Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Scientific Reports”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2020

North Carolina State climate report

Our scientific understanding of the climate system strongly supports the conclusion that North Carolina’s climate has changed in recent decades and the expectation that large changes—much larger than at any time in the state’s history—will occur if current trends in greenhouse gas concentrations continue. Even under a scenario where emissions peak around 2050 and decline thereafter, North Carolina will experience substantial changes in climate. The projected changes with the highest level of scientific confidence include increases in temperature, increases in summer absolute humidity, increases in sea level, and increases in extreme precipitation. It is also likely that there will be increases in the intensity of the strongest hurricanes. A full appreciation for past and future changes in North Carolina’s climate requires a global perspective. Earth’s climate has warmed substantially since the late 19th century, with most of that warming occurring in the last 50 years. This warming trend is clear from global temperature records and many other indicators, including rising global sea levels and rapid decreases in arctic sea ice cover. Scientists have very high confidence that this warming is largely due to human activities that have significantly increased atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gases. Exhaustive research has examined other potential causes of this warming, and the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations is the only plausible cause that is consistent with the observed data and the physics that governs the climate system.

North Carolina↗
USGS2024

Special topic—Eruption plumes and clouds

Introduction Explosive eruptions create plumes of volcanic ash and gas that can rise more than 30,000 feet (9.1 kilometers [km]) above sea level within minutes of eruption onset. The resulting clouds disperse under prevailing winds and may cause hazardous conditions hundreds to thousands of kilometers from the volcano, including in international airspace. Rapid detection and characterization of explosive activity is vital to mitigate the wide-ranging effects of volcanic ash. Ashfall thicknesses as small as a millimeter or so on the ground can affect infrastructure, agriculture, and air quality, requiring extensive clean-up procedures (Schuster, 1981; Warrick and others, 1981, U.S. Geological Survey, 2022). Volcanic clouds also pose substantial threats to aircraft. Since 1953, 88 encounters between airplanes and ash clouds have been documented worldwide (International Civil Aviation Organization, 2015, appendix F), resulting in aircraft damage and, in 9 cases, engine failure (Guffanti and others, 2010). In 1982, two large passenger planes suffered complete engine failure owing to eruptions in Indonesia (Global Volcanism Program, 1982) and a similar incident occurred over Alaska in 1989 (Casadevall, 1994). In all three cases, they were able to restart some engine capability and land safely once they emerged from the ash clouds, although with substantial damage (Guffanti and others, 2010). The clear threat to aviation has led to establishment of nine Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAAC) around the world to monitor and rapidly disseminate information about volcanic eruptions to the aviation community. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) volcano observatories issue the Volcano Observatory Notice for Aviation that informs of preeruptive unrest or eruptive activity. When ash-producing eruptions do occur, volcano observatories work closely with their regional VAAC to ensure consistency and accuracy in eruption onset time, cloud altitude, ash production, and duration as reported in Volcanic Ash Advisories. Explosive volcanism in the United States and Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands prompts 50–100 such advisories in any given year (table J1). This collaborative effort is greatly aided by USGS detection and monitoring of eruption clouds to ensure a timely and coordinated response. To support these efforts to provide guidance on ash transport and fallout, the USGS developed the Ash3d volcanic ash dispersion model ( https://vsc-ash.wr.usgs.gov/ash3d-gui ) (Schwaiger and others, 2012). Automated simulations are run daily by the USGS for volcanoes that are in elevated states of unrest, and in response mode when eruptions occur. During eruptions, the model output is provided to local National Weather Service Weather Forecast Offices to guide them in the issuance of their information products (such as special weather statements, ashfall advisories, or ashfall warnings), as well as to State and local governments and the public. Characterization of the eruption source is needed to estimate the parameters used to initialize the Ash3d model, and by the Anchorage and Washington VAACs to initialize other dispersion models that inform forecasts for the airborne volcanic cloud. The source parameters that can be provided by observation during an eruption include eruption start time, eruption cloud height over time, and eruption duration. Other, nonobservable source parameters, such as mass eruption rate and grain-size distribution, are based on empirical correlations and study of historical deposits. The goal is to provide a time series of cloud heights, mass eruption rates, and particle-size distributions that accurately reflects current conditions. When feasible, the USGS also provides guidance on the nature of ongoing eruptions and forecasts future activity using petrologic monitoring of collected tephra samples. The aims of providing accurate observable parameters are achieved through analysis of (1) near-real-time meteorological satellite data, (2) ground-based cameras (see of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–G, 11 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062g.">chapter G , this volume; Orr and others, 2024), (3) weather radar, (4) volcanic lightning detection, and (5) ground-based ash sensors and sampling. Explosive eruptions can be detected by a variety of geophysical monitoring, including infrasound (see of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–C, 11 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062c.">chapter C , this volume; Lyons and others, 2024) and seismicity (see of Flinders, A.F., Lowenstern, J.B., Coombs, M.L., and Poland, M.P., eds., Recommended capabilities and instrumentation for volcano monitoring in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2024–5062–B, 9 p., https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20245062b.">chapter B , this volume; Thelen and others, 2024). However, those methods cannot quantify the altitude, ash content, and dispersal dynamics of resulting volcanic clouds. Ideally, all available sources of monitoring data are synthesized to develop a coherent understanding of eruptive activity. The guidance summarized here provides a framework for characterizing volcanic clouds in the atmosphere and tracking the evolution of explosive eruption dynamics.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2026

