Bathymetry, volcanoes (green triangles), and earthquakes in the Mediterranean area. SubMap: Arnauld Heuret, Jérôme Losq and Serge Lallemand
The General Assembly is not only for researchers but for teachers and educators with an interest in the geosciences also. Every year the Geosciences Information For Teachers (GIFT) is organised by the EGU Committee on Education to bring first class science closer to primary and high school teachers. The topic of the 2017 edition of GIFT is ‘The Mediterranean’. This year’s workshop is co-organised with the Italy’s National Institute of Geophysics and Volcanology (INGV) and will be taking place on 24–26 April 2017 at the EGU General Assembly in Vienna, Austria.
The Mediterranean is a key region for understanding the complexities and delicate relationships between civilization, natural processes, catastrophic events and protection of the environment. The region is densely populated with progressively increasing anthropogenic pressures, which, when combined with the peculiar geological setting, result in heightened vulnerability to climate change enhanced by increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide. The workshop will explore most of these aspects, and will include a hands-on experience session.
Teachers from Europe and around the world can apply to participate in the 2017 edition of GIFT, and to receive a travel and accommodation stipend to attend the workshop, by November 15. Application information is available for download in PDF format, a document which also includes the preliminary programme of the workshop.
Not sure what to expect? More information about GIFT workshops can be found in the GIFT section of the EGU website. You can also take a look at a blog post about what participants could expect from the 2016 workshop and also learn what the workshop is like from a teacher’s perspective here. You might also find videos of the 2016 workshop useful too.
Imagine you find yourself standing atop a wooden box in the middle of your home town, on a rainy weekend day, with the sole aim of talking to passersby about your research work. It can be a rather daunting prospect! How do you decide what the take-home message of your work is: which single nugget of information do you want members of the public to take away after having spoken to you? Even more important still, how are you going to grab their attention in the first place? After all, they’ll be going about their business and not expecting to see you there, on top of your box, least of all talk to you about your work! But if you fancy the challenge, then read on, as Stephanie Zihms, the ECS Representative of the Earth Magnetism and Rock Physics Division, describes her experience doing just that!
Now in its 6th year Soapbox Science is spreading and I was selected to take part in the 1st Edinburgh event on July 24th on The Mound. The weather was typically Scottish but it didn’t seem to bother the crowds and it definitely did not dampen the enthusiasm of the 12 speakers.
I have done a range of different outreach events but I was particularly drawn to Soapbox Science because it specifically promotes female scientists and their work. It was great to meet the other scientists and to see the range of soapbox “performances” as well as the variety of props utilised to showcase each research topic.
The scary thing for this type of event is that you don’t know who might stop, listen & ask questions since we were standing on The Mound in Edinburgh – this also means that your material has to be accessible and engaging to a wide audience.
Here is what I did to explain my research in geomechanics: Going deeper underground – why do we want to know how rocks behave?
I opted for a big PVC banner showing different heights & depths. With help from the audience I added a picture to each line to show what it represented. I used this banner to set the scene for the type of work I do. I’m a researcher in geomechanics – I want to understand why rocks deform the way they do and what part or component of the rock controls the deformation. The rocks I work with are related to a very deep oil field that lies under 2km of ocean and 5km of rocks. It would take me ~1 hour to run this. At this depth the pressure squeezing the rocks is very high – each square meter of rock experiences the pressure of 16 African elephants per km of depth. So at 5km depths that is 80 African Elephants per square meter.
Under these high pressures the slightest change in conditions e.g. through oil production affects the rocks and changes the distribution of this pressure onto the rocks. I want to understand how different rocks respond to these changes. I do this by collecting rock samples that are easy to get to e.g. from quarries. But they have to be similar to the ones found in the oil field of interest – we call this an analogue (or think of it as a sibling).
Rock sample before it is placed into the Hoek Cell. Image Credit: Stephanie Zihms
In the lab at Heriot-Watt University I have an apparatus that lets me deform rocks under different conditions. The sample, usually a core sample (seeimage above) gets placed into a rubber sleeve before being placed into a stainless steel cell called a Hoek Cell. The space between the rubber sleeve and stainless stell cell is filled with oil that can be pressurised. That way the rock samples can be placed under different pressures that mimic the conditions at different depths. After this initial pressurisation the rock is squeezed in a press until it deforms. When the readings pass a peak value it indicates that the rock sample can’t withstand the squeeze pressure any longer and the test is stopped.
Unfortunatley we can’t see what happens to the rock during the squeezing process but we measure the sample before and after testing – we can also take a x-ray images of the entire sample. We do this with the sample before it is deformed and then again afterwards. This technique lets us see inside the rock – similar to having a x-ray in hospital to see if a bone is broken or not.
