SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Global Environmental Change”

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

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

796 records · Page 45Linked to original sources

USGS2001

A spatially referenced regression model (SPARROW) for suspended sediment in streams of the Conterminous U.S.

Suspended sediment has long been recognized as an important contaminant affecting water resources. Besides its direct role in determining water clarity, bridge scour and reservoir storage, sediment serves as a vehicle for the transport of many binding contaminants, including nutrients, trace metals, semi-volatile organic compounds, a nd numerous pesticides (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000a). Recent efforts to addr ess water-quality concerns through the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) process have iden tified sediment as the single most prevalent cause of impairment in the Nation’s streams a nd rivers (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000b). Moreover, sediment has been identified as a medium for the tran sport and sequestration of organic carbon, playing a potentia lly important role in understa nding sources and sinks in the global carbon budget (Stallard, 1998). A comprehensive understanding of sediment fate a nd transport is considered essential to the design and implementation of effective plans for sediment management (Osterkamp and others, 1998, U.S. General Accounting Office, 1990). An exte nsive literature addr essing the problem of quantifying sediment transport has produced a nu mber of methods for estimating its flux (see Cohn, 1995, and Robertson and Roerish, 1999, for us eful surveys). The accuracy of these methods is compromised by uncertainty in the concentration measurements and by the highly episodic nature of sediment movement, particul arly when the methods are applied to smaller basins. However, for annual or decadal flux es timates, the methods are generally reliable if calibrated with extended periods of data (Robertson and Roerish, 1999). A substantial literature also supports the Universal Soil Loss Equation (U SLE) (Soil Conservation Service, 1983), an engineering method for estimating sheet and rill erosion, although the empirical credentials of the USLE have recently been questioned (Tri mble and Crosson, 2000). Conversely, relatively little direct evidence is available concerning the fate of sediment. The common practice of quantifying sediment fate with a sediment deliv ery ratio, estimated from a simple empirical relation with upstream basin area, does not artic ulate the relative importance of individual storage sites within a basin (Wolman, 1977). Rates of sediment deposition in reservoirs and flood plains can be determined from empirical measurement s , but only a limited number of sites have been monitored, and net rates of deposition or loss from other potential sinks and sources is largely unknown (Stallard, 1998). In particular, little is known about how much sediment loss from fields ultimately makes its way to stream channels, and how much sediment is subsequently stored in or lost from th e streambed (Meade and Parker, 1985, Trimble and Crosson, 2000). This paper reports on recent progress made to a ddress empirically the question of sediment fate and transport on a national scale. The model pres ented here is based on the SPAtially Referenced Regression On Watershed attr ibutes (SPARROW) methodology, fi rst used to estimate the distribution of nutrients in str eams and rivers of the United Stat es, and subsequently shown to describe land and stream processes affecting the delivery of nutrients (Smith and others, 1997, Alexander and others, 2000, Preston and Brakeb ill, 1999). The model makes use of numerous spatial datasets, available at the national level, to explain long-term sediment water-quality conditions in major streams and rivers throughou t the United States. Sediment sources are identified using sediment erosion rates from the National Resources I nventory (NRI) (Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2000) and apportioned over the landscape according to 30- meter resolution land-use information from th e National Land Cover Data set (NLCD) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2000a). More than 76,000 reservoirs from the National Inventory of Dams (NID) (U.S. Army Corps of Engin eers, 1996) are identified as pot ential sediment sinks. Other, non-anthropogenic sources and sinks are identified using soil in formation from the State Soil Survey Geographic (STATSGO) data base (Schwarz and Alexander, 1995) and spatial coverages representing surficial rock t ype and vegetative cover. The SPA RROW model empirically relates these diverse spatial datasets to estimates of long-term, mean annual sediment flux computed from concentration and flow measurements co llected over the period 1985 -95 from more than 400 monitoring stations maintained by the Na tional Stream Quality Accounting Network (Alexander and others, 1998), the National Wa ter Quality Assessment Program, and U.S. Geological Survey District offices (Turcios and Gray, in press). Th e calibrated model is used to estimate sediment flux for over 60,000 stream segments included in the River Reach File 1 (RF1) stream network (Alexander and others, 1999). SPARROW uses statis tical methods to calibrate a simple, structural model of riverine water quality, one that imposes mass ba lance in accounting for changes in contaminant flux. As applied here, the mass-balance approach facilitates the interpretation of model results in terms of physical processes affecting sediment transport, and makes possible the estimation of various rates of sediment generation and loss associated with stream channels and features of the landscape. The statistical approach provides a basi s for assessing the error of these inferred rates and of the error in extrapolated estimates of sediment flux made for streams in the RF1 network. An important implication of the holistic modeling approach adopted in this analysis is that estimates of sediment production and loss ar e based on, and therefore consistent with, measurements of in-stream flux. Other ancillary information, such as direct measurements of long-term sediment storage and release from rese rvoirs (Steffen, 1996), is incorporated into the analysis by specifying additional equations expl aining these ancillary variables. The imposition of cross-equation constraints affords this info rmation a statistically consistent weight in explaining in-stream sediment flux. Thus, the me thodology described here represents a general framework for synthesizing a wide spectrum of available information relevant to the understanding of sediment fate and transport.

