Geology topics

Brenda Pierce

Publications and source records attributed to Brenda Pierce.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2013

A framework for quantitative assessment of impacts related to energy and mineral resource development

Natural resource planning at all scales demands methods for assessing the impacts of resource development and use, and in particular it requires standardized methods that yield robust and unbiased results. Building from existing probabilistic methods for assessing the volumes of energy and mineral resources, we provide an algorithm for consistent, reproducible, quantitative assessment of resource development impacts. The approach combines probabilistic input data with Monte Carlo statistical methods to determine probabilistic outputs that convey the uncertainties inherent in the data. For example, one can utilize our algorithm to combine data from a natural gas resource assessment with maps of sage grouse leks and piñon-juniper woodlands in the same area to estimate possible future habitat impacts due to possible future gas development. As another example: one could combine geochemical data and maps of lynx habitat with data from a mineral deposit assessment in the same area to determine possible future mining impacts on water resources and lynx habitat. The approach can be applied to a broad range of positive and negative resource development impacts, such as water quantity or quality, economic benefits, or air quality, limited only by the availability of necessary input data and quantified relationships among geologic resources, development alternatives, and impacts. The framework enables quantitative evaluation of the trade-offs inherent in resource management decision-making, including cumulative impacts, to address societal concerns and policy aspects of resource development.

Natural Resources Research↗

USGS2011

An evaluation of the science needs to inform decisions on Outer Continental Shelf energy development in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, Alaska

The U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) was asked to conduct an initial, independent evaluation of the science needs that would inform the Administration's consideration of the right places and the right ways in which to develop oil and gas resources in the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), particularly focused on the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas. Oil and gas potential is significant in Arctic Alaska. Beyond petroleum potential, this region supports unique fish and wildlife resources and ecosystems, and indigenous people who rely on these resources for subsistence. This report summarizes key existing scientific information and provides initial guidance of what new and (or) continued research could inform decision making. This report is presented in a series of topical chapters and various appendixes each written by a subset of the USGS OCS Team based on their areas of expertise. Three chapters (Chapters 2, 3, and 4) provide foundational information on geology; ecology and subsistence; and climate settings important to understanding the conditions pertinent to development in the Arctic OCS. These chapters are followed by three chapters that examine the scientific understanding, science gaps, and science sufficiency questions regarding oil-spill risk, response, and impact (Chapter 5), marine mammals and anthropogenic noise (Chapter 6), and cumulative impacts (Chapter 7). Lessons learned from the 1989 Exxon Valdez Oil Spill are included to identify valuable "pre-positioned" science and scientific approaches to improved response and reduced uncertainty in damage assessment and restoration efforts (appendix D). An appendix on Structured Decision Making (appendix C) is included to illustrate the value of such tools that go beyond, but incorporate, science in looking at what can/should be done about policy and implementation of Arctic development. The report provides a series of findings and recommendations for consideration developed during the independent examination of science gaps and sufficiency. These recommendations are important for understanding what the USGS discovered in the course of this study and to help inform and improve decision making.

Circular↗

USGS2011

An evaluation of the science needs to inform decisions on Outer Continental Shelf energy development in the Chukchi and Beaufort Seas, Alaska

On March 31, 2010, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar announced a national strategy for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas development. In that announcement, the Administration outlined a three-pronged approach (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2010a): Development: "...expand development and production throughout the Gulf of Mexico, including resource-rich areas of the Eastern Gulf of Mexico..." Exploration: "...expand oil and gas exploration in frontier areas, such as the Arctic Ocean and areas in the Atlantic Ocean, to gather the information necessary to develop resources in the right places and the right ways." Conservation: "...calls for the protection of special areas like Bristol Bay in Alaska...national treasure[s] that we must protect for future generations." In a companion announcement (U.S. Department of the Interior, 2010b), within the Administration's "Exploration" component, the Secretary asked the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct an initial, independent evaluation of the science needs that would inform the Administration's consideration of the right places and the right ways in which to develop oil and gas resources in the Arctic OCS, particularly focused on the Beaufort and Chukchi Seas (fig. 1).

Fact Sheet↗

USGS1995

Comparison of the petrography, palynology, and paleobotany of the Little Fire Creek coal bed, southwestern Virginia, U.S.A.

Two continuous cores that penetrated the Lower Pennsylvanian Little Fire Creek coal bed in the Southwestern coal field in southwestern Virginia were sampled and X-ray radiographed to determine subunit distinctions. Comparison of petrographic, palynologic, and paleobotanic data from the same sample sets from the two cores allowed for comparison of compositional data within the Little Fire Creek coal bed. The proximate, petrographic, palynologic, and plant tissue data from two sets of samples indicate a high ash, gelocollinite- and liptinite-rich coal consisting of a relatively diverse paleoflora, including lycopsid trees, small lycopsids, tree ferns, small ferns, pteridosperms (seed ferns), and rare calamites and cordaites. The relatively very high ash yields (3–80 wt%), the relatively thin subunits (1–28 cm), and the large scale vertical variations in palynomorph floras suggest that the study area was at the edge of the paleopea-forming environment. As a result, most of the compositional correspondences are among those components indicative of degradation or decomposition.

Virginia↗

USGS1993

Comparison of the petrography, palynology and paleobotany of the Stockton coal bed, West Virginia and implications for paleoenvironmental interpretations

The Stockton coal bed (Middle Pennsylvanian) is a relatively high ash coal composed primarily of moderately thin banded, sparsely thin banded, and nonbanded coal (splint and cannel coal). Comparisons of petrographic, palynologic, and paleobotanic data gathered from the same sample sets from a single column of the Stockton coal bed indicate that compositional correspondences among the sets exist regardless of coal type. Some correspondences are believed to exist because of original plant constituents and others because of the paleoenvironment of peat formation. Using some combination of these data is critical when interpreting paleoenvironmental conditions because (1) a direct correspondence is lacking between many of the data and (2) each of the three data sets provides a unique and important perspective on the paleomire. The Stockton paleomire in the area of this study supported a diverse flora that consisted of both small and arboreous lycopsids, small ferns and tree ferns, calamites, cordaites, and pteridosperms. There appear to have been two successions of Lycospora spore-dominated, vitrinite-rich, liptinite-poor peat formation, which were followed by inertinite-rich peat formation marked by a tree fern-dominant spore assemblage and abundant unidentifiable plant tissues. These are interpreted to be two water-laden or topogenous peat formational stages followed by slightly domed, better drained peat formation.

West Virginia↗