cometadata/datacite-titles-descriptions-related-identifiers huggingface dataset:
DOI: 10.15468/dl.cymmkq
title: Occurrence Download

description: A dataset containing 0 species occurrences available in GBIF matching the query:
{
 "and" : [
 "TaxonKey is Odonata",
 "Geometry POLYGON ((-4.705748 58.04978, -4.703983 58.04947, -4.703416 58.04893, -4.702694 58.04873, -4.702033 58.04859, -4.701854 58.04874, -4.702052 58.04928, -4.699497 58.05049, -4.697345 58.05109, -4.696699 58.05174, -4.696223 58.05227, -4.694932 58.05299, -4.693645 58.05376, -4.693429 58.05298, -4.693406 58.05268, -4.693298 58.05244, -4.692277 58.05227, -4.691834 58.05265, -4.692069 58.05279, -4.691359 58.05318, -4.690796 58.05286, -4.690858 58.05249, -4.691387 58.05208, -4.690786 58.05213, -4.689199 58.0528, -4.6886 58.05318, -4.688239 58.05284, -4.689137 58.05227, -4.689626 58.05191, -4.690364 58.05159, -4.691031 58.05122, -4.69085 58.0509, -4.690102 58.05078, -4.68907 58.05108, -4.688245 58.05102, -4.68847 58.05085, -4.688897 58.05028, -4.689672 58.04984, -4.69035 58.04948, -4.691093 58.0491, -4.690213 58.04869, -4.689015 58.04886, -4.687885 58.04933, -4.686944 58.05025, -4.686444 58.05049, -4.686057 58.05084, -4.686182 58.05099, -4.685956 58.05172, -4.685449 58.05188, -4.686112 58.05208, -4.686598 58.05208, -4.686127 58.05287, -4.686246 58.05326, -4.688051 58.05341, -4.689117 58.05491, -4.689413 58.05557, -4.69007 58.05625, -4.69152 58.05675, -4.693182 58.05678, -4.694231 58.05664, -4.694486 58.05685, -4.700797 58.05538, -4.70257 58.0551, -4.704725 58.05424, -4.706462 58.05556, -4.711441 58.05941, -4.709897 58.06005, -4.709122 58.06019, -4.707773 58.06044, -4.706994 58.06082, -4.705549 58.06128, -4.704551 58.06151, -4.705628 58.06174, -4.702661 58.06194, -4.700335 58.06234, -4.699887 58.06293, -4.70014 58.06391, -4.701147 58.06447, -4.702551 58.06494, -4.703874 58.06523, -4.704923 58.06546, -4.706774 58.06591, -4.708147 58.06596, -4.709873 58.06625, -4.711266 58.06657, -4.711129 58.06565, -4.714017 58.06579, -4.714712 58.06845, -4.713214 58.0697, -4.713378 58.06982, -4.716317 58.06881, -4.717992 58.06734, -4.715989 58.06513, -4.714058 58.05877, -4.712482 58.05455, -4.707549 58.0519, -4.705748 58.04978))",
 "Year is 2014"
 ]
}

 The dataset includes 0 records from 0 constituent datasets; see https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/download/0053673-251120083545085/datasets/export for details.
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000141
title: Cross Cutting Projects: ESME v4.3 Results Charts

description: This publication has been produced as part of the work on the ETI’s internationally peer reviewed energy system modelling environment (ESME) - a national energy system design and planning capability that helps to identify key areas for ETI investments. ESME is also used by UK Government to underpin and inform energy policy.<br><br>This file includes summary results from a standard run of ESME v4.3. A standard set of core charts exported from the ESME model showing energy flows and technology deployment in each major sector. Below each chart a table shows the corresponding numerical data
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000134
title: Hydrogen Turbines Follow On - Scenario 1,2 and 3 Results Spreadsheet: Role of Gas/H<sub>2</sub> in the GB power sector - initial analysis

