percentages assigned to various land categories. Machine-readable tables are also provided that contain the input and results for each assessment unit summarized in the USGS Fact Sheet. Methodology of assessments are documented in USGS Data Series 547 for continuous assessments (https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/547) and USGS DDS69-D, Chapter 21 for conventional assessments (https://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-d/REPORTS/69_D_CH_21.pdf). See supplemental information for a detailed list of files included this data release.