• Energy Research
• 7. Clean energy close
• 11. Sustainability close
• CN close
• US close

The atmosphere concentration of CO2 is steadily increasing and causing climate change. To achieve the Paris 1.5 or 2 oC target, negative emissions technologies must be deployed in addition to reducing carbon emissions. The ocean is a large carbon sink but the potential of marine primary producers to contribute to carbon neutrality remains unclear. Here we review the alterations to carbon capture and sequestration of marine primary producers (including traditional ‘blue carbon’ plants, microalgae, and macroalgae) in the Anthropocene, and, for the first time, assess and compare the potential of various marine primary producers to carbon neutrality and climate change mitigation via biogeoengineering approaches. The contributions of marine primary producers to carbon sequestration have been decreasing in the Anthropocene due to the decrease in biomass driven by direct anthropogenic activities and climate change. The potential of blue carbon plants (mangroves, saltmarshes, and seagrasses) is limited by the available areas for their revegetation. Microalgae appear to have a large potential due to their ubiquity but how to enhance their carbon sequestration efficiency is very complex and uncertain. On the other hand, macroalgae can play an essential role in mitigating climate change through extensive offshore cultivation due to higher carbon sequestration capacity and substantial available areas. This approach seems both technically and economically feasible due to the development of offshore aquaculture and a well-established market for macroalgal products. Synthesis and applications: This paper provides new insights and suggests promising directions for utilizing marine primary producers to achieve the Paris temperature target. We propose that macroalgae cultivation can play an essential role in attaining carbon neutrality and climate change mitigation, although its ecological impacts need to be assessed further. To calculate the parameters presented in Table 1, the relevant keywords "mangroves, salt marshes, macroalgae, microalgae, global area, net primary productivity, CO2 sequestration" were searched through the ISI Web of Science and Google Scholar in July 2021. Recent data published after 2010 were collected and used since area and productivity of plants change with decade. For data with limited availability, such as net primary productivity (NPP) of seagrasses and global area and NPP of wild macroalgae, data collection was extended back to 1980. Total NPP and CO2 sequestration for mangroves, salt marshes, seagrasses and wild macroalgae were obtained by the multiplication of area and NPP/CO2 sequestration density and subjected to error propagation analysis. Data were expressed as means ± standard error.

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.UA.MCM-UA-1-0' 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 Manabe Climate Model v1.0 - University of Arizona climate model, released in 1991, includes the following components: aerosol: Modifies surface albedoes (Haywood et al. 1997, doi: 10.1175/1520-0442(1997)010<1562:GCMCOT>2.0.CO;2), atmos: R30L14 (3.75 X 2.5 degree (long-lat) configuration; 96 x 80 longitude/latitude; 14 levels; top level 0.015 sigma, 15 mb), land: Standard Manabe bucket hydrology scheme (Manabe 1969, doi: 10.1175/1520-0493(1969)097<0739:CATOC>2.3.CO;2), landIce: Specified location - invariant in time, has high albedo and latent heat capacity, ocean: MOM1.0 (MOM1, 1.875 X 2.5 deg; 192 x 80 longitude/latitude; 18 levels; top grid cell 0-40 m), seaIce: Thermodynamic ice model (free drift dynamics). The model was run by the Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA (UA) in native nominal resolutions: aerosol: 250 km, atmos: 250 km, land: 250 km, landIce: 250 km, ocean: 250 km, seaIce: 250 km.

