Categories
Blog Evolution Ideas Interfaces of Global Change IGEP Science Communication Uncategorized

Evolution2019 Dispatches: Navigating relationships between science and the public

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

From the Society for the Study of Evolution Blog 
By Kerry Gendreau | July 5, 2019

Header image art by Dave Cutler.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator style=”dotted”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_column_text]

“To be maximally helpful in society, scientists in academia need to take collective action to engage effectively.”    
– Jane Lubchenco

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]How do we bridge the gap between scientific and public knowledge and address the resulting disconnect between data and public policy? The American Society of Naturalists’ Vice Presidential Symposium at this year’s Evolution meeting, entitled “Politics, the public, and science: navigating the new reality,” addressed this topic as a call to action. Organized by professor and science writer Doug Emlen, this symposium brought together four science communicators from different fields: journalist and science writer Carl Zimmer, professor and author of the science blog Dynamic Ecology Meghan Duffy, executive director of The Story Collider podcast Liz Neeley, and ecologist and political advisor Jane Lubchenco.[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”30927″ img_size=”large” add_caption=”yes” alignment=”center”][vc_column_text]Carl Zimmer started the discussion by addressing the mounting crisis in journalism of fabricated news and “alternative facts,” touching on the common theme uniting all of the talks: how do we get people to recognize credible news sources and to understand the information that they provide? He referenced the website Natural News, which uses its platform to propagate anti-vaccination and anti-science sentiments to advertise “natural” and holistic health products, noting that Natural News had more followers than the New York Times before being banned from Facebook for providing misleading and inaccurate information. He pointed out that foreign intelligence agencies promote such websites to exacerbate the polarization of news sources and create discord among US citizens.

This bombardment with discordant information has resulted in widespread mistrust of scientific evidence, which is reflected in recently proposed bills like the Honest Act (H.R. 1430), which may limit the use of scientific data for environmental policy decisions. Environmental policy depends on environmental science, and it should be obvious that scientific expertise is critical to making rational and sustainable environmental policy decisions, yet this bill was passed in the House in 2017 without amendment before being stalled in the Senate.

As a solution to such issues, Zimmer emphasized the need for education reform, suggesting that public schools provide courses in digital literacy (the ability to assess the credibility of information found on the internet) and basic statistics.

Picking up on the idea of scientific literacy, Meghan Duffy discussed her experiences trying to incorporate lessons on climate change in her undergraduate biology classroom. She showed some striking results from surveys of undergraduate students suggesting that, while most students acknowledge that climate change is a real threat, they do not necessarily understand what it is or what is driving it. She stressed the importance of teaching climate literacy to undergraduate biology students by equipping them not only with facts, but with the capability to make informed decisions about climate-related policy. I realized that, coming from a background in molecular biology and biotechnology, I was never asked to read a science-related bill or to know a politician’s stance on environmental issues during my undergraduate studies. This was during a time at which major climate legislation was being proposed. Had we discussed the costs and benefits of this proposed legislation in school and had someone imparted to me the power of my voice in government, I would have taken an active role in advocacy ten years ago when we were still talking about climate change mitigation rather than adaptation.

Jane Lubchenco and Liz Neeley focused on effective communication, giving advice on how to engage the public by keeping our messages simple and accessible. Neeley also discussed the importance of properly framing conversations about science and the public. A popular narrative among scientists has been the idea that policymakers are engaged in a “war on science”; however, this framework, said Neeley, may be detrimental to the public opinion of the scientific community. The panelists collectively encouraged incorporating a human element into our discussions about science, by building relationships with our audiences, actively listening, incorporating warmth into our conversations, and acknowledging the uncertainty and messiness that is inevitably a part of all science, rather than just providing facts and arguments.

Lubchenco pointed out that scientists have a tendency to dictate rather than to inform, highlighting this as one of the underlying causes of the current disconnect between scientists and the community. She went on to illustrate the effectiveness of a two-way scientific conversation when she recalled her experience briefing then-Vice President Joe Biden on the potential effects of a major oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Biden was amazed at her straightforward explanations, which he didn’t expect from a scientist.

