GeoLog

ESurf, more formally known as Earth Surface Dynamics is the new open access journal from the EGU. Focussing on the processes that affect the Earth’s surface at all scales, ESurf aims to communicate the interactions of Earth surface processes with the lithosphere, biosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and pedosphere. Highlighting field measurements, remote sensing and experimental and numerical modeling of Earth surface processes.

The first issue of Earth Surface Dynamics!

As with most other EGU journals, Earth Surface Dynamics has an open review process, where the submitted papers are also available in an open access discussion forum (Earth Surface Dynamics Discussions). What’s more, because ESurf is the ‘new kid on the block’, all submission charges are currently waived, so it’s free to submit, free to access and free to use. Brilliant!

Take a look at the first issue here and to keep updated on the latest research in Earth Surface Dynamics, follow the journal on Twitter (@EGU_ESurf).

More information about the launch of this great open access journal is also available on the EGU website.

Short Courses

Open Access (OA)

Demystifying Open Access – an open discussion for early career researchers tackling how OA can benefit young scientists without compromising their careers. From what it costs to publish an open access paper to how we can measure its impact, all interested scientists are invited to drop in and join us over drinks in a marketplace of discussion.

How to apply for a job. It’s a topic rarely addressed in postgraduate courses, but in this session, career training experts will help you make the most of your strengths and show them off to a potential employer. Pick up some tips about finding the right job for you, preparing a good CV, and writing a targeted cover letter.

The Blogs and social media in scientific research session explores the ways in which scientists can use blogs and social media to communicate their work. Why should scientists blog or use Twitter?  How do they find the time? And what are the benefits? A panel of blog and social media-savvy scientists will talk about their experience before opening the discussion to the audience.

Last year’s communicate your science workshop

If you’re a Geomorphologist, you’ll be set for the week as the Geomorphology division has loads on offer! Pickup skills on dating techniques, project supervision, open access publishing  and you can also meet the master for tips from seasoned academics.

If you’re a Hydrologist, there’s also the opportunity to meet experts in the field in a round-table discussion with established scientists. You can also pick up pointers on writing the perfect hydrology paper.

See the session programme for more short courses at EGU 2013.

Meeting other Geoscientists during the tweet up at last year’s General Assembly.

Networking

The opening reception on Sunday, 7 April is a great opportunity to meet people, network, get to know the Assembly venue. There is free food and drink as well as specific places for Young Scientists to meet up on the Green Level. Tall signs will tell you where to go, so stop by to meet fellow early career researchers, division presidents and the Young Scientist representatives for the EGU (Jennifer Holden and Sara Mynott).

Earlier in the day, there will also be an opportunity for women in the geosciences to attend a networking event run by the Earth Science Women’s Network, for more information and how to register, see here.

Check this post for more details on networking opportunities at the General Assembly.

Have your say!

What would you like us to do for you? Join us over lunch (food provided!) to find out what the EGU can do to for Young Scientists and let us know what you’d like more of. These will take place on Tuesday 9 April and Thursday 11 April.

Other Sessions

The Medal Lectures, which highlight the work of brilliant scientists. Head on over to the lectures on the Arne Richter Award for Outstanding Young Scientists (ML4-ML7) and be inspired!

You can also join in a conference call for Young Researchers in Earth Sciences, which aims to promote interdisciplinary research efforts among early career researchers.

It’s time for the fifth edition of the EGU’s Twitter Journal Club, our interactive online discussion about a timely scientific article. If you have not yet taken part in one of these discussions, read more about it in our introductory post and make sure to participate when we meet online next week! 

This time, we will be discussing the recent peer-reviewed policy briefing Water Resource Resilience, produced by the UK Parliamentary Office of Science & Technology (POST).

The discussion will take place on Twitter next Thursday 15 November at 14:00 CET, and you can take part by following the EGU’s Twitter account (@EuroGeosciences) and using the hashtag #egutjc5 on your tweets. Please email the EGU’s Science Communications Fellow Edvard Glücksman if you have any further questions.

Happy reading!

The availability of water resources is fundamental for society and economic activities. (Photo: Edvard Glücksman)

Water Resource Resilience

Published 17 September 2012 | POST notes POST PN 419

Summary. The availability of water resources is fundamental for society and economic activities. This POSTnote describes the reasons for uncertainties in water resource availability for future supply and demand and possible responses to managing these risks in the medium term.

