One of the disadvantages to having a website is that, when it is ignored, it looks like you haven't been up to anything! In truth, the early warm weather has prompted an acceleration of summer research. I'm hoping to update soon about some of the exciting frontiers we are looking to explore in the next few months, as we settle on methods and sites. For now, I want to share this beautiful map created by HINT.FM, which shows a map of wind speeds and direction in the conterminous U.S. states. This map is built from data derived via the National Digital Forecast Database. See it here.

For those of us who check the 7 day National Weather Service (NWS) outlook religiously looking for snowfall in the winter, it's been a tough few months even in (usually) snowy Syracuse. There is no better way to visualize this difference from a year ago (to equivalent date) than to look at the NWS' National Snow Analysis. This data product is a combination of on the ground, cooperative member measurements of both snow depth and snow water equivalent, as well as input from remote sensing platforms (such as the MODIS, one of the wickedly cool NASA Terra instruments) to develop models for the coterminous U.S.:

2011 - 2012:

As you can see, 2010 - 2011 was marked by heavy snowfall of long duration, whereas 2011 - 2012 to date has been marked by mild snowfall in the finger lakes region (below and to the right of Ontario) with regular melting. Temperatures later this week are likely to lead to substantial northward retreat of meager snow totals present now.

I have tagged this post under "climate change", though I claim no particular expertise. However, reading and understanding the physics of climate change as they relate to yearly winter weather phenomena are not beyond anyone with sufficient science literacy and a good cup of coffee. Of particular interest is the important of the Arctic Oscillation and its ability to contort the jet stream as it moves across North America and beyond. In the 2010 - 2011 winter, The Arctic Oscillation Index was strongly negative, leading to the "refrigerator door" phenomena whereby cold air dumped across the coterminous U.S. (and Canada and much of the Arctic were left with above average temperatures). For most of the 2011 - 2012 winter to date, the index has been positive. You can see the generalized effect of this in a graphic by J. Wallace from the University of Washington (hosted by the National Snow & Ice Data Center):

_(Re-printed from the National Snow and Ice Data Center)

Ultimately, the Arctic Oscillation in a negative phase tends to increases the amplitude of the jet stream, delivering cold air effectively to my neck of the woods, and perhaps yours. One in its positive phase will lead to more seasonally mild temperatures (although, when combined with La Nina, it might be difficult to separate exactly what is responsible for our current winter weather). Dr. Jeff Masters, with the Weather Underground, has a great post about many of these issues and their potential relationship with climate change.

Of course, the fact that it is warm or cold today does not validate or disprove any particular aspect of climate theory; we must be careful about extrapolating too much from noisy weather over the short term. However, as Dr. Masters points out, the reduction in arctic sea ice has a very plausible relationship to extreme weather, in part manifested by swings in the Arctic Oscillation Index.

So can we expect a weakly positive arctic oscillation index for the rest of the season? As best I can tell, the only forward data on this issue comes from the NWS Climate Prediction Center:

As you can see, they are calling for movement towards a negative Arctic Oscillation near the first of the month. This will certainly lead to cold weather and buckets of snowfall! A guy can dream right?

It has taken a few weeks to fully digest the EPA STAR Conference, primarily as I catch up on schoolwork and other responsibilities! It was great to meet so many folks from all over the U.S. doing high impact research in various environmental fields. I certainly came away inspired and ready to dig in to my own work.

Other than the networking opportunities, there were several items that represent great "take aways" for anyone engaged in research or resume building. I've shared them here.

Doing the right things, but doing them the wrong way. Dr. Paul Anastas, who gave the morning keynote, reinforced this repeatedly. Largely regarded as the father of green chemistry, Dr. Anastas has been advocating a systemic approach to environmental problem solving for decades. It's a great reminder to keep our heads up, and avoid deepening and narrowing our specialty to the point that we miss the larger context. On that note:

You are more than the sum of your (often narrow) training. This point was reinforced particularly well by Melissa Panger of the U.S. EPA, formerly of UC Berkeley and George Washington University. A primatologist by training, Dr. Panger left the academic world to pursue a career with EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs (a decidedly different role), in 2004. Her exact quote, "knowledge in the sciences is transferable", was complemented by a number of panelists in the Private Industry breakout session. Their advice was to maintain a broad portfolio, both by training and by evidence of interest.