Conterminous United States↗

USGS2012

Varve calibrated records of carbonate and organic carbon accumulation over the last 2000 years in the Black Sea

Sedimentologic and geochemical studies of box and gravity cores recovered from the Black Sea during the first leg of a multileg international Black Sea expedition in 1988 allow reconstruction of the basinwide Holocene environmental history of the Black Sea. In the deeper parts of the basin, box cores typically recovered a flocculent surface layer (“fluff”), laminated coccolith marls of Unit I (25–45 cm thick), and the upper 5–10 cm of finely laminated, dark‐colored sapropels of Unit II. Fine‐grained, homogeneous mud turbidites are interbedded with Units I and II over much of the basin, but the stratigraphie position of these turbidites differs, from site to site. The deposition of individual turbidites up to 15 cm thick does not appear to have significantly disturbed underlying laminae. Sediment trap deployments in the Black Sea suggest that light and dark laminae couplets represent annual increments of sedimentation (i.e., varves); we have therefore constructed a varve chronology for the sequence in order to correlate and date distinctive sedimentation and paleoenvironmental events. Distinctive groups of laminae in Unit I can be correlated across the entire deeper basin (a distance of more than 1000 km). This implies a remarkable homogeneity in production, accumulation, and preservation of biogenic material over much of the Black Sea during deposition of Unit I. The change from deposition of finely laminated, organic carbon‐rich sapropels (Unit II) to laminated, more calcareous, coccolith‐rich marls (Unit I) is thought to represent the crossing of a salinity threshold for Emiliania huxleyi. The varve chronology sets this change at about 1.63 ka (1633±100 yr B.P.), but the record of magnetic secular variation measured in several cores produces an age estimate of about 2.0 ka for the base of Unit I, or about 1.2 times the varve age. The average of six calibrated accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon ages for the base of Unit I is 2.7 ka, or about 1.7 times the varve age. Following the initial change to coccolith‐dominated sedimentation, deposition of sapropel resumed for at least one significant period, 1.56–1.25 ka. Since 1.25 ka, cycles of carbonate deposition with quasi‐decadal periodicities have produced characteristic darker and lighter assemblages of laminae. These cycles may have been climatically driven. Geochemical analyses coupled with the varve ages adopted herein indicate that accumulation rates of carbonate are nearly an order of magnitude higher in Unit I (averaging 35–45 g m −2 yr −1 ) than in sapropelic Unit II. which contains primarily detrital carbonate. The accumulation of lithogenic components in parts of Unit I is only 1.5 times the rate in Unit II. Deepwater organic carbon accumulation rates are somewhat higher in Unit I (3.5–4.5 g m −2 yr −1 ) than in the upper part of Unit II. Organic carbon accumulation rates in Unit I are somewhat antithetic to those of carbonate, and on the basis of this and additional constraints placed by pyrolysis and carbon isotopic analyses of organic material, it appears that terrestrial organic matter is an important component (perhaps >25%) of total organic carbon burial in the basin. Unit I in the western part of the Black Sea has a higher terrestrial organic component and higher accumulation rates of terrigenous clastic material than Unit I in the eastern part. This difference between eastern and western Black Sea is to be expected because of the major rivers that empty into the western Black Sea from eastern Europe, Ukraine, and Russia. Shallow slope sites, but still within euxinic bottom waters, have lower organic carbon accumulation rates and lower pyrolysis hydrogen indices than deepwater basinal sites, suggesting selective resuspension and oxidation of organic matter at basin margins and focusing of organic matter deposition toward the basin center. A comparison of the Black Sea data with those from several open ocean sites with similar water depths showed no significant difference between organic carbon accumulation rates under oxic and anoxic conditions. For a given bulk accumulation rate the organic carbon accumulation rates, normalized to primary productivity, are about the same in both settings.