Questions to think about:

1. How would you summarise this briefing in a tweet?

2. How does the framework presented here apply internationally, particularly in other European countries?

3. Why are Environmental Flow Indicators (EFIs) important?

4. What would you add to this paper, if given an extra two pages of space?

The EGU’s Twitter Journal Club had its fourth virtual meeting yesterday, this time focusing on a paper from the journal Atmospheric Environment. The work examines methods of assessing contributions of individual emissions to ozone and hence to climate change. Read a full transcript of the discussion on our Storify page!

Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) lead to formation of ozone, which is an important greenhouse gas. (Photo: Edvard Glücksman)

It’s time for the fourth edition of the EGU’s Twitter Journal Club, our interactive online discussion about a timely scientific article. If you have not yet taken part in one of these discussions, read more about it in our introductory post and make sure to participate when we meet online next week! 

This time, we will be discussing a recent Open Access article from the journal Atmospheric Environment, covering the various approaches used to calculate contributions of individual nitrogen oxide emissions to creating ozone – and hence towards climate change.

The discussion will take place on Twitter next Thursday 25 October at 14:00 CEST, and you can take part by following the EGU’s Twitter account (@EuroGeosciences) and using the hashtag #egutjc4 on your tweets. Please email the EGU’s Science Communications Fellow Edvard Glücksman if you have any further questions.

Happy reading!

Nitrogen oxide emissions from burning fossil fuels are important contributors to the formation of ozone, and hence to climate change. (Source: Wikimedia)

Attributing ozone to NOx emissions: Implications for climate mitigation measures

Atmospheric Environment 59 (2012) 102-107

Abstract. Emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) lead to formation of ozone, which is an important greenhouse gas. Despite its relevance, little emphasis was previously given on verifying approaches to calculate contributions of individual emissions to ozone and hence to climate change. Basically two methods (perturbation method and tagging method) were used in the past. We demonstrate that both methods are valid and have their area of application, but only tagging calculates contributions of emissions to concentrations, whereas the perturbation method identifies changes in the ozone concentrations due to emission changes. Our results show that the contribution of road traffic emissions to climate change is underestimated by a factor of 5 in the perturbation method. This is caused by non-linear compensating effects from other emission sectors, which are concealed in the perturbation method but disclosed with tagging. Consequently, the effectiveness of mitigation measures for individual sectors (i.e. concentrating on road traffic induced ozone) is only correctly expressed by the tagging method. The perturbation method provides accurately the total impact (i.e. total ozone) of a mitigation measure. However, current approaches, which evaluate the effectiveness of a mitigation measure based on the perturbation approach, do not reflect changes in the chemical state of the atmosphere (i.e. ozone production rates). These largely affect the effectiveness of subsequent measures and hence make the evaluation of the effectiveness of two measures dependent on their chronology of application. We show that also in this regard, the tagging method is better suited to evaluate the effectiveness of a mitigation measure than the perturbation method.

Questions to think about:

1. How would you summarise this article in a tweet?

2. What are the broader implications of this study?

3. Which approach seems to be the most effective in calculating contributions of individual emissions to ozone?

4. What would be an interesting follow-up study to this work?

It’s time for the third edition of the EGU’s Twitter Journal Club, our interactive online discussion about a timely scientific article. If you have not yet taken part in one of these discussions, read more about it in our introductory post and make sure to participate on this third edition! 

This time, we will be discussing an article recently published in the EGU’s Open Access journal Biogeosciences that features an innovative way of calculating the amount of carbon stored in tropical forests which incorporates tree-height data. The discussion will take place on Twitter next Thursday 27 September at 17:00 CEST, and you can take part by following the EGU’s Twitter account (@EuroGeosciences) and using the hashtag #egutjc3 on your tweets. Please email the EGU’s Science Communications Fellow Edvard Glücksman if you have any further questions.

Happy reading – and don’t be scared of the equations, they won’t bite!

Incorporating tree-height data into calculations of the amount of carbon stored in tropical forests reduces the estimates by roughly 13%. (Source: Imaggeo.net, credit: Alina Mihaela Luchian)

Tree height integrated into pantropical forest biomass estimates
Biogeosciences, 9, 3381–3403, 2012

Abstract. Aboveground tropical tree biomass and carbon storage estimates commonly ignore tree height (H). We estimate the effect of incorporating H on tropics-wide forest biomass estimates in 327 plots across four continents using 42 656 H and diameter measurements and harvested trees from 20 sites to answer the following questions:

1. What is the best H-model form and geographic unit to include in biomass models to minimise site-level uncertainty in estimates of destructive biomass?

2. To what extent does including H estimates derived in (1) reduce uncertainty in biomass estimates across all 327 plots?

