Framing of Geoengineering Affects Support for Climate Change Mitigation

The growing recognition that climate change mitigation alone will be inadequate has led scientists and policymakers to discuss climate geoengineering. An experiment with a US sample found, contrary to previous research, that reading about geoengineering did not reduce conservatives’ skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Moreover, depending on how it is framed, geoengineering can reduce support for mitigation among both conservatives and non-conservatives. When geoengineering is framed as a major solution, people worry less about climate change, leading to reduced mitigation support. When framed as disastrous, people perceived geoengineering as riskier, also leading to a decrease in mitigation support. A more moderate framing of geoengineering as a partial solution is less susceptible to moral hazard effects. Overall, results suggest that geoengineering will not lessen political polarization over anthropogenic climate change, and could undercut support for mitigation efforts. Instead, framing geoengineering as a small piece to solving a big puzzle seems to be the best strategy to weaken this potential moral hazard.     

Footprints for Sustainability: The Next Steps

The concept of an ecological footprint is based on the understanding that every individual human appropriates a share of the productive and assimilative capacity of the biosphere. An ecological footprint corresponds to this exclusive biologically productive area that a defined population uses for all its resource requirements and wastes, and is expressed in terms of bioproductive space, with world-average productivity. Humanity's footprint or its aggregate ecological demand can only temporarily exceed the productive and assimilative capacity of the biosphere without liquidating and weakening the natural capital on which humanity depends fundamentally. Therefore, accounting tools for quantifying humanity's use of nature are essential for overall assessments of human impact as well as for planning specific steps towards a sustainable future.This paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the ecological footprint as an ecological accounting method, points out research needs for improvement of the analysis, and suggests potential new applications. The paper identifies ten new applications of the tool to make it applicable at various geographic scales and for a number of analytical and didactic purposes. Then nine methodological improvements are suggested that could refine the currently applied method, making assessments more sensitive to a larger number of ecological impacts. It concludes that many crucial questions pertinent to building a sustainable society can be addressed by current ecological footprint research. By making the method more complete, this tool could evolve from being largely of pedagogical use to become a strategic tool for policy analysis.     

Bison and cattle grazing management,bare ground coverage,and links to suspended sediment concentrations in grassland streams

This study quantified the impact of bison and cattle grazing management practices on bare ground coverage at the watershed, riparian, and forested riparian scales within the Flint Hills ecoregion in Kansas. We tested for correlations between bare ground coverage and fluvial suspended sediment concentrations during base‐flow and storm‐flow events. We used remotely sensed imagery combined with field surveys to classify ground cover and quantify the presence of bare ground. Base‐flow water samples were collected bi‐monthly during rain‐free periods and 24 h following precipitation events. Storm‐flow water samples were collected on the rising limb of the hydrograph, using single‐stage automatic samplers. Ungrazed treatments contained the lowest coverage of bare ground at the watershed, riparian, and forested riparian scales. Bison treatments contained the highest coverage of bare ground at the watershed scale, while high‐density cattle treatments contained the highest coverage of bare ground at the riparian and forested riparian scales. In bison and cattle‐grazed treatments, a majority of bare ground was located near fence lines, watershed boundaries, and third‐ and fourth‐order stream segments. Inorganic sediment concentrations at base flow were best predicted by riparian bare ground coverage, while storm‐flow sediment concentrations were best predicted by watershed scale bare ground coverage.     

Benchmarking Optical/Thermal Satellite Imagery for Estimating Evapotranspiration and Soil Moisture in Decision Support Tools

Generally, one expects evapotranspiration (ET) maps derived from optical/thermal Landsat and MODIS satellite imagery to improve decision support tools and lead to superior decisions regarding water resources management. However, there is lack of supportive evidence to accept or reject this expectation. We “benchmark” three existing hydrologic decision support tools with the following benchmarks: annual ET for the ET Toolbox developed by the United States Bureau of Reclamation, predicted rainfall‐runoff hydrographs for the Gridded Surface/Subsurface Hydrologic Analysis model developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the average annual groundwater recharge for the Distributed Parameter Watershed Model used by Daniel B. Stephens & Associates. The conclusion of this benchmark study is that the use of NASA/USGS optical/thermal satellite imagery can considerably improve hydrologic decision support tools compared to their traditional implementations. The benefits of improved decision making, resulting from more accurate results of hydrologic support systems using optical/thermal satellite imagery, should substantially exceed the costs for acquiring such imagery and implementing the remote sensing algorithms. In fact, the value of reduced error in estimating average annual groundwater recharge in the San Gabriel Mountains, California alone, in terms of value of water, may be as large as $1 billion, more than sufficient to pay for one new Landsat satellite.     