Global Biogeochemical Cycles↗

USGS2013

Historical methane hydrate project review

In 1995, U.S. Geological Survey made the first systematic assessment of the volume of natural gas stored in the hydrate accumulations of the United States. That study, along with numerous other studies, has shown that the amount of gas stored as methane hydrates in the world greatly exceeds the volume of known conventional gas resources. However, gas hydrates represent both a scientific and technical challenge and much remains to be learned about their characteristics and occurrence in nature. Methane hydrate research in recent years has mostly focused on: (1) documenting the geologic parameters that control the occurrence and stability of gas hydrates in nature, (2) assessing the volume of natural gas stored within various gas hydrate accumulations, (3) analyzing the production response and characteristics of methane hydrates, (4) identifying and predicting natural and induced environmental and climate impacts of natural gas hydrates, and (5) analyzing the effects of methane hydrate on drilling safety. Methane hydrates are naturally occurring crystalline substances composed of water and gas, in which a solid water-‐lattice holds gas molecules in a cage-‐like structure. The gas and water becomes a solid under specific temperature and pressure conditions within the Earth, called the hydrate stability zone. Other factors that control the presence of methane hydrate in nature include the source of the gas included within the hydrates, the physical and chemical controls on the migration of gas with a sedimentary basin containing methane hydrates, the availability of the water also included in the hydrate structure, and the presence of a suitable host sediment or “reservoir”. The geologic controls on the occurrence of gas hydrates have become collectively known as the “methane hydrate petroleum system”, which has become the focus of numerous hydrate research programs. Recognizing the importance of methane hydrate research and the need for a coordinated effort, the U.S. Congress enacted Public Law 106-‐193, the Methane Hydrate Research and Development Act of 2000. This Act called for the Secretary of Energy to begin a methane hydrate research and development program in consultation with other U.S. federal agencies. At the same time a new methane hydrate research program had been launched in Japan by the Ministry of International Trade and Industry to develop plans for a methane hydrate exploratory drilling project in the Nankai Trough. Since this early start we have seen other countries including India, China, Canada, and the Republic of Korea establish large gas hydrate research and development programs. These national led efforts have also included the investment in a long list of important scientific research drilling expeditions and production test studies that have provided a wealth of information on the occurrence of methane hydrate in nature. The most notable expeditions and projects have including the following: -‐Ocean Drilling Program Leg 164 (1995) -‐Japan Nankai Trough Project (1999-‐2000) -‐Ocean Drilling Program Leg 204 (2004) -‐Japan Tokai-‐oki to Kumano-‐nada Project (2004) -‐Gulf of Mexico JIP Leg I (2005) -‐Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Expedition 311 (2005) -‐Malaysia Gumusut-‐Kakap Project (2006) -‐India NGHP Expedition 01 (2006) -‐China GMGS Expedition 01 (2007) -‐Republic of Korea UBGH Expedition 01 (2007) -‐Gulf of Mexico JIP Leg II (2009) -‐Republic of Korea UBGH Expedition 02 (2010) -‐MH-‐21 Nankai Trough Pre-‐Production Expedition (2012-‐2013) -‐Mallik Gas Hydrate Testing Projects (1998/2002/2007-‐2008) -‐Alaska Mount Elbert Stratigraphic Test Well (2007) -‐Alaska Iġnik Sikumi Methane Hydrate Production Test Well (2011-‐2012) Research coring and seismic programs carried out by the Ocean Drilling Program (ODP) and Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP), starting with the ODP Leg 164 drilling of the Blake Ridge in the Atlantic Ocean in 1995, have also contributed greatly to our understanding of the geologic controls on the formation, occurrence, and stability of gas hydrates in marine environments. For the most part methane hydrate research expeditions carried out by the ODP and IODP provided the foundation for our scientific understanding of gas hydrates. The methane hydrate research efforts under ODP-‐IODP have mostly dealt with the assessment of the geologic controls on the occurrence of gas hydrate, with a specific goal to study the role methane hydrates may play in the global carbon cycle. Over the last 10 years, national led methane hydrate research programs, along with industry interest have led to the development and execution of major methane hydrate production field test programs. Two of the most important production field testing programs have been conducted at the Mallik site in the Mackenzie River Delta of Canada and in the Eileen methane hydrate accumulation on the North Slope of Alaska. Most recently we have also seen the completion of the world’s first marine methane hydrate production test in the Nankai Trough in the offshore of Japan. Industry interest in gas hydrates has also included important projects that have dealt with the assessment of geologic hazards associated with the presence of hydrates. The scientific drilling and associated coring, logging, and borehole monitoring technologies developed in the long list of methane hydrate related field studies are one of the most important developments and contributions associated with methane hydrate research and development activities. Methane hydrate drilling has been conducted from advanced scientific drilling platforms like the JOIDES Resolution and the D/V Chikyu, which feature highly advanced integrated core laboratories and borehole logging capabilities. Hydrate research drilling has also included the use of a wide array of industry, geotechnical and multi-‐service ships. All of which have been effectively used to collect invaluable geologic and engineering data on the occurrence of methane hydrates throughout the world. Technologies designed specifically for the collection and analysis of undisturbed methane hydrate samples have included the development of a host of pressure core systems and associated specialty laboratory apparatus. The study and use of both wireline conveyed and logging-‐while-‐drilling technologies have also contributed greatly to our understanding of the in-‐situ nature of hydrate-‐bearing sediments. Recent developments in borehole instrumentation specifically designed to monitor changes associated with hydrates in nature through time or to evaluate the response of hydrate accumulations to production have also contributed greatly to our understanding of the complex nature and evolution of methane hydrate systems. Our understanding of how methane hydrates occur and behave in nature is still growing and evolving – we do not yet know if methane hydrates can be economically produced, nor do we know fully the role of hydrates as an agent of climate change or as a geologic hazard. But it is known for certain that scientific drilling has contributed greatly to our understanding of hydrates in nature and will continue to be a critical source of the information to advance our understanding of methane hydrates.

