ERE
Energy, Resources and the Environment

Energy, Resources and the Environment

How to Make Scientific Posters

How to Make Scientific Posters

The schedule of the annual EGU general assembly has just been published and if you submitted and abstract you do now know whether or not you will be able to give a poster presentation. Maybe this is the first time you will need to present a scientific poster or are wondering how to make your poster for this year’s conference. Look no further, we have compiled some thoughts for you in this blog post. There is also a small gallery of anonymized posters to look for inspiration!

The Purpose of a Scientific Poster

To make a good poster starts with identifying its purpose. A scientific poster is a tool for sharing research with peers in a concise, visually engaging manner. The goal is to communicate key findings effectively and encourage interaction. Think of your poster as an invitation for discussion rather than a dense collection of information or a published paper. This is particularly helpful if you are still in the middle of a project! One thing to note is that at EGU there are literally thousands of poster on display every day a good poster catches the attention of the audience nonetheless.

Key Principles:

  • Engagement: Attract viewers with a clear layout and engaging visuals.
  • Simplicity: Focus on a few key points—less is more.
  • Interactivity: Encourage dialogue by making it easy for others to understand your work quickly.

What a Poster Is Not

A poster is not a paper, thesis, or slideshow. It should not be overloaded with text or complex equations and tables. Instead, extract the essential points and present them in an easily digestible format.

Designing an Effective Layout

The layout is critical to a poster’s readability. Before adding content, sketch a rough draft of your design on paper to organize sections logically.

Key Layout Tips:

  1. Know Your Dimensions: EGU allows for larger than A0 posters. Make use of it if you can! Check the details here: https://www.egu25.eu/guidelines/presenters/poster_presenter_guidelines.html
  2. Orientation: Landscape is generally preferred, as it is easier for the human eye to process.
  3. Visual Hierarchy: Use headings, subheadings, and clear section divisions to guide the reader.
  4. White Space Matters: Aim for a balance of 40% visuals, 40% text, and 20% empty space. Yes, 20 % empty space! And 40% text is already the very much upper limit!

Typography and Readability

Your text should be easily readable from at least 1.5 meters away. There may be several people trying to look at your poster at the same time, enable them all!

  • Title: 96pt or larger
  • Subheadings: 40pt
  • Body text: 24pt minimum
  • Font choice: Stick to 1-2 professional fonts. Maybe use Open Sans, its the official EGU font.
  • Spacing: Use 1.5 or double spacing to enhance readability

Do the A4 test: If you print out your poster on a A4 sheet of paper and hold it at arms length you should be able to read everything well.

The Role of Color and Graphics

Figures are maybe THE most important part of a poster. As geoscientists we can make amazing figures (think maps, cross-sections, 3D models, satellite imagery, …). Make use of that to draw people to your poster! Colors are great and can enhance clarity and engagement—but should be used wisely.

Content That Works

Your poster should tell a clear story from introduction to conclusion. Here’s a simple structure:

  1. Title: Make it engaging and, if possible, phrase it as a question.
  2. Introduction: A short, jargon-free summary (120 words max) answering What, Why, Where, When, Who, and How.
  3. Methods & Results: Use visuals to explain key processes and findings.
  4. Conclusion: Summarize the key takeaway in a few sentences.
  5. Contact Info: Include an email address, social media handle, or QR code linking to your poster, or any published material.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

  • Overcrowded posters: Avoid excessive text and unnecessary details.
  • Small fonts: Ensure readability from a distance.
  • Poor image quality: Use high-resolution graphics (at least 300 dpi).
  • Lack of structure: Organize content logically so it flows naturally.

Printing Your Poster

  • File format: Save your poster as a high-quality PDF for printing.
  • Resolution: Print at 300-600 dpi for best results.
  • Size setting: Ensure your design software is set to the correct dimensions before you begin.
  • Printing options: University services are often cost-effective, but local print shops can be a great alternative. I always print my poster in Vienna for less than 20 Euros, this means I do not have to carry it both ways!

Final Thoughts

A well-designed poster is a powerful communication tool. It doesn’t just present research; it starts conversations. Be not afraid to highlight issues you currently have in your project, it may well be that someone walking by has an idea that could really help you. Last year one of the best posters I have seen had post-its next to it and asked people to fill in some blanks!

Introduction of the ERE division

Introduction of the ERE division

Hello and welcome to the reopened blog of the Energy, Resources and the Environment Division of the EGU! We want to use this blog in the future actively to keep you updated with what is happening in our division and to highlight various ERE related topics of interest, activities and research. But today we want to first introduce ourselves.

In the ERE division, people who work to better understand our planet’s energy, resources, and environment and its inter-and transdisciplinary aspects come together. Our mission is to make sense of the complex interactions between our natural resources and the environment, which naturally means that we have to collaborate in interdisciplinary ways. The core of the division consists of experts in various fields that will help meet the mutually coupled challenges of energy, resources and the environment.

As with every EGU division, our team consists of around 10 persons who voluntarily help organizing the division and are here to help you with any questions you have about the topics covered in our division. This includes our current president Viktor, our current deputy president and future president Giorgia, Rotman and Thanushika as early career scientist representatives, Sarah as OSPP Coordinator, Johannes, Michael and Sonja as Science officers, and Ana Teresa, who is our Policy Officer. Do you want to get involved in organizing our division? Let us know at ere@egu.eu!

Graphic showing the current ERE team members

The current ERE team. Feel free to reach out to us!

However, the most important people in our division are all the authors, co-authors and session conveners who contribute to the successful ERE program at the annual General Assembly! Traditionally, there are six sub-programme groups, in which sessions cover the whole breadth of ERE: Integrated studies, renewable energy, geo-storage, raw materials and resources, process coupling and monitoring, and inter-and transdisciplinary sessions. Why not check out sessions in our programme at this years EGU in Vienna? We look forward to seeing you then!