Characterizing Drought in Irrigated Agricultural Systems: The Surface Water Delivery Index (SWDI)

Quantifying surface water shortages in arid and semiarid agricultural regions is challenging because limited water supplies are distributed over long distances based on complex water management systems constrained by legal, economic, and social frameworks that evolve with time. In such regions, the water supply is often derived in a climate dramatically different from where the water is diverted to meet agricultural demand. The existing drought indices which rely on local climate do not portray the complexities of the economic and legal constraints on water delivery. Nor do these indices quantify the shortages that occur in drought. Therefore, this research proposes a methodological approach to define surface water shortages in irrigated agricultural systems using a newly developed index termed the Surface Water Delivery Index (SWDI). The SWDI can be used to uniformly quantify surface water deficits/shortages at the end of the irrigation season. Results from the SWDI clearly illustrate how water shortages in droughts identified by the existing indices (e.g., SPI and PDSI) vary strongly both within and between basins. Some surface water entities are much more prone to water shortages than other entities based both on their source of water supply and water right portfolios.     

Augmenting Watershed Model Calibration with Incorporation of Ancillary Data Sources and Qualitative Soft Data Sources

Watershed simulation models such as the Soil & Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) can be calibrated using “hard data” such as temporal streamflow observations; however, users may find upon examination of model outputs, that the calibrated models may not reflect actual watershed behavior. Thus, it is often advantageous to use “soft data” (i.e., qualitative knowledge such as expected denitrification rates that observed time series do not typically exist) to ensure that the calibrated model is representative of the real world. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of coupling SWAT‐Check (a post‐evaluation framework for SWAT outputs) and IPEAT‐SD (Integrated Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty Analysis Tool‐Soft & hard Data evaluation) to constrain the bounds of soft data during SWAT auto‐calibration. IPEAT‐SD integrates 59 soft data variables to ensure SWAT does not violate physical processes known to occur in watersheds. IPEAT‐SD was evaluated for two case studies where soft data such as denitrification rate, nitrate attributed from subsurface flow to total discharge ratio, and total sediment loading were used to conduct model calibration. Results indicated that SWAT model outputs may not satisfy reasonable soft data responses without providing pre‐defined bounds. IPEAT‐SD provides an efficient and rigorous framework for users to conduct future studies while considering both soft data and traditional hard information measures in watershed modeling.     

Variability and Trends in Runoff Efficiency in the Conterminous United States

Variability and trends in water‐year runoff efficiency (RE) — computed as the ratio of water‐year runoff (streamflow per unit area) to water‐year precipitation — in the conterminous United States (CONUS) are examined for the 1951 through 2012 period. Changes in RE are analyzed using runoff and precipitation data aggregated to United States Geological Survey 8‐digit hydrologic cataloging units (HUs). Results indicate increases in RE for some regions in the north‐central CONUS and large decreases in RE for the south‐central CONUS. The increases in RE in the north‐central CONUS are explained by trends in climate, whereas the large decreases in RE in the south‐central CONUS likely are related to groundwater withdrawals from the Ogallala aquifer to support irrigated agriculture.     

Molecular tools for bathing water assessment in Europe: Balancing social science research with a rapidly developing environmental science evidence-base

The use of molecular tools, principally qPCR, versus traditional culture-based methods for quantifying microbial parameters (e.g., Fecal Indicator Organisms) in bathing waters generates considerable ongoing debate at the science–policy interface. Advances in science have allowed the development and application of molecular biological methods for rapid (~2 h) quantification of microbial pollution in bathing and recreational waters. In contrast, culture-based methods can take between 18 and 96 h for sample processing. Thus, molecular tools offer an opportunity to provide a more meaningful statement of microbial risk to water-users by providing near-real-time information enabling potentially more informed decision-making with regard to water-based activities. However, complementary studies concerning the potential costs and benefits of adopting rapid methods as a regulatory tool are in short supply. We report on findings from an international Working Group that examined the breadth of social impacts, challenges, and research opportunities associated with the application of molecular tools to bathing water regulations.