Linking academic achievement to leadership, teamwork and communication skills. Admittedly, this one sounds a little vague. But the idea that underpins it is to demonstrate a set of skills (communication, teamwork, leadership) through your academic work, not purely as narrow extra-curricular activities added to your resume. This might include finding opportunities to complete class projects in a community setting, presenting research in a non-academic environment, and building a portfolio of work that goes beyond assignments and peer-reviewed publications.

Getting your work out there. Students, particularly at the graduate level, are often encouraged to maintain a private website and/or blog about their work. This is a great idea, but it's often difficult to know how to take content shared on these resources and get them out to a wider audience. Kelly Widener, Assistant Center Director for Research Communications for EPA's National Center for Environmental Research (NCER), had some specific suggestions for handling this:
1) Contact a publication (academic, trade, web), magazine, newspaper or any other resource you are interested in, and ask the editor what the themes are for the upcoming issues. Your content will have a better chance of being included if it can be tailored to their needs;
2) Develop a portfolio with evidence of your work. If you are interested in sharing content or writing an article, it's helpful to have examples of the kind of work you are capable of doing;
3) Share your work with the EPA and other interested groups/agencies! This can be done via The EPA's Greenversations blog or Science Wednesday section of that blog. The EPA also runs a bi-monthly newsletter, Science Matters, which can feature content.
Although many of these links are EPA-specific, the principle is transferable. 

Keep working and sharing!

Yesterday marked the first full day here at the EPA Graduate Fellowship Conference at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. The conference is unusual in that it brings together accomplished scientists working (or attempting to do so) on high impact research, but does not have research as its focus. Instead, everything from the welcome address by Drs. Jones and Sanders to the keynote, plenary and breakout sessions have been designed to help fellows see their role in the scientific process, and find ways to balance other responsibilities like professional development, advocacy, and family. I've been pleasantly surprised how effectively this message has been delivered.

Some highlights:
Dr. Paul Anastas, Science Advisor to the EPA and Assistant Administrator for the EPA's Office of Research and Development (ORD), gave the morning keynote. He focused on the need to move from an exclusively reductionist approach to environmental science and problem solving to a systems approach. This was explained in part by using biofuels for illustration: it's possible to diversify the energy portfolio of the U.S. by including more biofuels, which has the benefit of reducing the need for oil and gas extraction and potentially reducing the carbon footprint associated with this fuel use (of course, this is itself highly dependent on the fuel). But in so doing, we place food production in direct competition with fuel production. A purely reductionist approach (reducing GHG emissions) absent a systemic evaluation of connectivity will not work.

Dr. Anastas also provided several book recommendations. The first is the "green book" recently released by the National Academy of Sciences, entitled Sustainability and the U.S. EPA. This book was written at the request of Secretary Jackson, who asked the National Academy of Science to evaluate the EPA's approach to sustainability. The second, by Patrick Lencioni, is titled Death By Meeting, and relates to the effectiveness of our all too frequent meetings. The third, by Garr Reynolds, is Presentation Zen (more information can be seen here). The final recommendation by Randy Olson is the book Don't Be Such a Scientist. This one offers a view on why scientific work doesn't always translate to the general public.

Another highlight was the policy breakout session which included Doug Boucher, Director of the Tropical Forest and Climate Initiative for the Union of Concerned Scientists. Dr. Boucher made the point that it is naive to think that scientists can operate wholly independent of the political process, and in attempting to do so, often create an artificial persona that is not relatable to the public. He recommended two readings from very different points on the political spectrum. The first, by Henry Waxman, former Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, is The Waxman Report, which relates to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. The second is The Triumph of Politics by David Stockman, a former Reagan Administrator.

One final (out of many possible) item: Dr. Jose Zambrana, one of the fellowship administrators, introduced the Open Source Ecology project, which if you haven't heard of (and I had not), you can check out via TED talk here.

One consequence of spending a lot of times out of doors conducting field work is that there is less time to keep up responsibilities such as a blog! But looking back at several months of intense data work in some very beautiful parts of Upstate New York, I am certainly not complaining. I will be posting some of our results and explaining our process here in the next few days. Till then, I will leave you with this extraordinary picture of Hurricane Irene, currently preparing to reek havoc on the mid-Atlantic and New England. Wondrous to behold isn't it? 

Just a quick note here as we enter the long weekend: I was contacted this morning and offered support under the prestigious EPA STAR Fellowship. It will give me a great deal of flexibility in pursuing my research and schooling, and provide additional opportunities for collaboration with other fellowship recipients. I'm grateful to my adviser, Dr. Ted Endreny, and my recommenders, including Dr. Erika Elswick, my undergraduate adviser, and Dr. Steve Mims at Kentucky State University for their help and support. Maria Hosmer-Briggs and Andrea Webster at SUNY-ESF were also very helpful in editing the proposal. It's a great day!