Lubchenco ended her talk by stressing the urgency of taking action to increase scientific literacy and to bridge the gap between science and the public. Scientific advancement need not be limited to scientists but should be co-created by listening to and addressing public needs and fostering two-way conversations. We need to promote public understanding of the use and interpretation of data rather than suppressing it. If we want to use scientific knowledge to make a difference,academics need to recognize their responsibility to teach the citizens of tomorrow and we, as scientists, need to actively and honestly share our stories and opinions with the public and with our elected representatives.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator style=”shadow”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”18265″ img_size=”150×150″][/vc_column][vc_column width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]Kerry Gendreau is a PhD candidate at Virginia Tech and an IGC Fellow. She studies genome evolution and adaptation in snakes and salamanders, and is particularly keen on the evolution of nervous systems and sensory perception.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Climate Change Global Change Ideas News Research Science Communication

Marc Stern facilitates local solutions to global climate challenges

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

From VT NewsJune 26, 2019
With extreme environmental events, such as drought, coastal and river flooding, and wildfires, increasing in frequency, there is an urgent need to develop strategies that will reduce negative outcomes.

A National Science Foundation grant will help Professor Marc Stern of the College of Natural Resources and Environment study and develop workshops that will empower local communities to take action against climate challenges.

“This isn’t about experts coming in to tell a community they need to do x, y, and z,” Stern explained. “Instead, we’re trying to give communities planning tools and strategies so they can go ahead and do the work that needs to be done.”

The first component of Stern’s project is to survey experts who facilitate workshops that focus on using climate-relevant science to address a broad range of challenges. The project will integrate those strategies with a survey of the experiences of workshop participants. This two-step process will provide a holistic view of what is successful in these workshops and identify potential blind spots for reaching audiences and promoting positive change.

From those findings, the second component is to test strategies in a series of climate adaptation workshops around the U.S. These field tests of effective practices will enable the researchers and workshop facilitators to further refine their understanding of how learning takes place in informal learning environments. The workshops will focus on empowering people to take local action to address a worldwide concern.

“If environmental concerns are framed exclusively as a global challenge, it’s easy to brush them off as something too big to take on,” Stern said. “When you instead make it local — when you say, ‘here’s a community, here’s what’s happening, here’s what’s predicted, so let’s talk about it’ — that makes the challenge manageable. The global side, and the politics surrounding it, becomes a secondary issue; rather, you’re concerned that every time it rains your town has a flood, and you start thinking about what to do about it.”

In order for these workshops to successfully reach and resonate with the intended local audiences, Stern notes that it is crucial that the workshops be developed to engender trust between experts and participants so that successful collaboration can happen.

“We’ve done a lot of research around how trust can be developed in collaborative settings, which we hope to translate to facilitation techniques that can lead to a sense of empowerment and participation. We want participants to leave these workshops with a sense that they can solve these challenges.”

The project is a collaboration between Virginia Tech and EcoAdapt, a nonprofit dedicated to helping governments, organizations, and individuals develop climate change adaptations to make communities better prepared and protected from environmental challenges.

For Stern, a faculty member in the Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation, the project is a chance to make a lasting change in the world.

“I look for projects where I can make an on-the-ground, tangible difference, and this is an obvious place to do that,” Stern said. “If we can help even one of these communities on a positive path toward dealing with climate challenges by adapting their policies and planning efforts, that impact would be well worth the effort.”

The continuous grant from the National Science Foundation will run through 2023.

[hr_shadow]

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Climate Change Drinking water Ideas New Publications Pollution Science Communication Water

Human domination of the global water cycle absent from depictions and perceptions

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

From Science Daily | June 10, 2019

Pictures of the earth’s water cycle used in education and research throughout the world are in urgent need of updating to show the effects of human interference, according to new analysis by an international team of hydrology experts.