3. What effect does accounting for H have on plot- and continental-scale forest biomass estimates?

The mean relative error in biomass estimates of destructively harvested trees when including H (mean 0.06), was half that when excluding H (mean 0.13). Power- and Weibull-H models provided the greatest reduction in uncertainty, with regional Weibull-H models preferred because they reduce uncertainty in smaller-diameter classes (< or = to 40 cm D) that store about one-third of biomass per hectare in most forests. Propagating the relationships from destructively harvested tree biomass to each of the 327 plots from across the tropics shows that including H reduces errors from 41.8 Mg/ha (range 6.6 to 112.4) to 8.0 Mg/ha (−2.5 to 23.0). For all plots, aboveground live biomass was −52.2 Mg/ha (−82.0 to −20.3 bootstrapped 95% CI), or 13%, lower when including H estimates, with the greatest relative reductions in estimated biomass in forests of the Brazilian Shield, east Africa, and Australia, and relatively little change in the Guiana Shield, central Africa and southeast Asia. Appreciably different stand structure was observed among regions across the tropical continents, with some storing significantly more biomass in small diameter stems, which affects selection of the best height models to reduce uncertainty and biomass reductions due to H. After accounting for variation in H, total biomass per hectare is greatest in Australia, the Guiana Shield, Asia, central and east Africa, and lowest in east-central Amazonia, W. Africa, W. Amazonia, and the Brazilian Shield (descending order). Thus, if tropical forests span 1668 million km2 and store 285 Pg C (estimate including H), then applying our regional relationships implies that carbon storage is overestimated by 35 PgC (31–39 bootstrapped 95% CI) if H is ignored, assuming that the sampled plots are an unbiased statistical representation of all tropical forest in terms of biomass and height factors. Our results show that tree H is an important allometric factor that needs to be included in future forest biomass estimates to reduce error in estimates of tropical carbon stocks and emissions due to deforestation.

Questions to think about:

1. How would you summarise this article in a tweet?

2. What are the broader implications of this study? (hint: see recent Nature blurb linked to below)

3. What methods could be used to improve data within biomass maps?

4. What are the practical implications of this and similar studies on how we interpret carbon storage within biomass?

5. Could this article be improved – specifically, are there too many equations?

Related media coverage:
Nature

The European Geosciences Union, through publishing house Copernicus Publications, publishes 14 peer-reviewed Open Access journals. Biogeosciences (BG, IF 3.859) is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of research articles, short communications and review papers on all aspects of the interactions between the biological, chemical and physical processes in terrestrial or extraterrestrial life with the geosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere. The objective of the journal is to cut across the boundaries of established sciences and achieve an interdisciplinary view of these interactions.

The EGU’s Twitter Journal Club had its second virtual meeting yesterday, this time focusing on a paper from the EGU’s journal Biogeosciences, investigating the means by which microscopic life is sustained in the hostile aridity of the Atacama Desert. Read a full transcript of our discussion on our Storify page!

Vast expanse of Chile’s Atacama Desert, one of the most arid regions in the world. (source: Wikimedia)

The European Geosciences Union, through publishing house Copernicus Publications, publishes 14 peer-reviewed Open Access journals. Biogeosciences (BG, IF 3.587)  is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of research articles, short communications and review papers on all aspects of the interactions between the biological, chemical and physical processes in terrestrial or extraterrestrial life with the geosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere. The objective of the journal is to cut across the boundaries of established sciences and achieve an interdisciplinary view of these interactions.

Time for the second edition of the EGU’s Twitter Journal Club, our interactive online discussion about a timely scientific article. Full details can be found here. 

This time, our article focuses on one of the most extreme environments on Earth, the Atacama Desert in Chile, and the method by which rock-dwelling microorganisms obtain their water. The Twitter discussion will take place on Thursday 12 July at 17:00 CEST (hashtag #egutjc2). Please email the EGU’s Science Communications Fellow Edvard Glücksman with further questions. Happy reading!

The Atacama Desert is one of Earth’s driest environments. (credit: Wikimedia)

Novel water source for endolithic life in the hyperarid core of the Atacama Desert
Biogeosciences, 9, 2275-2286, 2012

Abstract. The hyperarid core of the Atacama Desert, Chile, is possibly the driest and most life-limited place on Earth, yet endolithic microorganisms thrive inside halite pinnacles that are part of ancient salt flats. The existence of this microbial community in an environment that excludes any other life forms suggests biological adaptation to high salinity and desiccation stress, and indicates an alternative source of water for life other than rainfall, fog or dew. Here, we show that halite endoliths obtain liquid water through spontaneous capillary condensation at relative humidity (RH) much lower than the deliquescence RH of NaCl. We describe how this condensation could occur inside nano-pores smaller than 100 nm, in a newly characterized halite phase that is intimately associated with the endolithic aggregates. This nano-porous phase helps retain liquid water for long periods of time by preventing its evaporation even in conditions of utmost dryness. Our results explain how life has colonized and adapted to one of the most extreme environments on our planet, expanding the water activity envelope for life on Earth, and broadening the spectrum of possible habitats for life beyond our planet.