Leaching dataset of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and nitrogen (DON), nitrate (NO3+) and ammonium (NH4+) were collected from 6 cropping treatments (corn, switchgrass, miscanthus, native grass mix, restored prairie and poplar) established in the Bioenergy Cropping System Experiment (BCSE) which is a part of Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center (www.glbrc.org) and Long Termn Ecological Research (LTER) program (www.lter.kbs.msu.edu). The site is located at the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station (42.3956° N, 85.3749° W and 288 m above sea level), 25 km from Kalamazoo in southwestern Michigan, USA. Prenart soil water samplers made of Teflon and silica (http://www.prenart.dk/soil-water-samplers/) were installed in blocks 1 and 2 of the BCSE (Fig. S1), and Eijkelkamp soil water samplers made of ceramic (http://www.eijkelkamp.com) were installed in blocks 3 and 4 (there were no soil water samplers in block 5). All samplers were installed at 1.2 m depth at a 45° angle from the soil surface, approximately 20 cm into the unconsolidated sand of the 2Bt2 and 2E/Bt horizons. Beginning in 2009, soil water was sampled at weekly to biweekly intervals during non-frozen periods (April to November) by applying 50 kPa of vacuum for 24 hours, during which water was collected in glass bottles. During the 2009 and 2010 sampling periods we obtained fewer soil water samples from blocks 1 and 2 where Prenart lysimeters were installed. We observed no consistent differences between the two sampler types in concentrations of the analytes reported here. Depending on the volume of leachate collected, water samples were filtered using either 0.45 µm pore size, 33-mm-dia. cellulose acetate membrane filters when volumes were <50 ml, or 0.45 µm, 47-mm-dia. Supor 450 membrane filters for larger volumes. Samples were analyzed for NO3-, NH4+, total dissolved nitrogen (TDN), and DOC. The NO3- concentration was determined using a Dionex ICS1000 ion chromatograph system with membrane suppression and conductivity detection; the detection limit of the system was 0.006 mg NO3--N L-1. The NH4+ concentration in the samples was determined using a Thermo Scientific (formerly Dionex) ICS1100 ion chromatograph system with membrane suppression and conductivity detection; the detection limit of the system was similar. The DOC and TDN concentrations were determined using a Shimadzu TOC-Vcph carbon analyzer with a total nitrogen module (TNM-1); the detection limit of the system was ~0.08 mg C L-1 and ~0.04 mg N L-1. DON concentrations were estimated as the difference between TDN and dissolved inorganic N (NO3- + NH4+) concentrations. The NH4+ concentrations were only measured in the 2013-2015 crop-years, but they were always small relative to NO3- and thus their inclusion or lack of it was inconsequential to the DON estimation. Leaching rates were estimated on a crop-year basis, defined as the period from planting or emergence of the crop in the year indicated through the ensuing year until the next year’s planting or emergence. For each sampling point, the concentration was linearly interpolated between sampling dates during non-freezing periods (April through November). The concentrations in the unsampled winter period (December through March) were also linearly interpolated based on the preceding November and subsequent April samples. Solute leaching (kg ha-1) was calculated by multiplying the daily solute concentration in pore-water (mg L -1) by the modeled daily drainage rates (m3 ha-1) from the overlying soil. The drainage rates were obtained using the SALUS (Systems Approach for Land Use Sustainability) model (Basso and Ritchie, 2015). SALUS simulates yield and environmental outcomes in response to weather, soil, management (planting dates, plant population, irrigation, nitrogen fertilizer application, tillage), and crop genetics. The SALUS water balance sub-model simulates surface run-off, saturated and unsaturated water flow, drainage, root water uptake, and evapotranspiration during growing and non-growing seasons (Basso and Ritchie, 2015). Drainage amounts and rates simulated by SALUS have been validated with measurements using large monolith lysimeters at a nearby site at KBS (Basso and Ritchie, 2005). On days when SALUS predicted no drainage, the leaching was assumed to be zero. The volume-weighted mean concentration for an entire crop-year was calculated as the sum of daily leaching (kg ha-1) divided by the sum of daily drainage rates (m3 ha-1). Weather data for the model were collected at the nearby KBS LTER meteorological station (lter.kbs.msu.edu). Leaching losses of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and nitrogen (DON) from agricultural systems are important to water quality and carbon and nutrient balances but are rarely reported; the few available studies suggest linkages to litter production (DOC) and nitrogen fertilization (DON). In this study we examine the leaching of DOC, DON, NO3-, and NH4+ from no-till corn (maize) and perennial bioenergy crops (switchgrass, miscanthus, native grasses, restored prairie, and poplar) grown between 2009 and 2016 in a replicated field experiment in the upper Midwest U.S. Leaching was estimated from concentrations in soil water and modeled drainage (percolation) rates. DOC leaching rates (kg ha-1 yr-1) and volume-weighted mean concentrations (mg L-1) among cropping systems averaged 15.4 and 4.6, respectively; N fertilization had no effect and poplar lost the most DOC (21.8 and 6.9, respectively). DON leaching rates (kg ha-1 yr-1) and volume-weighted mean concentrations (mg L-1) under corn (the most heavily N-fertilized crop) averaged 4.5 and 1.0, respectively, which was higher than perennial grasses (mean: 1.5 and 0.5, respectively) and poplar (1.6 and 0.5, respectively). NO3- comprised the majority of total N leaching in all systems (59-92%). Average NO3- leaching (kg N ha-1 yr-1) under corn (35.3) was higher than perennial grasses (5.9) and poplar (7.2). NH4+ concentrations in soil water from all cropping systems were relatively low (<0.07 mg N L-1). Perennial crops leached more NO3- in the first few years after planting, and markedly less after. Among the fertilized crops, the leached N represented 14-38% of the added N over the study period; poplar lost the greatest proportion (38%) and corn was intermediate (23%). Requiring only one third or less of the N fertilization compared to corn, perennial bioenergy crops can substantially reduce N leaching and consequent movement into aquifers and surface waters. readme files are given that describe the data table