Using special computer software we can then look at different parts of the rock’s inside – I am particularly interested in the fractures that formed during the deformation and I’m working on ways to relate these observed features to the rock type, grain size and pore shape.
Why is this important? As I mentioned above I look at rocks related to an oil field – and the response of the rocks to oil production could hinder or help extraction. Oil companies are very interested in predicting the rock response to ensure it does not have a negative impact on oil production.
3D reconstruction of the rock sample using the x-ray images. Image Credit: Stephanie Zihms
Additionally this research is also relevant to other areas: for example geothermal energy. One method of generating geothermal energy is by pumping water into a rock that is hotter than the surface to increase the water temperature. When this water then reaches the surface it can be used to generate electricity. Adding water into the rock also changes the pressure conditions. Another field is Carbon Capture & Storage – If we want to store CO2 securely and long-term into the subsurface e.g. in a disused gas field – understanding how rocks respond to changes in conditions firstly by removal of gas & secondly by filling the rocks with CO2 is important.
The straight line career plan may no longer be a realistic expectation for undergraduates. The straight ring . Credit: Jerome Mayaud (distributed via imaggeo.egu.eu)
‘What do you want to be when you grow up?’ From a tender age, we are regularly asked that question, with answers ranging from the downright hilarious through to those kids who’ve got it all figured out. As we grow older the question of what career we want to pursue carries more weight and the outcome of our choices is scrutinised closely. In today’s GeoEd column, Rhian Meara (a geography and geology lecturer at Swansea University), explores the notion that as young adults adapt to a changing working environment, it is ok to be unsure, to change your mind, and that pursuing the one-time holy grail, linear career path might no longer be a realistic expectation.
My role as a lecturer in the Geography Department at Swansea University includes participating in the university admissions process which includes organising and attending open and visit days, reading application forms and meeting with potential applicants and their parents. Time and time again, I’m asked about employability, work experience opportunities and career pathways – what sort of work will I get after graduation? What are the work experience opportunities? Should I go into post-graduate studies? Will the degree give me transferable skills? What if I choose not to work in the same field as my degree? Current and prospective students are under immense pressure to know what they want to do with their lives from an early age and often feel like failures if they don’t have a “plan”. And as tuition fees continue to rise, the idea of having a post-graduation “plan” to justify the expense of higher education is becoming more and more important.
The inspiration for this post came after a recent school visit, where most of the students were 16 years old and had no idea what they wanted to study or even if they wanted to go to university. My colleague and I discussed these issues with the students and answered their questions. We explained our backgrounds, what we had studied and how we had gotten to where we are now. My colleague and I had been to the same high school and were now both lecturers at the same university, but our paths in between have been completely different.
Many of us grew up with the “straight line plan”. That is:
Finish school → Go to university (complete PG qualification) → Get a Career → Retire.
Where a university qualification should (in theory) guarantee you a job and a career in your chosen field until retirement. This plan or route is characteristic of our parents’ generation. My contemporaries and I came into play towards the end of the “straight line plan” era, we went to university with grand expectations of long term employment, careers and success in our chosen fields. However, the onset of the international banking crisis in the late 2000s, meant that despite our hard work, many of us found ourselves last in and first out. No job, no career, no funding. And so we began to think outside the box. We used our skills, knowledge, talents and contacts to develop our own jobs, our own careers and our own pathways. Some have carved out career pathways that have stayed relatively similar to the original straight line plan, while others have wiggled around a bit, gaining new skills and experiences from a wide range of opportunities. Being open to new ideas has allowed us to develop our own pathways and to succeed. Below are four examples of how career pathways have developed for my contemporaries and I.
Jo: the industrial straight line
Jo is a classic straight liner. Jo graduated with a BSc in Applied and Environmental Geology and gained employment in the Hydrocarbon industry, where she has worked for the past ten years in geosteering. However, due to the current down turn in oil production, Jo has been made redundant. While Jo is investigating what to do next, she has been undertaking a part-time MSc and is open to the idea of moving sideways into a new field which would utilize the transferable skills she gained during her geosteering work.
Rhian: the academic wiggler
This is me! I am an academic wiggler! I initially followed a straight line career; I graduated with an MGeol in Geology and completed a PhD focussing on physical volcanology and geochemistry. I decided that academia wasn’t for me and wiggled sideways into science communication working for an international science festival both in Scotland and in the United Arab Emirates. While I loved the communication work, I felt I had to give academia one more chance and I went back to complete a one year post doc in tephrochronology. Although the post doc confirmed that a career in scientific research wasn’t for me, I discovered the teaching-focussed academic pathway where I could use my communication skills. I’ve now been teaching for four years. The figure above has a two way arrow between teaching and science communicating as I’m still involved with communication and do outreach, accessibility work and TV / radio work to promote my subject whenever possible. I have no major plans to leave my role in the near future, but academia can be a very fickle place. I am therefore continuing to develop my skills and interests to ensure that I am able to wiggle again should the need arise.
