• Energy Research
• Open Access close
• Restricted close
• Embargo close
• 12. Responsible consumption close
• 2. Zero hunger close
• US close
• DE close

This data publication offers updated data about low-carbon energy technology (LCET) patents and citations links to the scientific literature. Compared to a [previous version](https://doi.org/10.4119/unibi/2941555), it also contains data on biofuels and fuels from waste technologies. The updated version also contains the code (R-scripts) that have been used to (1) compile the data and (2) to reproduce the statistical analysis including figures and tables presented in the final paper Hötte, Pichler, Lafond (2021): "The rise of science in low-carbon energy technologies", RSER. DOI: [10.1016/j.rser.2020.110654](10.1016/j.rser.2020.110654). 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. - "patent:citations.RData": Patent citations among all patents (not only LCET), 2 columns: citing, cited (Patent numbers). Moreover, this data publication contains a folder "code" with 2 subfolders: - "R_code_create_data" contains the R-scripts used to create the data sample. - "R_code_plots_and_figures" contains all R-scripts used to make the statistical analyses presented in the text (including figures and tables). Please check the read-me documents in the code folder for further detail. ### 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 Please find the full license text below. If you want to use the data, do not forget to give appropriate credit by citing this article: 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 ### 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 chagen. 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"), Y02E03 ("Energy generation of nuclear origin") and Y02E5 ("Technologies for the production of fuel of non-fossil origin") technologies are used. 10 different LCET are distinguished: Solar PV, Wind, Solar thermal, Ocean power, Hydroelectric, Geothermal, Biofuels, Fuels from waste, 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 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 10 different types of LCET (pv, (nuclear) fission, (solar) thermal, (nuclear) fusion, wind, geo(termal), sea (ocean power), hydro, biofuels, (fuels from) waste) (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 fields 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 assigned. 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) - "patent:citations.RData": Patent citations among all patents (not only LCET), 2 columns: citing: Number of citing patent (numeric) cited: Number of cited patent (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: - #papers in MAG: 179,083,029 - #all patents: 10,160,667 - #citing patents: 2,058,233 - #cited papers: 4,404,088 - #citation links from patents to papers: 34,959,193 LCET subset: - #LCET patents: 65,305 - #citing LCET patents: 22,017 - #cited papers: 103,645 - #citation links from LCET patents to papers: 396,504 Meta-information: Papers: - Publication year, 251 Web-of-Science (WoS) categories, Journal/ conference proceedings name, DOI, Paper title Patents: - Grant year, >240,000 hierarchical CPC classes, 10 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** ### Acknowledgements ### The authors want to thank the Center for Research Data Management of Bielefeld University and in particular Cord Wiljes for excellent support. ### 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

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.

#### 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

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.

Comprehensive and reliable information on anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gas emissions is required to track progress towards keeping warming well below 2°C as agreed upon in the Paris Agreement. Here we provide a dataset on anthropogenic GHG emissions 1970-2019 with a broad country and sector coverage. We build the dataset from recent releases from the “Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research” (EDGAR) for CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and industry (FFI), CH4 emissions, N2O emissions, and fluorinated gases and use a well-established fast-track method to extend this dataset from 2018 to 2019. We complement this with information on net CO2 emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) from three available bookkeeping models.

Aim: Climate warming and biodiversity loss both alter plant productivity, yet we lack an understanding of how biodiversity regulates the responses of ecosystems to warming. In this study, we examine how plant diversity regulates the responses of grassland productivity to experimental warming using meta-analytic techniques. Location: Global Major taxa studied: Grassland ecosystems Methods: Our meta-analysis is based on warming responses of 40 different plant communities obtained from 20 independent studies on grasslands across five continents. Results: Our results show that plant diversity and its responses to warming were the most important factors regulating the warming effects on plant productivity, among all the factors considered (plant diversity, climate and experimental settings). Specifically, warming increased plant productivity when plant diversity (indicated by effective number of species) in grasslands was lesser than 10, whereas warming decreased plant productivity when plant diversity was greater than 10. Moreover, the structural equation modelling showed that the magnitude of warming enhanced plant productivity by increasing the performance of dominant plant species in grasslands of diversity lesser than 10. The negative effects of warming on productivity in grasslands with plant diversity greater than 10 were partly explained by diversity-induced decline in plant dominance. Main Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the positive or negative effect of warming on grassland productivity depends on how biodiverse a grassland is. This could mainly owe to differences in how warming may affect plant dominance and subsequent shifts in interspecific interactions in grasslands of different plant diversity levels.

QTDIAN - Quantification of Technological DIffusion and sociAl constraiNts - is a toolbox of qualitative and quantitative descriptions of socio-technical and political aspects of the energy transition that influence the overall potential, the rate of energy-related technology and service diffusion and the design of the future energy system. The output of QTIDIAN is empirically founded datasets of social and political drivers and barriers of the transition, both in the form of raw data describing past and current developments and manipulated to constitute consistent quantifications of the storylines. Here you can download the data for six QTDIAN themes: Socially feasible scaling of energy technologies Policy preferences & dynamics Barriers to infrastructural development (wind energy, grid development) Citizen energy Private energy demand Further information on the QTDIAN modelling toolbox and the data can be found in the SENTINEL Deliverable 2.3 and Deliverable 2.4: S��sser, D., al Rakouki, H., & Lilliestam, J.(2021). The QTDIAN modelling toolbox���Quantification of social drivers and constraints of the diffusion of energy technologies. Deliverable 2.3. Sustainable Energy Transitions Laboratory (SENTINEL) project. Potsdam: Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS). S��sser, D., Pickering, B., Chatterjee, S., Oreggioni, G., Stavrakas, V., & Lilliestam, J.(2021). Integration of socio-technological transition constraints into energy demand and systems models. Deliverable 2.5. Sustainable Energy Transitions Laboratory (SENTINEL) project. Potsdam: Institute for Advanced Sustainability Studies (IASS).