Practical guidance for engaging end-users and experts in developing scientific tools

This report provides actionable guidance for scientists developing scientific tools that inform on-the-ground decision making. Scientific tools, in the context of this report, are technology or protocols that help practitioners collect and analyze their own data, and information products and web tools that practitioners could use to inform decisions. Engaging end-users and fellow experts is fundamental to the creation of useful scientific tools. Scientists can use clear and specific direction on action steps and activities to effectively engage with end-users and fellow experts during development. Our study explores lessons learned from six U.S. Geological Survey projects that designed and implemented engagement activities with end-users and experts to coproduce scientific tools for natural resource managers. U.S. Geological Survey teams engaged end-users and experts across the United States from Federal, State, and local governments; universities; Tribes; territories; and nongovernmental organizations in designing and developing scientific tools intended to support end-users in their work. An online survey with 98 participants measured satisfaction across several indicators of successful engagement, including engagement activity frequency, sufficient opportunities to provide feedback, feedback implementation, inclusion of necessary perspectives, and functionality of the tool for end-users. Semistructured interviews were held with project leads, during which the project leads reviewed a summary of the survey results. The project leads reflected on the engagement efforts used in their project, then described lessons learned from the engagement experience and participant feedback. Common themes for ensuring effective engagement identified through thematic analysis included engaging end-users during product conceptualization; establishing clear roles and expectations; considering who end-users are and how end-users may use the tool; recruiting participants through your network, boundary spanners, and leadership; understanding individual use cases; communicating how feedback was integrated into the product; and strategically using virtual meeting tools. This guide shares practical steps and exercises for planning and facilitating effective engagement based on lessons learned from project leads and case study summaries of each project.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2024

Groundwater model of the Harney Basin, southeastern Oregon

Groundwater development, mainly for large-scale irrigation, has increased substantially in the Harney Basin of southeastern Oregon since 2010. Concurrently, some areas of the basin experienced groundwater-level declines of more than 100 feet, and some shallow wells have gone dry. The Oregon Water Resources Department has limited new groundwater development in the basin until an improved understanding of the groundwater-flow system is available. The groundwater resources report by Gingerich and others (2022, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2021–5103, https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20215103 ) provides that understanding. This report describes the development of a numerical groundwater-flow model that can be used as a tool to help improve that understanding. The Harney Basin Groundwater Model was developed using the finite-difference groundwater-modeling software U.S. Geological Survey modular finite-difference groundwater-flow model (MODFLOW 6) and associated Python pre- and post-processing routines. The groundwater model encompasses the entire 5,240-square-mile Harney Basin and adjacent areas and is calibrated to the hydrologic conditions from 1930 to 2018. The model has a uniform grid consisting of 78,064 nearly square cells, each covering 2,005 by 2,007 feet (about 92 acres) and has 10 layers (780,640 total cells) representing the vertical distribution of hydrogeologic units. The results from the calibrated model simulations indicate that groundwater pumpage exceeded recharge since about the mid-1980s, resulting in an estimated net cumulative depletion of groundwater storage (discharge minus recharge) of about 840,000 acre-feet and also indicated declines in groundwater evapotranspiration and spring and stream discharge. Model simulations show as much as 100 feet of groundwater-level decline in some areas and more than 40 feet of decline in widespread areas in recent decades. Model simulations are consistent with field observations of groundwater levels through time.