Laura: The wiggling communicator
Laura graduated with an MGeol in Geology and worked as an Environmental Consultant before returning to academia to complete a PhD in Geomagnetism. While completing her PhD, Laura began blogging about geosciences and her research and developed a passion for science communication and social media. Upon completion of her PhD, Laura gained employment at the European Geosciences Union as the Communications Officer, and is now responsible for managing and developing content for the EGU blogs, social media accounts, online forums and Early Career Researcher activities. Laura is a perfect example of how to use your interests, skills and passions to create new opportunities.
Kate: the chaotic accumulator
Kate is a chaotic accumulator, and I mean that in the best possible way. Kate is someone who tries everything and has developed a portfolio of transferable skills and interests from each experience. Although slightly chaotic to the untrained eye, there are underlying themes in the figure above: Geography, Textiles and Education. Each job or qualification has built on one or more of those themes and in her current job as a university lecturer in Human Geography, Kate uses all three themes in her modules. There is an additional theme that does not show up on the figure: Language. Kate is a fluent Welsh speaker and in each position or qualification, the Welsh language has been central from museums to coaching to teaching to lecturing.
And so in my future discussions with applicants and their parents, I will introduce the idea of straight lines, wiggles and all out chaos (although perhaps not in those exact words). I will explain that an undergraduate degree will train and prepare them, but that we should all be open to new opportunities and new experiences.
And as life becomes more complicated once again – the down turn in the oil industry, the impact of the UK leaving the EU, an overly qualified labour market – it’s becoming more important than ever for us all to adapt, to think outside the box, to wiggle.
By Rhian Meara, Geology & Geography Lecturer at Swansea University.
Much ink is spilled hailing the work of the early fathers of geology – and rightly so! James Hutton is the mind behind the theory of uniformitarianism, which underpins almost every aspect of geology and argues that processes operating at present operated in the same manner over geological time, while Sir Charles Lyell furthered the idea of geological time. William Smith, the coal miner and canal builder, who produced the first geological map certainly makes the cut as a key figure in the history of geological sciences, as does Alfred Wegener, whose initially contested theory of continental drift forms the basis of how we understand the Earth today.
Equally deserving of attention, but often overlooked, are the women who have made ground-breaking advances to the understanding of the Earth. But who the title of Mother of Geology should go to is up for debate, and we want your help to settle it!
In the style of our network blogger, Matt Herod, we’ve prepared a poll for you to cast your votes! We’ve picked five leading ladies of the geoscience to feature here, but they should only serve as inspiration. There are many others who have contributed significantly to advancing the study of the planet, so please add their names and why you think they are deserving of the title of Mother of Geology, in the comment section below.
We found it particularly hard to find more about women in geology in non-English speaking country, so if you know of women in France, Germany, Spain, etc. who made important contributions to the field, please let us know!
Mary Anning (1799–1847)
Mary Anning. Credited to ‘Mr. Grey’ in Crispin Tickell’s book ‘Mary Anning of Lyme Regis’ (1996).
Hailing from the coastal town of Lyme Regis in the UK, Mary was born to Richard Anning, a carpenter with an interest in fossil collecting. On the family’s doorstep were the fossil-rich cliffs of the Jurassic coast. The chalky rocks provided a life-line to Mary, her brother and mother, when her father died eleven years after Mary was born. Upon his death, Richard left the family with significant debt, so Mary and her brother turned to fossil-collecting and selling to make a living.
Mary had a keen eye for anatomy and was an expert fossil collector. She and her brother are responsible for the discovery of the first Ichthyosaurs specimen, as well as the first plesiosaur.
When Mary started making her fossil discoveries in the early 1800s, geology was a burgeoning science. Her discoveries contributed to a better understanding of the evolution of life and palaeontology.
Mary’s influence is even more noteworthy given that she was living at a time when science was very much a man’s profession. Although the fossils Mary discovered where exhibited and discussed at the Geological Society of London, she wasn’t allowed to become a member of the recently formed union and she wasn’t always given full credit for her scientific discoveries.
Charlotte Murchinson (1788–1869)
Roderick and Charlotte Murchinson made a formidable team. A true champion of science, and geology in particular, Charlotte, ignited and fuelled her husband’s pursuit of a career in science after resigning his post as an Army officer.