Leaving humans out of the picture, the researchers argue, contributes to a basic lack of awareness of how humans relate to water on Earth — and a false sense of security about future availability of this essential and scarce resource.

The team has drawn up a new set of diagrams to promote better understanding of how our water cycle works in the 21st century. These new diagrams show human interference in nearly all parts of the cycle.

The study, published in Nature Geoscience, with an additional comment in Nature, was carried out by a large team of experts from Brigham Young University and Michigan State University in the US and the University of Birmingham in the UK, along with partners in the US, France, Canada, Switzerland and Sweden.

It showed that, in a sample of more than 450 water cycle diagrams in textbooks, scientific literature and online, 85 per cent showed no human interaction at all with the water cycle, and only 2 per cent of the images made any attempt to connect the cycle with climate change or water pollution.

In addition, nearly all the examples studied depicted verdant landscapes, with mild climates and abundant freshwater — usually with only a single river basin.

The researchers argue there is an urgent need to challenge this misrepresentation and promote a more accurate and sophisticated understanding of the cycle and how it works in the 21st century. This is crucial if society is to be able to achieve global solutions to the world’s water crisis.

[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”30553″ img_size=”large” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]

“The water cycle diagram is a central icon of hydro science, but misrepresenting the ways in which humans have influenced this cycle diminishes our awareness of the looming global water crisis,” says Professor David Hannah, UNESCO Chair in Water Sciences at the University of Birmingham.

“By leaving out climate change, human consumption, and changes in land use we are, in effect, creating large gaps in understanding and perception among the public and also among some scientists.”

The new diagrams drawn up by the team show a more complex picture that includes elements such as meltwater from glaciers, flood damage caused by land use changes, pollution and sea level rises.

Professor Stefan Krause, Head of the Birmingham Water Council states: “For the first time, the new water cycle diagram adequately reflects the importance of not just quantities of water but also water quality and pollution as key criteria for assessing water resources.”

Professor Ben Abbott, from Brigham Young University, is lead author on the paper: “Every scientific diagram involves compromises and distortions, but what we found with the water cycle was widespread exclusion of a central concept. You can’t understand water in the 21st century without including humans.”

“Other scientific disciplines have done a good job depicting how humans now dominate many aspects of the Earth system. It’s hard to find a diagram of the carbon or nitrogen cycle that doesn’t show factories and fertilizers. However, our drawings of the water cycle are stuck in the 17th century.”

“Better drawings of the water cycle won’t solve the global water crisis on their own, but they could improve awareness of how local water use and climate change have global consequences.”

 

[/vc_column_text][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Drinking water Ideas News Research Special Events Water

Water & Health in Rural China & Appalachia Conference at VT – October 4th, 2019

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

 

Save the Date!

October 4th – Water & Health in Rural China & Appalachia  Conference will be held at Virginia Tech

The goal of this one-day conference is to connect VT faculty and students with researchers and officials from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC) and UC Berkeley in order to share past/present/planned research that is relevant to low-income settings in rural Appalachia and China. The conference and attendant working sessions (held before and after) will also serve as a forum for officially expanding The Berkeley/China-CDC Program for Water & Health to Virginia Tech, as well as a planning platform for new collaborative projects. The Global Change Center is a sponsor of this event.
When: Friday, October 4th, 2019, from 9am-5pm, including lunch (with topic-specific working sessions on October 3rd and 7th)
Where: The Skelton Conference Center, at the Inn at Virginia Tech (901 Prices Fork Rd, Blacksburg, VA 24061)

Schedule and additional information to follow. Please email GCC Faculty Affiliate Alasdair Cohen (PHS) with any questions.


 

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Blog Ideas Interfaces of Global Change IGEP Science Communication Student Spotlight

IGC Seminar Reflection Series: Navigating elephants in the room

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_column_text]

Navigating elephants in the room

Pepsi or coke? Cats or dogs? Evolution or creationism? Some topics are easier than others to discuss. Other topics are avoided altogether, like elephants in the room. In the academic arena, we often work with people who share our values and opinions on topics like climate change, vaccination, and evolution. However, discussing these topics with people outside of our bubbles does not always go so smoothly.