Oregon↗
USGS2018

Rio Grande transboundary integrated hydrologic model and water-availability analysis, New Mexico and Texas, United States, and Northern Chihuahua, Mexico

Errata **September 28, 2018: The purpose of a USGS Open-file report (OFR) is dissemination of information that must be released immediately to fill a public need or information that is not sufficiently refined to warrant publication in one of the other USGS series. As part of that refinement process, an error was discovered in one of the input data sets of the Rio Grande Transboundary Integrated Hydrologic Model (RGTIHM) that this OFR was based upon. The error involved the assignment of storage properties to “phantom cells.” Phantom cells are required for most variants of MODFLOW that use a structured finite-difference grid when individual stratigraphic layers are represented as separate layers. Using phantom cells is a common practice that allows separate model layers to be maintained without having to combine stratigraphic layers into equivalent model layers or to use an unstructured grid. Typically, phantom cell horizontal hydraulic conductivities and storage properties are set to a small number and vertical hydraulic conductivities are set to a number large enough to allow vertical flow between the vertically adjacent layers. In the RGTIHM, the specific storage properties of the phantom cells for the upper (RGTIHM layers 3 and 4), middle (RGTIHM layers 5 and 6), and lower (RGTIHM layers 7 and 8) members of the Santa Fe Group were inadvertently assigned a value of 1 feet -1 . The revision of these specific storage values to a small number (1.0 x 10 -09 feet -1 ) required additional trial-and-error model calibration and a new sensitivity analysis. After calibration, the overall model fit remained similar to the fit described in the OFR, but the fit for many individual features such as project water available for diversions at the American Canal and Acequia Madre improved due to the reduction in flow coming from lower layers. Overall, there is still an average net depletion of groundwater flow, and the conclusions of the report are not changed. The revised average annual groundwater flow depletion simulated for the period 1953-2014 is -1,480 acre-feet/year for the entire model region, and -3,660 acre-feet/year for the portion of the model in the United States. The final version of the model will be the basis of the USGS Scientific Investigations Report that will supersede this OFR. An updated Model Archive of RGTIHM is available upon request to the USGS California Water Science Center. The corrected version of the model WAS the basis for the USGS Scientific Investigations Report that SUPERSEDED this Open-File Report.** Abstract Changes in population, agricultural development and practices (including shifts to more water-intensive crops), and climate variability are increasing demands on available water resources, particularly groundwater, in one of the most productive agricultural regions in the Southwest—the Rincon and Mesilla Valley parts of Rio Grande Valley, Doña Ana and Sierra Counties, New Mexico, and El Paso County, Texas. The goal of this study was to produce an integrated hydrological simulation model to help evaluate water-management strategies, including conjunctive use of surface water and groundwater for historical conditions, and to support long-term planning for the Rio Grande Project. This report describes model construction and applications by the U.S. Geological Survey, working in cooperation and collaboration with the Bureau of Reclamation. This model, the Rio Grande Transboundary Integrated Hydrologic Model, simulates the most important natural and human components of the hydrologic system, including selected components related to variations in climate, thereby providing a reliable assessment of surface-water and groundwater conditions and processes that can inform water users and help improve planning for future conditions and sustained operations of the Rio Grande Project (RGP) by the Bureau of Reclamation. Model development included a revision of the conceptual model of the flow system, construction of a Transboundary Rio Grande Watershed Model (TRGWM) water-balance model using the Basin Characterization Model (BCM), and construction of an integrated hydrologic flow model with MODFLOW-One-Water Hydrologic Flow Model (referred to as One Water). The hydrologic models were developed for and calibrated to historical conditions of water and land use, and parameters were adjusted so that simulated values closely matched available measurements (calibration). The calibrated model was then used to assess the use and movement of water in the Rincon Valley, Mesilla Basin, and northern part of the Conejos-Médanos Basin, with the entire region referred to as the “Transboundary Rio Grande” or TRG. These tools provide a means to understand hydrologic system response to the evolution of water use in the region, its availability, and potential operational constraints of the RGP. The conceptual model identified surface-water and groundwater inflows and outflows that included the movement and use of water both in natural and in anthropogenic systems. The groundwater-flow system is characterized by a layered geologic sedimentary sequence combined with the effects of groundwater pumping, operation of the RGP, natural runoff and recharge, and the application of irrigation water at the land surface that is captured and reused in an extensive network of canals and drains as part of the conjunctive use of water in the region. Historical groundwater-level fluctuations followed a cyclic pattern that were aligned with climate cycles, which collectively resulted in alternating periods of wet or dry years. Periods of drought that persisted for one or more years are associated with low surface-water availability that resulted in higher rates of groundwater-level decline. Rates of groundwater-level decline also increased during periods of agricultural intensification, which necessitated increasing use of groundwater as a source of irrigation water. Agriculture in the area was initially dominated by alfalfa and cotton, but since 1970 more water-intensive pecan orchards and vegetable production have become more common. Groundwater levels substantially declined in subregions where drier climate combined with increased demand, resulting in periods of reduced streamflows. Most of the groundwater was recharged in the Rio Grande Valley floor, and most of the pumpage and aquifer storage depletion was in Mesilla Basin agricultural subregions. A cyclic imbalance between inflows and outflows resulted in the modeled cyclic depletion (groundwater withdrawals in excess of natural recharge) of the groundwater basin during the 75-year simulation period of 1940–2014. Changes in groundwater storage can vary considerably from year to year, depending on land use, pumpage, and climate conditions. Climatic drivers of wet and dry years can greatly affect all inflows, outflows, and water use. Although streamflow and, to a minor extent, precipitation during inter-decadal wet-year periods replenished the groundwater historically, contemporary water use and storage depletion could have reduced the effects of these major recharge events. The average net groundwater flow-rate deficit for 1953–2014 was estimated to be about 8,990 acre-feet per year.