description: Various scenarios for the UK’s power fleet composition in 2030 and 2040 were developed. Dispatch modelling in Plexos was carried out by Baringa on these fleets to investigate the role gas fed plants might have in future. This includes the ability to study load factors, stop/starts etc, and together with concomitant pricing, provide a picture of investment remuneration.The effect of key drivers is studied e.g. gas price. This spreadsheet contains baseline, and scenario 1,2 and 3 results for aeverage power generation mix, winter mix amd modelled generation duration.
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000116
title: CCS Benchmark Refresh - A techno-economic analysis of the performance of a state-of-the art CCGT with and without amine capture at 90% capture rate

description: This spreadsheet model was produced as part of the CCS Capture Benchmark Refresh Study, and provides a techno-economic analysis of the performance of a state-of-the art CCGT with and without amine capture at 90% capture rate.The spreadsheet enables ‘what if’ calculations of costs for the following designs: CCGT with and without capture, at 100% and 40% load; CCGT with and without capture, with 38% and 18% exhaust gas recycle rates, at 100% and 40% load; CCGT with an independent capture plant, generating its own power and steam, at 100% load; CCGT with an independent capture plant, generating its own steam only, at 100% load CCGT with retrofitted capture plant, at 100% load. Outputs include capital costs, operating costs, cost of capture and levelised cost of electricity.The spreadsheet concentrates on power generation, capture and compression, but allows manual input of transport and storage costs to provide overall figures.These cases are covered in Benchmark Refresh reports D2.1 (refresh of CCGT benchmark and EGR) and D7.1 (Independent Capture Plant). It should be noted that the underlying capture plant designs were reviewed as part of the Independent Capture Plant work, so the results given by this spreadsheet for the earlier cases may not precisely match those presented in Report D2.1.
DOI: 10.15468/dl.jdgmnn
title: Occurrence Download

description: A dataset containing 568 species occurrences available in GBIF matching the query:
{
 "and" : [
 "Country is Mozambique",
 "OccurrenceStatus is Present",
 "TaxonKey is one of (Gymnosporia heterophylla, Gymnosporia senegalensis, Hyperacanthus amoenus, Grewia villosa, Krauseola mosambicina, Lagenaria sphaerica, Salacia leptoclada, Strychnos henningsii, Strychnos innocua, Strychnos panganensis, Strychnos potatorum, Vitex harveyana, Vitex patula)"
 ]
}

 The dataset includes 568 records from 27 constituent datasets; see https://api.gbif.org/v1/occurrence/download/0053675-251120083545085/datasets/export for details.
 
Data from some individual datasets included in this download may be licensed under less restrictive terms.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17456273
title: Modern plant wax distributions and hydrogen isotope compositions from the Falkland Islands

description: This dataset contains compound-specific hydrogen isotope data (δ2H values) for n-alkanoic acids and n-alkanes extracted from modern plant samples collected across the Falkland Islands. The data were generated to quantify plant wax D/H fractionation and to assess the consistency of fractionation between compound classes. The dataset includes sample metadata (species, location, and collection context), δ2H values of individual n-alkanoic acids and n-alkanes, and associated environmental water isotope values used to calculate ε wax/water.
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17940374
title: Modern plant wax distributions and hydrogen isotope compositions from the Falkland Islands

description: This dataset contains compound-specific hydrogen isotope data (δ2H values) for n-alkanoic acids and n-alkanes extracted from modern plant samples collected across the Falkland Islands. The data were generated to quantify plant wax D/H fractionation and to assess the consistency of fractionation between compound classes. The dataset includes sample metadata (species, location, and collection context), δ2H values of individual n-alkanoic acids and n-alkanes, and associated environmental water isotope values used to calculate ε wax/water.
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000061
title: Biomass to Power with CCS - Bio chem loop decadal model