A difficult choice for global change scientists is the extent to which we advocate for issues on a personal and a political level. Choosing to advocate sometimes requires addressing the “elephant” issues, especially if one is seeking to gain support from parties or entities that currently oppose favorable action for one’s cause.

During the IGC seminar titled “Difficult Conversations,” Nicole, Sydney, and Ariel walked us through strategies toward having productive conversations about polarizing topics with people who might disagree with you.  Prior to the seminar, we read about identity politics and how tribalism often guides one’s beliefs and perspective on issues. As political beliefs can encompass one’s identity, disagreement on political issues can be internalized as a personal attack. This sentiment can create a combative atmosphere, hampering communication. To avoid this potential hostile climate (pun intended), Nicole, Sydney, and Ariel discussed with us the importance of both listening and trying to understand each other’s values. These practices help find common ground and make discussing controversial topics less aggressive.

While these practices do not a guarantee of a productive conversation, several students shared personal experiences where they were able to reach a disagreeing family member by easing into the conversation with a less contentious topic. (I still need to figure out how to connect liking Frank Sinatra and accepting climate change to my denier uncle….)

Some tips for having “difficult conversations”:

  • Start with a shared interest (i.e. baseball, music, etc.)
  • Listen!!!!!
  • Acknowledge the rationale behind the other’s beliefs
  • Focus on common values (i.e., clean air, clean water, etc. rather than directly discussing global warming, biodiversity, etc.)
  • Choose your battles – some people cannot be reached, no matter how hard you try!

Hopefully, these tips will help you the next time you’re caught addressing an “elephant” topic in the room.[/vc_column_text][vc_separator style=”shadow”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”24475″ img_size=”medium” alignment=”center”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”2/3″][vc_column_text]Alaina Weinheimer is a 1st year PhD student in Biological Sciences in the Aylward Lab focusing her research on microbial ecology and evolution. Passionate about protecting the environment, she aims to elucidate the effects of microbial communities on ecosystem health and global biogeochemical cycles, particularly in marine systems.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Ideas New Publications News Research

Virginia Tech researchers develop system-of-systems framework to unify knowledge across disciplines

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]VT News

April 22, 2019

With the goal of reconnecting fragmented knowledge, John Little and his colleagues have developed a tiered, system-of-systems framework to help solve complex socio-environmental problems by incorporating models from a variety of disciplines.

A few years ago, Little taught a class on sustainability. “I thought I would look into the sustainability knowledgebase and pick out the quantitative procedures that can be used to evaluate sustainability, so I could teach those. I found that what I was looking for hardly exists and thought that there had to be better approaches to evaluating sustainability,” said Little, the Charles E. Via Jr. Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering in the College of Engineering at Virginia Tech.

The idea behind this approach is to simplify each system, or upscale it, in order to capture the essential dynamics. Within each system, there are multiple interacting elements. Systems connect to other systems when their elements interact. For example, agricultural systems often interact with soil and land use systems; the business of farming interacts with economic systems, which interconnect with social systems.

“The idea is to upscale the models to the systems level and connect them together there. There may be some cases where we don’t have a process level model, so we go directly to the systems level,” said Little, an affiliated faculty member of the Global Change Center, housed within the Fralin Life Science Institute. “By connecting them there, we can see what the main drivers are of the problem that we are trying to solve. In a way, modeling is the common language of science.”

Little and colleagues recently published a study in the journal Environmental Modelling and Software. They proposed that a tiered, system-of-systems framework would be most useful in developing sustainable and resilient solutions for complex socio-environmental problems.

 

Six sectors of a socio-environmental system
Six sectors of a socio-environmental system grouped into the three subsystems of sustainability. Figure courtesy of Erich Hester.