Roderick Murchinson’s seminal work on establishing the first geologic sequence of Early Paleozoic strata would have not arisen had it not been for his wife’s encouragement. With Roderick, Charlotte travelled the length and breadth of Britain and Europe (along with notable friend Sir Charles Lylle), collecting fossils (one of the couple’s trips took them to Lyme Regis where they met and worked with Mary Anning, who later became a trusted friend) and studying the geology of the old continent. Roderick’s first paper, presented at the Geological Society in 1825 is thought to have been co-written by Charlotte.
Not only was Charlotte a champion for the sciences, but she was a believer in gender equality. When Charles Lylle refused women to take part in his lectures at Kings Collage London, at her insistence he changed his views.
Florence Bascom (1862–1945)
By Camera Craft Studios, Minneapolis – Creator/Photographer: Camera Craft Studios, Minneapolis. Persistent Repository: Smithsonian Institution Archives Collection: Science Service Records, 1902-1965 (Record Unit 7091)
Talk about a life of firsts: Florence Bascom, an expert in crystallography, mineralogy, and petrography, was the first woman hired by the U.S Geological Survey (back in 1896); she was the first woman to be elected to the Geological Society of America (GSA) Council (in 1924) and was the GSA’s first woman officer (she served as vice-president in 1930).
Perhaps influenced by her experience as a woman in a male dominated world, she lectured actively and went to set-up the geology department at Bryn Mawr College, the first college where women could pursue PhDs, and which became an important 20th century training centre for female geologist.
Inge Lehmann (1888-1993)
There are few things that scream notoriety as when a coveted Google Doodle is made in your honour. It’s hardly surprising that Google made such a tribute to Inge Lehmann, on the 127th Anniversary of her birth, on 13th May 2015.
The Google Doodle celebrating Inge Lehmann’s 127th birthday.
A Danish seismologist born in 1888, Inge experienced her first earthquake as a teenager. She studied maths, physics and chemistry at Oslo and Cambridge Universities and went on to become an assistant to geodesist Niels Erik Nørlund. While installing seismological observatories across Denmark and Greenland, Inge became increasingly interested in seismology, which she largely taught herself. The data she collected allowed her to study how seismic waves travel through the Earth. Inge postulated that the Earth’s core wasn’t a single molten layer, as previously thought, but that an inner core, with properties different to the outer core, exists.
But as a talented scientist, Inge’s contribution to the geosciences doesn’t end there. Her second major discovery came in the late 1950s and is named after her: the Lehmann Discontinuity is a region in the Earth’s mantle at ca. 220 km where seismic waves travelling through the planet speed up abruptly.
Marie Tharp (1920-2006)
That the sea-floor of the Atlantic Ocean is traversed, from north to south by a spreading ridge is a well-established notion. That tectonic plates pull apart and come together along boundaries across the globe, as first suggested by Alfred Wegener, underpins our current understanding of the Earth. But prior to the 1960s and 1970s Wegener’s theory of continental drift was hotly debated and viewed with scepticism.
In the wake of the Second World War, in 1952, in the then under resourced department of Columbia University, Marie Tharp, a young scientist originally from Ypsilanti (Michigan), poured over soundings of the Atlantic Ocean. Her task was to map the depth of the ocean.
By 1977, Marie and her boss, geophysicist Bruce Heezen, had carefully mapped the topography of the ocean floor, revealing features, such as the until then unknown, Mid-Atlantic ridge, which would confirm, without a doubt, that the planet is covered by a thin (on a global scale) skin of crust which floats atop the Earth’s molten mantle.
Their map would go on to pave the way for future scientists who now knew the ocean floors weren’t vast pools of mud. Despite beginning her career at Columbia as a secretary to Bruce, Marie’s role in producing the beautiful world ocean’s map propelled her into the oceanography history books.
Over to you! Who do you think the title of the Mother of Geology should go to? We ran a twitter poll last week, asking this very question, and the title, undisputedly, went to Mary Anning. Do you agree?
By Laura Roberts, EGU Communications Officer
All references to produce this post are linked to directly from the text.
EGU, the European Geosciences Union, is Europe’s premier geosciences union, dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the Earth, planetary, and space sciences for the benefit of humanity, worldwide. It is a non-profit international union of scientists with over 12,500 members from all over the world. Its annual General Assembly is the largest and most prominent European geosciences event, attracting over 11,000 scientists from all over the world.
This text was edited on 1 Septmember 2016 to correct the spelling of Weger. With thanks to Torbjörn Larsson for spotting the typo.