Category
Mineral Production Data Reflect Economic Slowdown
Posted on Saturday, May 24, 2008 @ 1:17 am by USGS Newsroom
The USGS releases mineral information essential to the U.S. economy and national security.
U.S. Geological Survey data on U.S. mineral production reflect the domestic housing market decline over the past year. The USGS study shows significant declines in domestic production for a number of construction materials, including cement, gypsum, construction sand and gravel, and crushed stone.
USGS mineral data are used by the Federal Reserve System’s Board of Governors in preparing its index of industrial production, a principal economic indicator.
This index measures the output of factories, mines, and electric and gas utilities. Output reflects changes in price and demand for mineral commodities used by industries such as construction, transportation equipment and agriculture. Output is an important early indicator of changes in economic activity in those industries.
“We find the data, analysis and assistance provided by the USGS to be invaluable in the preparation of the indexes of industrial production and of capacity,” said Norman J. Morin, senior economist with the Federal Reserve System. “The USGS data add appreciably to the product content of industrial production and, moreover, are in an area where no data are otherwise available.”
This is the first time the USGS has publicly released these data in the same form they are provided to the Federal Reserve System. This change is in response to a recent recommendation by the National Academy of Sciences in the report “Minerals, Critical Minerals, and the U.S. Economy.”
The U.S. is the world’s largest user of mineral commodities. Domestic mineral data are collected by the USGS through voluntary cooperation of the mineral industry. The USGS is the sole federal provider of unbiased research on mineral potential, production, consumption and environmental effects.
To see the report read “U.S. Production of Selected Mineral Commodities”
For more information on the NAS report read “Minerals, Critical Minerals, and the U.S. Economy”
Visit the USGS Mineral Resources Program for more information.
[Via USGS]
The Future of Climate Change Science and Water Resources
Posted on Friday, April 25, 2008 @ 8:30 am by Dave Schumaker
Although the IPCC is not responsible for producing new science, it certainly has a major role in pushing the direction of research. Therefore, any changes to the reporting process of the IPCC are of significance to the geoscience community, especially those who seek funding for research on global change. A recent report in Science highlights an intended reorganization of the IPCC annual report preparation process.
• The first change would ditch the practice of prescribing the scenarios of economic and technological progress driving future greenhouse gas emissions that researchers should incorporate into their modeling, the first step in the process. Delegates also backed the idea of having the communities that correspond to the panel’s three working groups on the science of climate change, its impacts, and mitigation strategies develop their studies in parallel rather than sequentially. Scientists say these changes will reduce the level of uncertainty in their findings, deliver more regional details, and provide policymakers with better clues on how to curb climate change–without lengthening the time from start to finish. The new regime “will expedite and improve the process,” says Richard Moss of the World Wildlife Fund, who helped coordinate the effort for IPCC.
[Via Science]
An editorial by two high-ranking IPCC officials published in a previous issue of Science presents a dissenting view of the intended changes. They contend, “Any move toward more rapid products risks incomplete identification of the range of justifiable views and a consequent reduction of the rigor, clarity, and robustness of the consensus [of climate scientists].”
These intended changes come at a time when the issue of climate change and water resources is (or should be) receiving additional media attention. On April 9, 2008, the IPCC released the Technical Paper on Climate Change and Water that describes the scientific evidence for and potential consequences of global warming. The report also explains methods of adaptation and mitigation that portend a sketchy future for freshwater supply, especially in arid regions of Africa and Asia. The Executive Summary emphasizes,
• “Globally, the negative impacts of future climate change on freshwater systems are expected to outweigh the benefits (high confidence). By the 2050s, the area of land subject to increasing water stress due to climate change is projected to be more than double that with decreasing water stress.”
• “Several gaps in knowledge exist in terms of observations and research needs related to climate change and water.”