 

Sustainability incorporates social, economic, and environmental subsystems, and when all three subsystems are in balance, the overall system is thought to be sustainable, or able to be maintained through time. A system-of-systems approach groups smaller, individual systems into a larger one that functions at a higher level than the sum of each individual system.

Little’s approach trades detail for broader knowledge of the entire system; detailed process-level models inform more aggregated system-level models. By including a simplified representation of the entire system, more systems can be incorporated.

 

Process and System level models
Representation of the framework with more detailed process-level models and more aggregated system-level models. The bottom layer represents the real world, while the other four layers represent different systems. Figure courtesy of John Little.

 

“We need to have a system-of-systems model to capture the essential dynamics of the individual systems. Then we can see what drives the problem and focus on those things. We have to change the way we think and that’s the biggest battle,” Little said. “I want people to take whole systems and couple them. Then we may be able to solve the big problems.”

 

System-of-systems framework applied to the Chesapeake Bay
A representation of the tiered, system-of-systems framework applied to the Chesapeake Bay, which comprises a watershed and an estuary. Figure courtesy of John Little.

 

By simplifying and upscaling these watershed and estuary process models, they can be coupled with the economic system at a similar spatial and temporal resolution. Indicators reflect the actual state of the system, whereas orientors represent the desired state of the system.

“We have all these different, big-picture problems. The idea is that you choose your problem, your supreme orientor, and the initial systems you want to include in your system of systems and plug them in,” Little said. “Once the initial systems are being successfully simulated, you can add more systems, building complexity.”

In this framework, sustainability is the supreme orientor, or the ultimate goal for the system of systems. When the indicators match the orientors, the system of systems is considered to be in a sustainable state. As more systems are added, such as social systems, the evaluation becomes more comprehensive.

For example, a system-of-systems model could be used to address dead zones – areas of reduced oxygen levels – in the Chesapeake Bay. Cities in the watershed have large populations who need to eat. Fertilizer runoff from agricultural systems flows into the estuary, creating dead zones. How can agriculture and urban development be managed to prevent dead zones from forming? A system-of-systems model could be used to answer this question.

To address complex socio-environmental issues, researchers need to communicate across a wide variety of disciplines. However, collaboration is difficult when experts with different backgrounds cannot easily communicate. Little proposes that specially-trained “systems” experts in each discipline could upscale information from the process to the systems level, and then communicate that information with specially trained experts in other disciplines. In this way, knowledge would propagate more quickly across disciplines.

“Right now, there’s a barrier between all these disciplines – we can hardly communicate with people in other fields,” said Little. “We need to train people to communicate across different disciplines – not every detail, but the big picture. Information at the systems level would propagate very quickly because of these systems experts. They could integrate knowledge and overcome this barrier,” said Little.

Computer scientists are designing the proposed software framework so that it can be used to integrate many system-level models. The software will handle the exchange of information and the visualization of results.

Ideally, communities of scientists would develop models and upload them to a cyberinfrastructure repository. This would allow researchers to share models at the regional scale and use whichever models are needed for their specific problem. However, it is difficult to organize collaboration among such large communities.

“We need specially trained people to connect these models, so they can communicate across disciplines, as well as within their own discipline. They could speed up the propagation of information across knowledge domains,” Little said.

To address this, Little and colleagues received funding from the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) to hold workshops to develop design guidelines for the framework. The goal is to make the software as user-friendly as possible to guide researchers in sharing their models and using other models as part of their systems analyses. Four Ph.D. students – including one advised by Little – are implementing portions of the framework as part of their Ph.D. research.

“The Global Systems Science workshop involving Tony Jakeman and Sondoss Elsawah that was held in Blacksburg last March and funded by Fralin, and the seed funding from the Global Change Center, were crucial in getting this going,” Little said. The Global Systems Science Destination Area focuses on finding solutions to critical problems associated with human activity and environmental change, including disease, water quality, and food production.