This work models a last-mile network design problem for an e-retailer with a capacitated two-echelon distribution structure - typical in e-retail last-mile distribution, catering to a market with a stochastic and dynamic daily customer demand requesting delivery within time-windows. Considering the distribution evnironment, this work formulates last-mile network design problem for this e-retailer as a dynamic-stochastic two capacitated location routing problem with time-windows. In doing so, this work splits the last-mile network design problem into its constituent strategic, tactical, and operational decisions. Here, the strategic decisions undertake long-term planning to develop a distribution structure with appropriate distribution facilities and a suitable delivery fleet to service the expected customer demand in the planning horizon. The tactical decisions pertain to medium-term day-to-day planning of last-mile delivery operations to establish efficient goods flow in this distribution structure to service the daily stochastic customer demand. And finally, operational decisions involve immediate short-term planning to fine-tune this last-mile delivery to service the requests arriving dynamically through the day. Note, the last-mile network design problem formulated as a location routing problem constitutes three subproblems encompassing facility location problem, customer allocation problem, and vehicle routing problem, each of which are NP-hard combinatorial optimization problems. To this end, this work develops an adaptive large neighborhood search meta-heuristic algorithm that searches through the neighborhood by destroying and consequently repairing the solution thereby reconfiguring large portions of the solution with specific operators that are chosen adaptively in each iteration of the algorithm, hence the name adaptive large neighborhood search. Further, considering the stochastic and dynamic nature of the delivery environment, this work develops a Monte-Carlo framework simulating each day in the planning horizon, with each day divided into 1-hr timeslots, and with each time-slot accepting customer requests for service by the end of the day. In particular, the framework assumes the e-retailer will delay route commitments until the last-feasible time-slot to accumulate customer requests and consequently assign them to an uncommitted delivery route. Note, a delivery route is committed once the e-retailer starts loading packages assigned to this delivery route onto the delivery vehicle assigned for this delivery route. At the end of every time-slot then, this framework assumes the e-retailer integrates the new customer requests by inserting these customer nodes into such uncommitted delivery routes in a manner that results in the least increase in distribution cost keeping the customer-distribution facility allocation fixed. Thus, the framework iterates through the time-slots with the e-retailer processing route commitments, accumulating customer requests, and subsequently integrating them into the delivery operations for the day. E-commerce has the potential to make urban goods flow economically viable, environmentally efficient, and socially equitable. However, as e-retailers compete with increasingly consumer-focused services, urban freight witnesses a significant increase in associated distribution costs and negative externalities particularly affecting those living close to logistics clusters. Hence, to remain competitive, e-retailers deploy alternate last-mile distribution strategies. These alternate strategies, such as those that include use of electric delivery trucks for last-mile operations, a fleet of crowdsourced drivers for last-mile delivery, consolidation facilities coupled with light-duty delivery vehicles for a multi-echelon distribution, or collection points for customer pickup, can restore sustainable urban goods flow. Thus, in this study, the authors investigate the opportunities and challenges associated with such alternate last-mile distribution strategies for an e-retailer offering expedited service with rush delivery within strict timeframes. To this end, the authors formulate a last-mile network design (LMND) problem as a dynamic-stochastic two-echelon capacitated location routing problem with time-windows (DS-2E-C-LRP-TW) addressed with an adaptive large neighborhood search (ALNS) metaheuristic.

