USGS ScienceSearch

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy”

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

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

21 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

Executive summary. In Second State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR2): A Sustained Assessment Report

Central to life on Earth, carbon is essential to the molecular makeup of all living things and plays a key role in regulating global climate. To understand carbon’s role in these processes, researchers measure and evaluate carbon stocks and fluxes. A stock is the quantity of carbon contained in a pool or reservoir in the Earth system (e.g., carbon in forest trees), and a flux is the direction and rate of carbon’s transfer between pools (e.g., the movement of carbon from the atmosphere into forest trees during photosynthesis). This document, the Second State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR2), examines the patterns of carbon stocks and fluxes—collectively called the “carbon cycle.” Emphasis is given to these patterns in specific sectors (e.g., agriculture and energy) and ecosystems (e.g., forests and coastal waters) and to the response of the carbon cycle to human activity. The purpose of SOCCR2 is to assess the current state of the North American carbon cycle and to present recent advances in understanding the factors that influence it. Concentrating on North America—Canada, the United States, and Mexico—the report describes carbon cycling for air, land, inland waters (streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs), and coastal waters (see Figure ES.1, p. 23). The questions framing the publication A U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan (Michalak et al., 2011) inspired development of three slightly modified questions that guide SOCCR2’s content and focus on North America in a global context: How have natural processes and human actions affected the global carbon cycle on land, in the atmosphere, in the ocean and other aquatic systems, and at ecosystem interfaces (e.g., coastal, wetland, and urban-rural)? How have socioeconomic trends affected atmospheric levels of the primary carbon-containing gases, carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4)? How have species, ecosystems, natural resources, and human systems been impacted by increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations, associated changes in climate, and carbon management decisions and practices? SOCCR2 synthesizes the most recent understanding of carbon cycling in North America, assessing new carbon cycle findings and information, the state of knowledge regarding core methods used to study the carbon cycle, and future research needed to best inform carbon management and policy options. Focusing on scientific developments in the decade since the First State of the Carbon Cycle Report (SOCCR1; CCSP 2007), SOCCR2 summarizes the past, current, and projected state of carbon sources, sinks, and natural processes, as well as contributions by human activities. In addition to CO2 and CH4, the report sometimes discusses nitrous oxide (N2O), a GHG associated with activities and processes that affect fluxes of carbon gases.1 SOCCR2 also describes improvements in analysis tools; developments in decision support; and new insights into ecosystem carbon cycling, human causes of changes in the carbon cycle, and social science perspectives on carbon. Since publication of SOCCR1, coordinated research from agencies in the three North American countries has enabled innovative observational, analytical, and modeling capabilities to further advance understanding of the North American carbon cycle (see Appendix D: Carbon Measurement Approaches and Accounting Frameworks, p. 834). Some of the report’s main conclusions, based on the Key Findings of each chapter, are highlighted in Box ES.1, Main Findings of SOCCR2, p. 24.

Report

Geochemical legacies and the future health of cities: A tale of two neurotoxins in urban soils

The past and future of cities are inextricably linked, a linkage that can be seen clearly in the long-term impacts of urban geochemical legacies. As loci of population as well as the means of employment and industry to support these populations, cities have a long history of co-locating contaminating practices and people, sometimes with negative implications for human health. Working at the intersection between environmental processes, communities, and human health is critical to grapple with environmental legacies and to support healthy, sustainable, and growing urban populations. An emerging area of environmental health research is to understand the impacts of chronic exposures and exposure mixtures—these impacts are poorly studied, yet may pose a significant threat to population health. Acute exposure to lead (Pb), a powerful neurotoxin to which children are particularly susceptible, has largely been eliminated in the U.S. and other countries through policy-based restrictions on leaded gasoline and lead-based paints. But the legacy of these sources remains in the form of surface soil Pb contamination, a common problem in cities and one that has only recently emerged as a widespread chronic exposure mechanism in cities. Some urban soils are also contaminated with another neurotoxin, mercury (Hg). The greatest human exposure to Hg is through fish consumption, so eating fish caught in urban areas presents risks for toxic Hg exposure. The potential double impact of chronic exposure to these two neurotoxins is pronounced in cities. Overall, there is a paradigmatic shift from reaction to and remediation of acute exposures towards a more nuanced understanding of the dynamic cycling of persistent environmental contaminants with resultant widespread and chronic exposure of inner-city dwellers, leading to chronic toxic illness and disability at substantial human and social cost.

Indiana

Proceedings of a Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning Workshop for the Western United States

Recent scientific and ocean policy assessments demonstrate that a fundamental change in our current management system is required to achieve the long-term health of our ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes in order to sustain the services and benefits they provide to society. The present (2011) species- and sector-centric way we manage these ecosystems cannot account properly for cumulative effects, sustaining multiple ecosystem services, and holistically and explicitly evaluating the tradeoffs associated with proposed alternative and multiple human uses. A transition to an ecosystem-based approach to management and conservation of coastal and marine resources is needed. Competing uses and activities such as commerce, recreation, cultural practices, energy development, conservation, and national security are increasing pressure for new and expanded resource usage in coastal marine ecosystems. Current management efforts use a sector-by-sector approach that mostly focuses on a limited range of tools and outcomes [for example, oil and gas leases, fishery management plans, and Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)]. A comprehensive, ecosystem-based, and proactive approach to planning and managing these uses and activities is needed. Further, scientific understanding and information are essential to achieve an integrated decision-making process that includes knowledge of ecosystem services, existing and possible future conditions, and potential consequences of natural and anthropogenic events. Because no single government agency has executive authority for coastal or ocean resources, conflicting objectives around competing uses abound. In recent years, regional- and state-level initiatives in Coastal and Marine Spatial Planning (CMSP) have emerged to coordinate management activities. In some respects, the components and steps of the overall CMSP process are similar to how existing ocean resources are regulated and managed. For example, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) uses spatial planning exercises in State Renewable Energy Task Force meetings to identify competing and conflicting ocean uses, and to delineate areas suitable for renewable energy development. Similarly terrestrial areas such as in national parks and national wildlife refuges managed by the Department of the Interior (DOI) prepare management plans for preservation and restoration of species and habitats of concern, some of which are protected by law. The analogy to CMSP is clear - multiple users and multiple expectations, resulting in the requirement to establish spatial plans for management of different resources and different ecosystem services. A two-day workshop on December 1-2, 2010, was convened for DOI representatives and several key non-DOI participants with roles in CMSP as a step toward clarifying national perspectives and consequences of the National Ocean Policy for the West (appendix 1). Discussions helped to develop an understanding of CMSP from the federal perspective and to identify regional priorities. An overarching theme was to promote a better understanding of current and future science needs. The workshop format included briefings by key Federal agencies on their understanding of the national focus followed by discussion of regional issues, including the needs for scientific information and coordination. The workshop also explored potential science contributions by Federal agencies and others; utilizing current capabilities, data, and information systems; and provided a foundation for possible future regional workshops focusing in turn on the West Coast Region (California, Oregon, and Washington), Pacific Islands (sometimes referred to as Oceania) and Alaska. Participants were asked to share information in the following areas, recognizing that the purpose would be to learn more about the national perspective (see appendixes 2-4): Explore how the Western U.S. (Alaska, Pacific Islands, and West Coast Region) migh

Open-File Report