Written by Rasha Aridi

[hr]

 

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

CONTACT:
Kristin Rose
(540) 231-6614

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Blog Ideas Interfaces of Global Change IGEP Science Communication Student Spotlight

IGC Seminar Reflection Series: Scientists Need to Move More than Boxes, by Lauren Wind

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/1″][vc_column_text]

Scientists Need to Move More than Boxes

Scientists like putting data into their own specific boxes. Scientists stack those boxes based on things like significance and trends. Then scientists are left looking at room full of neat boxes; and move onto filling up the next room with more boxes.

To me, it seems like scientists have become an experienced, 5-star rated moving company and we (I’m working on my PhD, so this is my tribe) tend to become disheveled when items do not fit into those neat, stackable boxes. We tend to stay away from the “noise” (less predicative and replicable situations), but in many cases it is in the “noise” where we find the deepest meaning behind our research.

Social Science is the HR department of our scientific moving company. Social science accommodates the uncertainty of human-nature coupled systems and uncovers the values, behaviors, and uniqueness of each group. When scientists start to consider that individuals cannot be put into neat stackable boxes, because that’s not the nature of living things… that can be when we start to grasp the deeper understanding of our research.

Historically, social science and natural science have not been best friends. These fields are often divided by unfortunate terms such as soft and hard science. Today, academics are starting to erase this line and merge the fields to satisfy reviewers of interdisciplinary grants and funding. However; there still seems to be this lack of respect between fields and ultimately this sense that social scientists feel the need to justify their work.

In the IGC Seminar, fellow Bennett Grooms led an interactive discussion on the importance and benefits of linking social science with conservation and ecological sciences. A review paper by Bennett et al. (2017) addresses the scope, successes, and failures of social science as applied to conservation practices.  It is written in a way to sell the benefits of social science to natural scientists. Bennet et al. (2017) says “conservation social sciences can be valuable for descriptive, diagnostic, disruptive, reflexive, generative, innovative, or instrumental reasons” for “document[ing] and describe[ing] the diversity of conservation practices”. Proposing the idea that scientists need to alter the lens at which they view research and consider that learned Behavior and Relationships may be more significant than once thought.

Incorporating a social science lens allows us to provide a depth to natural science data, and intrinsically bridge the gap between social and natural scientists. It will take time and effort from both sides, as most noteworthy research does not come fast nor easily. However; think about the research potential out there if scientists thought more about behavior and relationships of groups before categorically putting them in boxes. Perhaps, the frameshift here to consider is why are we putting groups into boxes in the first place?[/vc_column_text][vc_separator style=”shadow”][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column width=”1/3″][vc_single_image image=”17994″ img_size=”medium” alignment=”center”][/vc_column][vc_column width=”2/3″][vc_column_text]Lauren Wind is a 2nd year PhD student in Biological Systems Engineering at Virginia Tech. She studies in the Krometis and Hession labs. Wind spends her time researching the spread of antibiotic resistance in our agricultural ecosystems. In her free time, she can be found enjoying a cup of coffee and writing downtown somewhere in the shade under the red oak trees.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Ideas Pollution Research Water

New working group: plastic pollution in freshwater systems

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]

April 17, 2019
Plastic pollution – specifically microplastics (MPs), which are <5mm sized plastic particles – is now ubiquitous in oceans and rivers. A combination of physical, chemical, and radiative (UV light) processes degrade large plastic materials into small fragments (MPs and even smaller nanoplastics) and leach chemical by-products. Once small, MPs become highly mobile, can adsorb other pollutants (such as DDT, PCBs, dioxins), and can be ingested by biota where MPs can have direct effects on an organism or bioaccumulate. MPs can be found in freshwater systems in concentrations just as high as in marine environments, although much less is known about their transport and fate given that less than 4% of MP studies during the past 15 years focused on freshwater systems.