With school wrapping up for the semester it has been challenging to find time to post about this one., although there is a lot of work wrapped up in this! On April 26, 2011, members of the Ecological Engineering course participated in a rain garden construction exercise at two locations within Syracuse: the Inner Harbor adjacent to Onondaga Lake, and Frazer Elementary, a K-8 school near downtown. This work followed several weeks worth of effort determining rain garden design, purchasing supplies, obtaining permits, and interacting with stakeholders at both sites. My teammates and I (Djibrilla Rapant, Sean Gallagher, Rachael Weiter and Mike Belveg had a lot of person investment in these rain gardens, and are grateful to Professor Stew Diemont for involving the entire class and providing funds for materials.
Our rain gardens got an immediate test with the rain event that began around 4:00 p.m. in the Syracuse area, which included flash flooding and one 1/2 inch hail. Our construction project at Frazer Elementary held up quite well. The project at the Inner Harbor was flooded for a longer period of time (several days), and some maintenance may be required over the summer. As part of of our work, we also submitted for an Onondaga Lake Partnership Grant to facilitate building several larger rain gardens (ours were a meager 15 square feet each) with professional signage. The Inner Harbor rain garden is located on the City of Syracuse Creekwalk, which connects downtown to the Inner Harbor and eventually Onondaga Lake. This Creekwalk project will be a great opportunity for the public to view our rain garden and the accompanying signage, and potentially encourage the use of green infrastructure at home. Rain gardens are a great way to manage stormwater on-site, and avoid costly upgrades to infrastructure to manage these inputs to our sewer systems. Even without the grant, future Ecological Engineering classes will be able to maintain our new rain gardens and conduct additional outreach work. Our final poster can be seen below. This project will lead to future collaboration with elementary students at Frazer Elementary.

Lots of late night tweaking involved in this one. First attempt at creating some usable model output for my research, and some processing of flume work from a few weeks ago. Hope you like it!

My research (described in greater detail under Research & Recent Work) will involve examining some of the assumptions that underpin modern stream restoration techniques, including how structures (such as riffles) are built, how they alter flow paths, residence times of mixed intra-gravel and surface water, and other features of these systems. You can see one example of a constructed riffle to the right. Why do we care? Well, the connection between important functions such as nutrient processing and hyporheic flow - the mixing of surface water and shallow groundwater - is well documented. Restoration is attempting to restore or improve functions such as nutrient processing.  Because structural elements are known to influence hyporheic flow, you can deduce that there will also be an influence on important functions (even if we can not always infer what this influence will be). Thus, the physical dimensions of restoration structures and their constituents have an important influence on our ability to examine, and hopefully create, functional improvement. Indeed, despite the strong influence of restoration structure elements on target functions, little evidence exists in restoration for design choices specifically targeted at hyporheic flow metrics, such as the subsurface flow paths and residence time of hyporheic water.

Part of my examination involves looking at how hyporheic flow paths and residence times are altered through the placement of areas of high and low permeability within constructed riffles. The image to the left shows two different scenarios for a constructed riffle in profile view. The upper image is a constructed riffle, identical to the image above, without the use of any areas of low permeability (no flow barrier is present). The bottom portion of the image is with a flow barrier from the riffle crest (peak elevation in the riffle) to the bottom of the flume. Although it may not look like much, obvious differences are apparent when dye tracing is used to show both flow paths and the residence time of hyporheic water within the riffle subsurface. The flow barrier induces deeper flow paths with a much longer residence time within the intra-gravel space. Without this flow barrier, piping through the riffle creates more diffuse, horizontal flow with a lower residence time. At this stage, my efforts are focused on a very basic examination of how design choices can create alterations in these flow paths, as a precursor to a more robust examination in our larger flume and modeling based on computational fluid dynamics. For now, I just get to play around. Fun stuff!

It has been a substantial and unintended break since my last update- a product of a very busy semester schedule, several grant applications, and illness. Hopefully more is to come in the next few weeks!
One of my fellow graduate students, Dave Eichorn, has been doing some fantastic work creating video teaching modules from the introductory course he teaches on climate. Dave is a meteorologist with 30 years of experience (formerly of WSYR-TV), so his presentation skills and depth of knowledge on this subject are impressive. You can see his most recent work on Arctic warming moving colder air south during the winter here: 

Climate Change: Arctic warming pushes winter weather farther south