[Via IPCC]
The findings of this report suggest that an increase in the knowledgebase for water resources in the United States is of utmost importance. However, the US Geological Survey’s FY 2009 budget for water resources was cut by nearly 17% compared to FY 2008. Some have argued that the Water 2025 initiative and congressional restoration of some budget cuts will offset this major blow to water resource assessment. The US Deparment of Interior’s Water 2025 initiative focuses on improving water resources in the western US, but recent water challenges faced by the southeastern US imply a significant deficiency in the scope of such an initiative.
This article was written by Bob Sas, a Master’s student at San Francisco State University, and kindly submitted to Geology News.
Desalination Could Boot U.S. Water Supplies
Posted on Thursday, April 24, 2008 @ 12:17 pm by Dave Schumaker
The National Academy of Sciences released a report today on the impact desalination could have on the United States’ water supplies. The report states that recent technological advances have made desalination a viable option for increasing water supplies and will likely play a role in augmenting our water resource. However, more research into the environmental impacts of desalination are needed.
Substantial uncertainties remain about the environmental impacts of desalination, the report says. Limited studies suggest that desalination may be less environmentally harmful than many other ways to supplement water — such as diverting freshwater from sensitive ecosystems — but definitive conclusions cannot be made without further research.
Researchers should investigate the extent to which fish and other creatures get trapped in saltwater intake systems in various settings, and seek ways to mitigate this and other impacts. Studies also should examine the long-term ecological effects of disposing of the salt concentrate that remains after desalination in rivers or the sea, a common practice. In addition, environmental evaluations of new desalination plants should be conducted, including ecological monitoring before and after the plant starts operating. The results should be synthesized with existing data in a national assessment that can guide future decision making, the report says.
Desalination also has raised concerns about greenhouse gases because it uses large amounts of energy. Seawater reverse osmosis uses about 10 times more energy than traditional treatment of surface water, for example, and in most cases uses more energy than other ways of augmenting water supplies. Researchers should investigate ways to integrate alternative energy sources — such as the sun, wind, or tides — in order to lower emissions from desalination, the report says.
[Via Eurekalert]
Contemplating Desalination
Posted on Wednesday, April 23, 2008 @ 1:24 pm by Dave Schumaker
Fresh on the heels of our post yesterday comes this press release from the National Research Council about the prospect of desalination as a potential source to bolster our nation’s water supplies.
As some U.S. regions face water shortages and growing contention over freshwater supplies, some communities are considering adding water through desalination — removing salt either from seawater or the brackish groundwater that underlies large parts of the country.DESALINATION: A NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE, new from the National Research Council, discusses desalination’s potential for bolstering U.S. water supplies and the advantages and drawbacks of various methods and technologies. The report also identifies existing barriers to desalination’s wider use and outlines research that could help overcome these problems.
The official report will be released tomorrow.
[Via Eurekalert]
The Future is Drying Up
Posted on Tuesday, April 22, 2008 @ 1:42 pm by Dave Schumaker
During a discussion at lunch on climate change, the Colorado River and the impact on water resources in the Southwest, one of my colleagues reminded me of this article published in the NY Times Magazine in October of 2007. It’s a fascinating (and rather grim) look on the future of water resources in the United States.
Climatologists seem to agree that global warming means the earth will, on average, get wetter. According to Richard Seager, a scientist at Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory who published a study on the Southwest last spring, more rain and snow will fall in those regions closer to the poles and more precipitation is likely to fall during sporadic, intense storms rather than from smaller, more frequent storms. But many subtropical regions closer to the equator will dry out. The models analyzed by Seager, which focus on regional climate rather than Colorado River flows, show that the Southwest will ultimately be subject to significant atmospheric and weather alterations. More alarming, perhaps, is that the models do not only concern the coming decades; they also address the present. “You know, it’s like, O.K., there’s trouble in the future, but how near in the future does it set in?” he told me. “In this case, it appears that it’s happening right now.” When I asked if the drought in his models would be permanent, he pondered the question for a moment, then replied: “You can’t call it a drought anymore, because it’s going over to a drier climate. No one says the Sahara is in drought.”
I figure this article is apropos, especially because of the recent news of the future of the Colorado River that we posted about last week.
[Via NY Times Magazine]