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.NOAA-GFDL.GFDL-ESM4.ssp245' 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 GFDL-ESM4 climate model, released in 2018, includes the following components: aerosol: interactive, atmos: GFDL-AM4.1 (Cubed-sphere (c96) - 1 degree nominal horizontal resolution; 360 x 180 longitude/latitude; 49 levels; top level 1 Pa), atmosChem: GFDL-ATMCHEM4.1 (full atmospheric chemistry), land: GFDL-LM4.1, landIce: GFDL-LM4.1, ocean: GFDL-OM4p5 (GFDL-MOM6, tripolar - nominal 0.5 deg; 720 x 576 longitude/latitude; 75 levels; top grid cell 0-2 m), ocnBgchem: GFDL-COBALTv2, seaIce: GFDL-SIM4p5 (GFDL-SIS2.0, tripolar - nominal 0.5 deg; 720 x 576 longitude/latitude; 5 layers; 5 thickness categories). The model was run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA (NOAA-GFDL) in native nominal resolutions: aerosol: 100 km, atmos: 100 km, atmosChem: 100 km, land: 100 km, landIce: 100 km, ocean: 50 km, ocnBgchem: 50 km, seaIce: 50 km.

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.CAMS.CAMS-CSM1-0.ssp119' 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 CAMS-CSM 1.0 climate model, released in 2016, includes the following components: atmos: ECHAM5_CAMS (T106; 320 x 160 longitude/latitude; 31 levels; top level 10 mb), land: CoLM 1.0, ocean: MOM4 (tripolar; 360 x 200 longitude/latitude, primarily 1deg latitude/longitude, down to 1/3deg within 30deg of the equatorial tropics; 50 levels; top grid cell 0-10 m), seaIce: SIS 1.0. The model was run by the Chinese Academy of Meteorological Sciences, Beijing 100081, China (CAMS) in native nominal resolutions: atmos: 100 km, land: 100 km, ocean: 100 km, seaIce: 100 km.

Figure 1-4 data for "Anaconda-shaped Spiral Multi-layered Triboelectric Nanogenerators with Ultra-High Space Efficiency for Wave Energy Harvesting" Figure 1-4 data for "Anaconda-shaped Spiral Multi-layered Triboelectric Nanogenerators with Ultra-High Space Efficiency for Wave Energy Harvesting"

This data set is no longer current – The most current data and all historical data sets can be found at https://data.nrel.gov/submissions/244 This database represents a list of community solar projects identified through various sources as of Dec 2021. The list has been reviewed but errors may exist and the list may not be comprehensive. Errors in the sources e.g. press releases may be duplicated in the list. Blank spaces represent missing information. NREL invites input to improve the database including to - correct erroneous information - add missing projects - fill in missing information - remove inactive projects. Updated information can be submitted to the contact(s) located on the current data set page linked at the top.

Matlab program and data for the paper “An energy consumption rectification method based on Bayesian linear regression and heating degree-days". "simulation model.zip" is the heating house model in Trnsys simulation software. "Example1" and "Example2" is the Matlab program and data in this paper.