[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]We are forming a “Plastic Pollution in Freshwater Systems” working group and are looking to organize individuals interested in collaborating on physical, chemical, environmental, ecological, biological, human health, social science, economics, etc. aspects of plastic pollution. In May, we will meet informally to assess interest and capabilities, then decide on whether to offer a seminar class in Fall 2019 on plastic pollution, and begin developing a strategy to submit a proposal(s) within the next year.[/vc_column_text][vc_column_text]

For more information on plastic pollution in freshwater systems see:
Freshwater Microplastics: Emerging Environmental Contaminants?
Editors: Martin Wagner & Scott Lambert

https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-61615-5

[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”45051″ style=”vc_box_outline_circle”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”3/4″][vc_column_text]

If interested in forming the “Plastic Pollution in Freshwater Systems” working group, please contact Jon Czuba, jczuba@vt.edu

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Drinking water Ideas News

Testing the water: Virginia Tech team launches system to predict water conditions

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]From Virginia Tech

April 2, 2019

Each morning, Jamie Morris, water production manager at the Western Virginia Water Authority in Roanoke, receives an automated email from a team of Virginia Tech researchers.

It resembles a weather forecast. But instead of predicting weather, it forecasts 16-day water quality conditions. It provides data about expected water temperatures and mixing, and soon it will include algae levels and amounts of dissolved oxygen in the Falling Creek Reservoir in Vinton.

Eventually, the water authority will begin using this information to determine how to chemically treat the reservoir water ahead of time, ensuring that it is palatable for Roanoke Valley residents. Falling Creek is one of four reservoirs managed by the authority.

“If we have a couple of days’ notice, that’s much better than having to react within minutes,” Morris said.

After more than a year, this unique water forecasting system, developed by a Virginia Tech team led by Cayelan Carey, an assistant professor of biological sciences, is ready to go. And it is drawing interest from groups around the globe who want to emulate it. In May, a representative from a group that manages lakes in Ireland and in other parts of Europe is making plans to visit Virginia Tech to see the forecasting system in action.

The work started in 2018 after Carey’s team received a $1 million Smart and Connected Communities grant from the National Science Foundation to develop a real-time water forecasting system for the reservoir. Since then, faculty and graduate students representing various disciplines have visited the reservoir weekly in the spring and summer and monthly in the winter to install sensors, take water samples, and collect other data.

Meanwhile, Falling Creek has been offline since June because of concern over poor water quality, Morris said.

The spring is an important time of year for tracking water quality. As outside temperatures warm, more algae can develop in water, creating taste and odor issues, and possibly staining.

Before Carey’s team got involved, the water authority’s lab technicians collected water samples by hand at the reservoir and took them back to the lab for testing, Morris said.

Now, “it’s much easier when I pull up a graph” from Carey’s lab, he said.

Sensors that Carey’s team installed in the reservoir collect a variety of information, such as carbon and oxygen levels and aquatic life. This information, combined with weather predictions and a model, is transmitted to a cloud network that water utility managers and scientists can access, Carey said.

A key gauge in this forecast is the likelihood of the lake turning over, which occurs when cold temperatures cause the water layers to break down and mix, bringing iron, manganese, and nutrients from the bottom of the lake to the top. This results in poor water quality, Morris said.

Carey’s team uses a modeling system that Quinn Thomas, an assistant professor of forest dynamics and ecosystem modeling at Virginia Tech, created to study the growth of loblolly pine forests. It translates well to water work, he said.

“We can post our forecast before the next day happens,” Thomas said. “That’s the foundation of the scientific method, making predictions based on inference that you’ve developed over time.”

Carey’s team includes undergraduate and graduate students, as well as faculty who are ecologists, social scientists, geologists, and engineers spanning the College of Science, the College of Engineering, and the College of Natural Resources and Environment.

Across disciplines, “the whole idea is that every piece feeds into another piece,” Carey said.

For example, Virginia Tech computer science students have visited the reservoir to understand how water data is collected, while natural science students are helping social science students collect data.

“By engaging in the hands-on experience of working together in really applied settings, but in ways that are predictable to making a project work, students are being exposed to different disciplines in ways that would never be possible in the classroom,” Carey said.

Whitney Woelmer, a Virginia Tech graduate student studying biological sciences who works in Carey’s lab, is one of the team members. Her passion for water and the environment stems from growing up in Michigan, surrounded by the state’s many lakes.