description: TESBiC: Techno-Economic Study of Biomass to power with CCS. This model was developed as part of Work Package 3. It examines changes in cost, efficiency and emissions under different operating conditions for biomass to power with chemical looping CCS. It should be read in conjunction with the Work Package 3 reports on model specification and user documentation.<br><br>The Biomass to Power with CCS Phase 1 project consisted of four work packages: WP1: Landscape review of current developments; WP2: High Level Engineering Study (down-selecting from 24 to 8 Biomass to Power with CCS technologies); WP3: Parameterised Sub-System Models development; and WP4: Technology benchmarking and recommendation report. Reports generally follow this coding. We would suggest that you do not read any of the earlier deliverables in isolation as some assumptions in the reports were shown to be invalid. Wewould recommend that you read the project executive summaries as they provide a good summary of the overall conclusions. This work demonstrated the potential value of Biomass to Power with CCS technologies as a family, but it was clear at the time of the project, that the individual technologies were insufficiently mature to be able to ‘pick a winner’, due to the uncertainties around cost and performance associated with lower Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs).
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000062
title: Biomass to Power with CCS - Bio IGCC decadal model

description: TESBiC: Techno-Economic Study of Biomass to power with CCS. This model was developed as part of Work Package 3. It examines changes in cost, efficiency and emissions under different operating conditions for biodedicated IGCC with CCS. It should be read in conjunction with the Work Package 3 reports on model specification and user documentation.<br><br>The Biomass to Power with CCS Phase 1 project consisted of four work packages: WP1: Landscape review of current developments; WP2: High Level Engineering Study (down-selecting from 24 to 8 Biomass to Power with CCS technologies); WP3: Parameterised Sub-System Models development; and WP4: Technology benchmarking and recommendation report. Reports generally follow this coding. We would suggest that you do not read any of the earlier deliverables in isolation as some assumptions in the reports were shown to be invalid. We would recommendthat you read the project executive summaries as they provide a good summary of the overall conclusions. This work demonstrated the potential value of Biomass to Power with CCS technologies as a family, but it was clear at the time of the project, that the individual technologies were insufficiently mature to be able to ‘pick a winner’, due to the uncertainties around cost and performance associated with lower Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs).
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000060
title: Biomass to Power with CCS - Bio amine decadal model

description: TESBiC: Techno-Economic Study of Biomass to power with CCS. This model was developed as part of Work Package 3. It examines changes in cost, efficiency and emissions under different operating conditions for biomass to power with amine-based carbon capture. It should be read in conjunction with the Work Package 3 reports on model specification and user documentation.<br><br>The Biomass to Power with CCS Phase 1 project consisted of four work packages: WP1: Landscape review of current developments; WP2: High Level Engineering Study (down-selecting from 24 to 8 Biomass to Power with CCS technologies); WP3: Parameterised Sub-System Models development; and WP4: Technology benchmarking and recommendation report. Reports generally follow this coding. We would suggest that you do not read any of the earlier deliverables in isolation as some assumptions in the reports were shown to be invalid. We would recommend that you read the project executive summaries as they provide a good summary of the overall conclusions. This work demonstrated the potential value of Biomass to Power with CCS technologies as a family, but it was clear at the time of the project, that the individual technologies were insufficiently mature to be able to ‘pick a winner’, due to the uncertainties around cost and performance associated with lower Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs).
DOI: 10.48436/t7cgh-mtq10
title: Ligand engineering enhances (photo) electrocatalytic activity and stability of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks via in-situ surface reconstruction

description: Context and Methodology

This dataset contains the primary experimental and theoretical data supporting the research article published in Nature Communication (DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-53385-0).

The files provide the raw and processed data used to characterize the structural, optical, and electrochemical properties of the synthesized materials, as well as supporting Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations. For detailed synthesis protocols, experimental setups, and comprehensive discussion of these results, please refer to the original publication and its Supplementary Information.

Technical Details 1. Dataset Structure: The dataset is organized by characterization technique and measurement type.





File Format: All data is provided in .xlsx (Microsoft Excel) format for broad accessibility.




Sample Identification: Inside each file, data columns are clearly labeled with the Sample Names/Numbers corresponding to those used in the manuscript.



2. File Descriptions:





XRD.xlsx: Powder X-ray Diffraction (PXRD) patterns used for crystal structure analysis.