 

 

Numerically simulating production in geothermal reservoirs: application to the Groß Schönebeck deep geothermal facility.

Numerically simulating production in geothermal reservoirs: application to the Groß Schönebeck deep geothermal facility.

Producing deep geothermal energy involves using a well, which can be several kilometres deep, to extract hot water in the aim of using its heat to generate electricity or for industrial applications.

The well is drilled into what’s called a geothermal reservoir; rock containing empty space, or porosity, which allows the passage or storage of fluids. Sometimes hot water is already sufficiently present within the geothermal reservoir, but often cooler water is pumped into the ground via an injection well in the aim of collecting it once it has been heated. The combined use of an injection and a production well is called a doublet and is a common method of exploiting geothermal energy. During the production or it is important to understand what is happening to this water as it is being injected, how much we can expect to get out at the other end and how hot it will be! This involves modelling the movement of the water, the transfer of heat and the mechanical stress and deformation of the rock, all of which are interconnected by coupled, highly non-linear equations.

Antoine Jacquey, of German Research Centre for Geosciences, Potsdam is a PhD student working on methods of reservoir engineering. In his 2016 paper, “Thermo-poroelastic numerical modelling for enhanced geothermal system performance: Case study of the Groß Schönebeck reservoir” demonstrating an improved version of this method, which takes into account the change in porosity as the rock deforms, Antoine Jacquey and his colleagues applied these new techniques to the Groß Schönebeck geothermal facility.

The Groß Schönebeck geothermal reservoir is located just north of Berlin, Germany, and is home to an injection/production well doublet. These wells are used as an in situ laboratory for investigating deep sedimentary structures and fluids under natural conditions. The reservoir, at 4-4.1 km depth, is made of up Elbe base sandstone which has a porosity of up to 10 %.  Antoine and his co-authors apply the thermo-mechanical modelling techniques to simulate 100 years of geothermal production at Groß Schönebeck, providing insights on the longevity and productivity for similar geothermal sites. The latter are dependent on temperature drops in both the reservoir and the extracted geothermal fluids which occur as a cold water front moves outwards from the injection well (see Figure above). They find that the injection of cold water enhances the porosity and permeability (the ability of the rock to transmit fluids) which in turn increases the amount of cold water propagating through the reservoir, decreasing the estimated life time of the system from 59 to 50 years. Their study highlights the importance of correctly taking into account the coupling between the different thermo-hydro-mechanical processes.

Antoine Jacquey is currently a PhD student at the German Research Centre for Geociences, Potsdam in section Basin Modelling. His research interests include numerical modelling of coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical processes, deformation of fractured systems and localized and diffused deformation in porous reservoir rocks.

 

The Scorpion and the… Trees: Surface mining (im)practical implications

The Scorpion and the Frog. This old tale, which was first documented by the movie Mr. Arkadin by Orson Welles, reports a scorpion that wants to cross a river… and asks a frog for a ride. Embarking on a lose-lose situation, both the frog and the scorpion are doomed in the tale.

Dramatic, this fable severely resembles how humans conduct their quest for resource extraction. Surface mining, a particular type of resource extraction, is devastating. It involves strip mining, open-pit mining and mountaintop-removal mining and accounts for more than 80% of ore mined each year (Ramani, 2012). Surface mining disturbs the landscape and impacts habitat integrity, environmental flows and ecosystem functions; it raises concerns about water (Miller and Zégre, 2014), air and soil quality (Mummey et al., 2002), and often also public health. Legacies of surface mining may include loss of soil structure and fertility, altered hydrology, and long-term leaching of contaminants from tailings and end-pit lakes (Isosaari and Sillanpää, 2010; Li, 2006; Ramani, 2012).

A new study debates the possible routes to deal with the legacies of surface mining. In a first instance, the authors revisit the terms remediation, reclamation, restoration and rehabilitation (R4) and clearly distinguish them in terms of the end-goal. While remediation is a more technical term and aims at removing pollutants and avoiding human exposure to them, restoration proposes the full recovery of the original ecosystem, prior to mining. Although frequently claimed as the end-goal, restoration may often not be feasible because of a myriad of constrictions.

To find out more about how the R4 is differentiated and where surface mining will likely happen in the future, check out the full study by Dr. Lima and her co-workers here.

dr-ana-limaDr. Ana Theresa Lima is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Ecohydrology group, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Waterloo, Canada, and a Visiting Associate Professor at the Department of Environmental Engineering, Universidade Federal de Espirito Santo, Vitória, Brazil. Her research interests include electrokinetics, urban soils and the impact of human activity on them, organic and inorganic pollution and possible remediation techniques, and environmental policy.

References

Miller, A., Zégre, N., 2014. Mountaintop removal mining and catchment hydrology. Water 6, 472–499. doi:10.3390/w6030472

Mummey, D.L., Stahl, P.D., Buyer, J.S., 2002. Soil microbiological properties 20 years after surface mine reclamation: spatial analysis of reclaimed and undisturbed sites. Soil Biol. Biochem. 34, 1717–1725. doi:10.1016/S0038-0717(02)00158-X

Isosaari, P., Sillanpää, M., 2010. Electromigration of arsenic and co-existing metals in mine tailings. Chemosphere 81, 1155–1158.

Li, M.S., 2006. Ecological restoration of mineland with particular reference to the metalliferous mine wasteland in China: A review of research and practice. Sci. Total Environ. 357, 38–53. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.05.003

Ramani, R. V., 2012. Surface Mining Technology: Progress and Prospects. Procedia Eng. 46, 9 – 21.