New Mexico, Northern Chihuahua, Texas↗
USGS2010

Geographic information system datasets of regolith-thickness data, regolith-thickness contours, raster-based regolith thickness, and aquifer-test and specific-capacity data for the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin, Weld, Adams, and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado

These datasets were compiled in support of U.S. Geological Survey Scientific-Investigations Report 2010-5082-Hydrogeology and Steady-State Numerical Simulation of Groundwater Flow in the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin, Weld, Adams, and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. The datasets were developed by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with the Lost Creek Ground Water Management District and the Colorado Geological Survey. The four datasets are described as follows and methods used to develop the datasets are further described in Scientific-Investigations Report 2010-5082: (1) ds507_regolith_data: This point dataset contains geologic information concerning regolith (unconsolidated sediment) thickness and top-of-bedrock altitude at selected well and test-hole locations in and near the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin, Weld, Adams, and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. Data were compiled from published reports, consultant reports, and from lithologic logs of wells and test holes on file with the U.S. Geological Survey Colorado Water Science Center and the Colorado Division of Water Resources. (2) ds507_regthick_contours: This dataset consists of contours showing generalized lines of equal regolith thickness overlying bedrock in the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin, Weld, Adams, and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. Regolith thickness was contoured manually on the basis of information provided in the dataset ds507_regolith_data. (3) ds507_regthick_grid: This dataset consists of raster-based generalized thickness of regolith overlying bedrock in the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin, Weld, Adams, and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. Regolith thickness in this dataset was derived from contours presented in the dataset ds507_regthick_contours. (4) ds507_welltest_data: This point dataset contains estimates of aquifer transmissivity and hydraulic conductivity at selected well locations in the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin, Weld, Adams, and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. This dataset also contains hydrologic information used to estimate transmissivity from specific capacity at selected well locations. Data were compiled from published reports, consultant reports, and from well-test records on file with the U.S. Geological Survey Colorado Water Science Center and the Colorado Division of Water Resources.

Data Series↗