Report↗

USGS2016

Users and uses of Landsat 8 satellite imagery—2014 survey results

Executive Summary In 2013, Landsat 8 began adding high quality, global, moderate-resolution imagery to the more than 40-year archive of Landsat imagery. To assess the potential effects of the availability of Landsat 8 imagery on users and their work, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Land Remote Sensing Program (LRS) initiated a survey of Landsat users. The objectives of the survey were to 1. Characterize various Landsat user groups, such as United States (U.S.) and international users and Landsat 8 and non-Landsat 8 users; 2. Identify any differences among user groups in uses and preferences; 3. Measure the importance of and satisfaction with Landsat 8 attributes; 4. Assess the importance to users of the frequency of usable imagery; and 5. Determine any challenges in using Landsat 8. The online survey was sent to 51,617 Landsat users registered with USGS in May 2014. Almost 13,000 people responded to the survey for a response rate of 25 percent (n = 12,966). Current Landsat users (users who had used Landsat in their work in the year prior to the survey) composed 89 percent of the sample (n = 11,549) and past Landsat users composed 11 percent (n = 1,417). The results reported here apply to current Landsat users registered with the USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center. Users from 161 countries responded to the survey. Of those, 19 percent were citizens or permanent residents of the United States and 81 percent resided in other countries. More than 70 percent of current users had used Landsat 8 in the year prior to the survey. The majority of Landsat 8 users (65 percent) were established users who used Landsat imagery regularly both before and after Landsat 8 imagery became available. The average current Landsat user was male, 36 years old, and highly educated, with 9 years of experience using satellite imagery or geographic information system (GIS) software. Landsat 8 users had, on average, two more years of experience than non-Landsat 8 users. Users were employed predominantly by academic institutions (65 percent), followed by private businesses (13 percent), Federal governments (10 percent), State and local governments (6 percent), and nonprofit organizations (6 percent). Of the Landsat imagery obtained in the past year by current users, on average 31 percent came from a Landsat 8 sensor. An equivalent amount came from the Landsat 7 ETM+ sensor (33 percent); slightly less came from Landsats 4 and 5 TM sensors (27 percent). Much less came from Landsats 1 through 5 MSS sensors (5 percent). Overall, more than a third of users’ work used Landsat imagery (38 percent). Of this work, on average, 37 percent of the work was operational. Landsat 8 users considered a greater proportion of their work operational than non-Landsat 8 users (39 percent compared with 29 percent). Environmental sciences and management were the most commonly selected primary applications (selected by 42 percent of users). Land use/land cover (23 percent) was the second most commonly selected primary application, followed by education (12 percent), agriculture (9 percent), and planning and development (6 percent). Landsat 8 users were asked to rank the importance of certain attributes in determining whether to use Landsat 8 imagery in their work. The archive was ranked most important, followed by cost, spatial resolution, extent of coverage, data quality, and frequency of revisit. Users were asked how satisfied they were with these same attributes as they currently apply to Landsat 8 imagery. On average, users were most satisfied with lack of cost, extent of coverage, data quality, and the archive, but they were satisfied with all attributes. Users were asked how often they needed Landsat imagery to meet various requirements for their primary application. The survey question specifically asked how often users needed usable imagery, which differs from how often they would like the Landsat satellites to acquire an image. Users were asked to identify their needed frequency of usable imagery for the following levels: 1. Threshold level—the minimum frequency of usable imagery needed to be of any value to their primary application. 2. Breakthrough level—the frequency of usable imagery that would result in a significant improvement for their primary application of the imagery. 3. Target level—the frequency of usable imagery that would only provide a limited additional increase in the expected performance for their primary application. To meet the threshold level, three-quarters of users needed usable imagery every 17 days or less frequently. At the breakthrough level, two-thirds of users (64 percent) needed a usable image every 5–16 days. The current constellation of two satellites (Landsat 7 and 8) is capable of meeting the threshold and breakthrough needs of most users at least some of the time, but a single satellite would be highly unlikely to do so. Two-fifths of users (40 percent) felt that usable imagery provided every 4 days or more frequently would meet their target level which the current Landsat constellation cannot provide. Landsat 8 users were significantly more likely than non-Landsat 8 users to need usable imagery more frequently to meet their target levels. Additionally, U.S. Landsat 8 users were significantly more likely than other Landsat users to need usable imagery more frequently in order meet both their breakthrough and target levels. To explore the effect of the availability of Landsat 8 imagery on Landsat imagery use in general, established users (those who had consistently used Landsat imagery both before and after Landsat 8 imagery became available) using Landsat 8 imagery were asked about changes in the amount of Landsat imagery they used. The majority of established users using Landsat 8 imagery (60 percent) reported an average increase of 51 percent in the number of scenes obtained after Landsat 8 imagery became available. Landsat 8 users were asked if they had encountered challenges in using Landsat 8 whereas non-Landsat 8 users were asked if such challenges had played a role in why they were not using Landsat 8 imagery. Although many users did not encounter challenges when using or trying to use Landsat 8 data, slightly less than 30 percent did encounter issues with processing the data to a usable point. The most common issue reported was not being able to create or have access to a surface reflectance corrected product. Other challenges were related to the file sizes of images being too large to download, store, or analyze. There were no statistically significant differences between Landsat 8 and non-Landsat 8 users in terms of challenges encountered when using or trying to use the imagery, which indicates that users were not unduly discouraged by the challenges they may have encountered. When asked about potential consequences of not using Landsat 8, more than half of the non-Landsat 8 users did not report detrimental effects on their work from not using the imagery. Of those who did report detrimental effects, decreased quality of work, decreased scope of work, and increased time spent on work were the most common.

Open-File Report↗