Questions to think about:
1. How would you summarise this article in a tweet?

2. The Atacama Desert is one of the driest environments on the planet. Can you think of others, and do you know of similar studies done there?

3. What is the link between the research presented here and our quest to find extraterrestrial life?

4. How could the methods presented here be improved in follow-up studies?

5. Do you see industrial applications for these findings?

Related media coverage
National Geographic Magazine
Sydney Morning Herald

The European Geosciences Union, through publishing house Copernicus Publications, publishes 14 peer-reviewed Open Access journals. Biogeosciences (BG, IF 3.587)  is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of research articles, short communications and review papers on all aspects of the interactions between the biological, chemical and physical processes in terrestrial or extraterrestrial life with the geosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere. The objective of the journal is to cut across the boundaries of established sciences and achieve an interdisciplinary view of these interactions.

The EGU’s Twitter Journal Club had its first virtual meeting yesterday, discussing an article on a climate change related blunder made by The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World and the swift response of an international group of scientists.

You can read a full transcript of our discussion on our brand new Storify page. Even though Twitter went down after an hour’s discussion, we’re optimistic that the TJC will continue to bring out the best of our now-over-1,000 followers!

Greenland ice outlines, from Kargel et al. 2012, published in The Cryosphere, an open-access journal of the European Geosciences Union (6, 533–537, 2012)

The European Geosciences Union, through publishing house Copernicus Publications, publishes 14 peer-reviewed Open Access journals. The Cryosphere (TC) (IF 3.641)  is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of research articles, short communications and review papers on all aspects of frozen water and ground on Earth and on other planetary bodies.

The EGU is pleased to announce the launch of its Twitter Journal Club, a regular, interactive online discussion about a timely scientific article. Full details can be found here. 

Our first ever article, described below, covers a climate change related blunder made by The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World and the swift response of an international group of scientists. The Twitter discussion will take place on Thursday 21 June at 17:00 CEST (hashtag #egutjc1). Please email the EGU’s Science Communications Fellow Edvard Glücksman with further questions. Happy reading!

Greenland ice outlines, from Kargel et al. 2012, published in The Cryosphere, an open-access journal of the European Geoscience Union

Greenland’s shrinking ice cover: “fast times” but not that fast
The Cryosphere, 6, 533–537, 2012

Abstract. A map of Greenland in the 13th edition (2011) of The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World made headlines because the publisher’s media release mistakenly stated that the permanent ice cover had shrunk 15% since the previous 10th edition (1999) revision. The claimed shrinkage was immediately challenged by glaciologists, then retracted by the publisher. Here we show: (1) accurate maps of ice extent based on 1978/87 aerial surveys and recent MODIS imagery; and (2) shrinkage at 0.019%a⁻¹ in 50 000 km² of ice in a part of east Greenland that is shown as ice-free in The Times Atlas.

Questions to think about:
1. Broadly, how does this article tie in with the current climate change debate, and the general public’s perception of environmental change?

2. Based on this paper, do you get the impression we need to be worried about Greenland’s ice shrinkage?

3. Do you often catch mistakes in the scientific content given to the general public by respected publishers? If so, what are some examples? Do you challenge them?

4. Here, the authors brought the Greenland map mistake up on www.cryolist.org, an open listserver for glaciologists. Would it be worth setting up a more general communications environment (website, forum etc) where mistakes like this can be reported? Do you know of any currently in use?

5. Is an article like this really necessary (see its final sentence), or are the authors being pedantic or perhaps even exaggerating the importance of the impact of their work?

6. Given all the benefits of online distribution methods (cheaper, easy to correct, wider potential audience), are paper atlases on their way out and, if so, is this a good thing?

Related media coverage
The BBC
The Carbon Brief
The National Review
The Telegraph

The European Geosciences Union, through publishing house Copernicus Publications, publishes 14 peer-reviewed Open Access journals. The Cryosphere (TC) (IF 3.641)  is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of research articles, short communications and review papers on all aspects of frozen water and ground on Earth and on other planetary bodies.