IR.xlsx: Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) data.




XPS.xlsx: X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy data, detailing surface elemental composition and oxidation states.




NMR.xlsx: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance spectra data.




Raman.xlsx: Raman spectroscopy data for analyzing vibrational modes and structural defects.




UV-vis.xlsx: Ultraviolet-Visible diffuse reflectance spectra (UV-vis DRS) and band gap calculations.




PL.xlsx: Photoluminescence spectroscopy data used to investigate charge carrier separation/recombination.




OER.xlsx: Electrochemical data for the Oxygen Evolution Reaction (OER), including CV curves and stability tests.




DFT.xlsx: Data output from Density Functional Theory calculations, including electronic density of states (DOS) and free energy diagrams.



3. Software Requirements: No proprietary instrument software is required to view this data. All files are standard spreadsheets and can be opened with Microsoft Excel, LibreOffice, or similar software.

Further Details Users are kindly requested to cite the original article when reusing any part of this dataset.
DOI: 10.48436/tp9g8-94y51
title: Ligand engineering enhances (photo) electrocatalytic activity and stability of zeolitic imidazolate frameworks via in-situ surface reconstruction

description: Context and Methodology

This dataset contains the primary experimental and theoretical data supporting the research article published in Nature Communication (DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-53385-0).

The files provide the raw and processed data used to characterize the structural, optical, and electrochemical properties of the synthesized materials, as well as supporting Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations. For detailed synthesis protocols, experimental setups, and comprehensive discussion of these results, please refer to the original publication and its Supplementary Information.

Technical Details 1. Dataset Structure: The dataset is organized by characterization technique and measurement type.





File Format: All data is provided in .xlsx (Microsoft Excel) format for broad accessibility.




Sample Identification: Inside each file, data columns are clearly labeled with the Sample Names/Numbers corresponding to those used in the manuscript.



2. File Descriptions:





XRD.xlsx: Powder X-ray Diffraction (PXRD) patterns used for crystal structure analysis.




IR.xlsx: Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) data.




XPS.xlsx: X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy data, detailing surface elemental composition and oxidation states.




NMR.xlsx: Nuclear Magnetic Resonance spectra data.




Raman.xlsx: Raman spectroscopy data for analyzing vibrational modes and structural defects.




UV-vis.xlsx: Ultraviolet-Visible diffuse reflectance spectra (UV-vis DRS) and band gap calculations.




PL.xlsx: Photoluminescence spectroscopy data used to investigate charge carrier separation/recombination.




OER.xlsx: Electrochemical data for the Oxygen Evolution Reaction (OER), including CV curves and stability tests.




DFT.xlsx: Data output from Density Functional Theory calculations, including electronic density of states (DOS) and free energy diagrams.



3. Software Requirements: No proprietary instrument software is required to view this data. All files are standard spreadsheets and can be opened with Microsoft Excel, LibreOffice, or similar software.

Further Details Users are kindly requested to cite the original article when reusing any part of this dataset.
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000033
title: Characterisation of Feedstocks - Characterisation of biomass feedstocks database

description: The Characterisation of Feedstocks project provides an understanding of UK produced 2nd generation energy biomass properties, how these vary and what causes this variability. In this project, several types of UK-grown biomass, produced under varying conditions, were sampled. The biomass sampled included Miscanthus, Short Rotation Forestry (SRF) and Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) Willow. The samples were tested to an agreed schedule in an accredited laboratory. The results were analysed against the planting, growing, harvesting and storage conditions (i.e.The provenance) to understand what impacts different production and storage methods have on the biomass properties.The main outcome of this project is a better understanding of the key characteristics of UK biomass feedstocks (focusing on second generation) relevant in downstream energy conversion applications, and howthese characteristics vary by provenance. <br> <br>This Excel Workbook presents the data arising from all experiments carried out under the Characterisation of Feedstocks Project.The data set includes:The sites sampled, the conditions at the time of sampling, provenance data, soil laboratory results and biomass laboratory results.The feedstock studies carried out to yield these data are shown in the “Workbook Details” sheet – this sheet also briefly describes the quality assurance process for the data. As a result of the breadth and depth of data provided in these tables, the ETI anticipates that these data will be useful to a range users includingAcademics whose research focuses on bioenergy crop production or use of bioenergy crops in pre-treatment or conversion technologies;Modellers seeking biomass physical property dataBioenergy project developers seeking to understand their design envelopes;Existing commercial biomass users seeking to understand process performance;Biomass buyers assessing risks and defining fuel specifications.
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000015
title: Biomass to Power with CCS - Cofire oxy decadal model