“Our job is to say what we think will happen,” Woelmer said of the forecasting system. Her focus is analyzing the presence of the reservoir’s phytoplankton, which are microscopic algae.

Both students and faculty are gearing up for more visits to the reservoir this summer. Woelmer also is leading a new water sampling initiative in the Beaverdam Creek Reservoir,  which is managed by the water authority, in Bedford County.

This summer, a Virginia Tech graduate student and a team of other students will survey Roanoke area residents about their water. Michael Sorice, an associate professor in the Department of Forest Resources and Environmental Conservation at Virginia Tech, is leading this group. They plan to survey 800 Roanoke Valley residents about their water and their trust of a water utility’s work to keep it safe for consumption. The team will go door-to-door with surveys for residents to fill out.

The idea is to understand a community’s response, Sorice said. He also is working with the water authority to identify ways that employees can integrate data from the forecasting system into their daily workflow.

The fundamental question — “How can we design this system so that it is meeting a real need for the water authority?” Sorice said.

Written by Jenny Kincaid Boone

[hr_shadow]

[/vc_column_text][vc_raw_html]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[/vc_raw_html][vc_separator][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Categories
Climate Change Global Change Ideas New Publications News

Ancient ‘Snowball Earth’ thawed out in a flash

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]From Sciencemag.org

BY LUCAS JOEL | April 2, 2019

More than half a billion years ago, our planet was a giant snowball hurtling through space. Glaciers blanketed the globe all the way to the equator in one of the mysterious “Snowball Earth” events geologists think occurred at least twice in Earth’s ancient past. Now, scientists have found that the final snowball episode likely ended in a flash about 635 million years ago—a geologically fast event that may have implications for today’s human-driven global warming.

The ice, which built up over several thousand years, “melted in no more than 1 million years,” says Shuhai Xiao, a paleobiologist at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg who was part of the team that made the discovery. That’s the blink of an eye in our planet’s 4.56-billion-year history, suggesting the globe reached a sudden tipping point, Xiao says. Although the  team doesn’t know for certain what caused it, carbon dioxide emitted by ancient volcanoes may have triggered a greenhouse event, causing the ice sheets to thaw rapidly.

To shine light on the pace of deglaciation, Xiao and colleagues dated volcanic rocks from southern China’s Yunnan province. These were embedded below another kind of rock called a cap carbonate—unique deposits of limestone and dolostone that formed during Snowball Earth’s shutdown in response to high levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Using radiometric dating techniques, the team found the volcanic rocks were 634.6 million years old, give or take about 880,000 years. Alone, this single new date couldn’t reveal the speed at which the melting happened. But in 2005, a different team of scientists dated volcanic rocks from above a similar cap at a different location—in China’s Guizhou province. They were dated to 635.2 million years, give or take 570,000 years.

Together, the two samples suggest the melting event was a quick thaw of about 1 million years, Xiao and his colleagues wrote last month in Geology. The key, Xiao explains, is that these two dates are far more precise than those of past samples, with error bars of less than 1 million years. Those error bars essentially bracket the period in which the cap carbonates formed—and, thus, bound the period of the final Snowball Earth thawing event. Because previously discovered samples have error bars of several million years or more, Xiao says these new dates are the first that can be used to calculate the pace of melting with any certainty.

However, because the two new samples come from southern China, they don’t paint a global picture of the ancient thaw, says Carol Dehler, a geologist at Utah State University in Logan. To do that, scientists would need to find datable volcanic rocks from other parts of the world, which are about “as common as unicorns,” she jokes. But, she adds, they might be out there “waiting to be discovered.”

Meanwhile, understanding the nature of these ancient glaciations could help scientists dealing with climate change today: “I think one of the biggest messages that Snowball Earth can send humanity,” Dehler says, “is that it shows the Earth’s capabilities to change in extreme ways on short and longer time scales.”

[hr]

 

[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]