description: TESBiC: Techno-Economic Study of Biomass to power with CCS. This model was developed as part of Work Package 3. It examines changes in cost, efficiency and emissions under different operating conditions for biomass and coal co-firing to power with oxycombustion CCS. It should be read in conjunction with the Work Package 3 reports on model specification and user documentation.<br><br>The Biomass to Power with CCS Phase 1 project consisted of four work packages: WP1: Landscape review of current developments; WP2: High Level Engineering Study (down-selecting from 24 to 8 Biomass to Power with CCS technologies); WP3: Parameterised Sub-System Models development; and WP4: Technology benchmarking and recommendation report. Reports generally follow this coding. We would suggest that you do not read any of the earlier deliverables in isolation as some assumptions in the reports were shown tobe invalid. We would recommend that you read the project executive summaries as they provide a good summary of the overall conclusions. This work demonstrated the potential value of Biomass to Power with CCS technologies as a family, but it was clear at the time of the project, that the individual technologies were insufficiently mature to be able to ‘pick a winner’, due to the uncertainties around cost and performance associated with lower Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs).
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000013
title: Biomass to Power with CCS - Cofire carb loop decadal model

description: TESBiC: Techno-Economic Study of Biomass to power with CCS. This model was developed as part of Work Package 3. It examines changes in cost, efficiency and emissions under different operating conditions for biomass co-firing to power with chemical looping CCS. It should be read in conjunction with the Work Package 3 reports on model specification and user documentation.<br><br>The Biomass to Power with CCS Phase 1 project consisted of four work packages: WP1: Landscape review of current developments; WP2: High Level Engineering Study (down-selecting from 24 to 8 Biomass to Power with CCS technologies); WP3: Parameterised Sub-System Models development; and WP4: Technology benchmarking and recommendation report. Reports generally follow this coding. We would suggest that you do not read any of the earlier deliverables in isolation as some assumptions in the reports were shown to be invalid. We would recommend that you read the project executive summaries as they provide a good summary of the overall conclusions. This work demonstrated the potential value of Biomass to Power with CCS technologies as a family, but it was clear at the time of the project, that the individual technologies were insufficiently mature to be able to ‘pick a winner’, due to the uncertainties around cost and performance associated with lower Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs)
DOI: 10.5286/ukerc.edc.000014
title: Biomass to Power with CCS - Cofire IGCC decadal model

description: TESBiC: Techno-Economic Study of Biomass to power with CCS. This model was developed as part of Work Package 3. It examines changes in cost, efficiency and emissions under different operating conditions for co-fired IGCC with CCS. It should be read in conjunction with the Work Package 3 reports on model specification and user documentation.<br><br>The Biomass to Power with CCS Phase 1 project consisted of four work packages: WP1: Landscape review of current developments; WP2: High Level Engineering Study (down-selecting from 24 to 8 Biomass to Power with CCS technologies); WP3: Parameterised Sub-System Models development; and WP4: Technology benchmarking and recommendation report. Reports generally follow this coding. We would suggest that you do not read any of the earlier deliverables in isolation as some assumptions in the reports were shown to be invalid. We would recommend thatyou read the project executive summaries as they provide a good summary of the overall conclusions. This work demonstrated the potential value of Biomass to Power with CCS technologies as a family, but it was clear at the time of the project, that the individual technologies were insufficiently mature to be able to ‘pick a winner’, due to the uncertainties around cost and performance associated with lower Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs).