Thursday, December 24, 2015

Two up-to-date contributions on Global Hydrology

I talk about global hydrology in a recent post. But, the topic is hot, and you do not have the time to relax, and a couple of authoritative papers are published on the global energy budget and the global water budget in the first slice of this century* **. Scientists never sleep.


L’Ecuyer, T. S., Beaudoing, H. K., Rodell, M., Olson, W., Lin, B., Kato, S., et al. (2015). The Observed State of the Energy Budget in the Early Twenty-First Century. Journal of Climate, 28(21), 8319–8346. http://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-14-00556.1

M. Rodell, H.K. Beaudoing, T.S. L’Ecuyer, W.S. Olson J.S. Famiglietti, P.R. Houser, R. Adler, M.G. Bosilovich, C.A. Clayson, D. Chambers, E. Clark, E.J. Fetzer, X. Gao, G. Gu, K. Hilburn, G.J. Huffman, D.P. Lettenmaier, W.T. Liu, F.R. Robertson, C.A. Schlosser, J. Sheffield, and E.F. Wood
 (2015). The observed state of the water cycle in the early 21st century. Journal of Climate, 28 (21), 1–80.

*An update:

Please also see this recent paper on Nature Geosciences, brought to my attention by Wuletawu Abera, on the groundwaters amount:

Gleeson, T., Befus, K. M., Jasechko, S., Luijendijk, E., & Cardenas, M. B. (2015). The global volume and distribution of modern groundwater. Nature Geoscience, 1–10. http://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2590


** A further update:

Zhang Y., PanM., Wood E.F., On Creating Global Gridded Terrestrial Water Budget Estimates from Satellite Remote Sensing, Surveys in Geophysics, DOI 10.1007/s10712-015-9354-y, 1-20, 2016

*** Yet another update

Bierkens, M. F. P. (2015), Global hydrology 2015: State, trends, and directions, Water Resour. Res., 51,4923–4947, doi:10.1002/2015WR017173.

Wednesday, December 23, 2015

Rejection of Rejection

Dear readers, if you are tired to have your paper rejected, you can consider the send this rejection of rejection letter, whose template has been published on BMJ journal (here) authored by  Cath Chapman and Tim Slade :

Rejection of rejection letter


[insert university emblem here]
Dear Professor [insert name of editor]

[Re: MS 2015_XXXX Insert title of ground-breaking study here]


Thank you for your rejection of the above manuscript.


Unfortunately we are not able to accept it at this time. As you are probably aware we receive many rejections each year and are simply not able to accept them all. In fact, with increasing pressure on citation rates and fiercely competitive funding structures we typically accept fewer than 30% of the rejections we receive. Please don’t take this as a reflection of your work. The standard of some of the rejections we receive is very high.
In terms of the specific factors influencing our decision the failure by Assessor 1 to realise the brilliance of the study was certainly one of them. Simply stating “this study is neither novel nor interesting and does not extend knowledge in this area” is not reason enough. This, coupled with the use of Latin quotes by Assessor 2, rendered an acceptance of your rejection extremely unlikely.
We do wish you and your editorial team every success with your rejections in the future and hope they find safe harbour elsewhere. To this end, may we suggest you send one to [insert name of rival research group] for consideration. They accept rejections from some very influential journals.

Please understand that our decision regarding your rejection is final. We have uploaded the final manuscript in its original form, along with the signed copyright transfer form.

We look forward to receiving the proofs and to working with you in the future.

Yours sincerely

Dr [insert name here]

[Insert research group acronym here]

[Insert university here]

[Insert country here—that is, Australia/New Zealand/small European Country/Canada]



Do not forget to look at the replays.

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

An overview of my research and my future envisioned work. My professorship talk

I was finally asked to do this talk, that cover my research experience, for my Full Professor appointment here at the Civil, Environmental and Mechanical Department of the University of Trento.  This the abstract:
In this talk I will cover, in brief, my last 25  years of research through my main contribution in surface hydrology, river network evolution, hyperresolution and travel-time modelling of hydrological processes, hydroinformatics. Life means “my academic life” but also some recent orientation I am taking to model the non linear interactions in the water cycle. These include plants and ecosystems, which I believe will be my next research objectives, which I will pursue with the use of my model infrastructure, based on evolving  GEOtop and JGrass-NewAGE.  I will talk a little, maybe, of thermodynamics,  hydro-informatics, and optimisation principles in natural processes (I see that I do not have a post, on this, I will do it). A little on Cryosphere processes will not be absent.


Clicking on the Figure, you will be linked to the slides of my talks (with links to literature). The talk, unfortunately is in Italian: but the slides are in English. Below, please find the youtube.

Monday, December 14, 2015

Age-ranked storage equations for river Adige

This below is the presentation that Maria Laura Bancheri is giving today at the AGU fall meeting. It summarises our recent work on travel time distributions theory (no contributions so far -well look at here -, but we tried to clarify concepts and mathematics) and its ongoing application to River Adige.

All this knowledge is going to flow into the great family of JGrass-NewAGE components and being used to assess age of water and tracer movements. 
Keep looking for upgrades.

Sunday, December 13, 2015

Be prepared for Java 9

We still do not have digested Java 8 in our programming style and ( other new programming languages like Swift appear on the  stage, and others, like FORTRESS -se also Wikipedia-, die),  we have to face the new improvements of Java 9 (effective December 2016, but already at a fixed stage of development). They are a REPL called JShell and modularity.

This is a sequence of webcasts on this topic, directly from  protagonists, Mark Reinhold, and Alan Bateman
On the same topi, a 2016 issue of eMag. Finally, an interesting website here.


Thursday, December 3, 2015

Economy, Water, Climate change. Methods and scale of analysis in economy.

This talk, of the CLIMAWARE project series, was given by Martina Sartori, a young economist, part of the group of the project. The talk was the occasion to exchange information about the type of models and the scale of modelling economists use to assess the impacts of variation of water availability on the economic system.
Click on the Figure to get the presentation.
I have to say that the discussion was interesting. The scale economists use is much larger than catchment scale, mostly because their models are parametrised on the knowledge of nations' exchanges more than regional ones. Model themselves seem not to be very complex from the mathematical point of view, but they treat thousands of parameters which makes them complicates. These parameters are collected by specialised companies and/or institutions by sorting out transactions among countries and looking at the global market. Probably the theoretical foundations of these models could not be so unassailable, but, however, they embeds a lot of empirical knowledge. For us was important to talk together.

Monday, November 30, 2015

Energy Conservation

In the days in which General relativity celebrates its first one hundred years (I believe the paper was published Dec 2 1915), I want to talk about energy conservation, which is a topic relevant to general relativity and to hydrology too. 

“One of the founding principle of Thermodynamics is that energy is always conserved. It can be transformed in one form to another, but it is never created or destroyed (but see below). The first principle of Thermodynamics was given something like in its modern form by Robert Mayer (see also here) in the 1840s -shortly before the concept of energy, as we understand it, was introduced into science. Mayer, a German doctor, became intrigued by the observation that the blood  he was letting from the veins of feverous sailors in the Dutch West Indies was considerable redder than he has would expected (read the full story in the Oliver Morton’s book, the entertaining lecture for a hydrologist, I am using here)” … Mayer deduced the the sailors were using less oxygen than expected due to the warmer climate and was brought to the conclusion that respiration in animals was a specialised form of combustion (which was a common, but not universally accepted belief among the chemist’s contemporary to Mayer).  “However, Mayer decided that the total amount of heat generated in the body must be equal to the capacity of generating force latent in food. Mayer was subsequently lead to  look at the sun, and he arrive to argue that sunlight was the sustenance from plants and  these of animals. Plants were converting energy from light to a chemical form.” 
Other famous scientists were subsequently working on energy conservation law, and maybe you associate the law with the name of Joule

Therefore the early discovering of the energy conservation is extraordinarily close to what modern hydrological studies pursue, especially now that the food-climate-water nexus is at the center of entire research programs.  

A famous finding  of Albert Einstein is the equivalence of energy and mass. This looks like an exotic property, but it is actually always present in hydrological thermodynamic: what else is the “latent heat” if not an explicit statement that mass (and forms of its arrangements, the phases) is a form of energy ? 
Since water on earth and in the hydrological cycle changes phase, water energy budget must account for mass transfer.  However, because also mass, besides energy, is conserved,  energy equation  is greatly simplified. 
If mass conservation is given for granted in hydrology (but not always completely accounted for: because people focuses more -erroneously - on the fluxes), energy conservation is rarely considered. Our GEOtop is one of the few models that does it, and considers energy conservation together with mass conservation (and the budgets, not just the flows!) with an appropriate level of complexity.

Going back to the main argument, what was an experimental achievement for Mayer, became, after Emmy Noether, a Swiss mathematicians a property connected with the symmetry of the mathematical structure of Mechanics (and Electromechanics indeed) when presented in Lagrangian of Hamiltonian form. Noether’s theorems simply state that if the Lagrangian (Hamiltonian) - either classic or quantistic - of a certain system is invariant under a group of transformations, this implies a conservation law. Energy conservation is, in fact, implied by invariance in time of the Galilean physics, while, for instance, momentum conservation is implied by invariance under space translations (and angular momentum is conserved because of invariance under rotations of the reference frame).  Special relativity does not alter this situation so, in special relativity, mass, energy and momentum are conserved, as well as in Galileian/Newtonian mechanics.  The new ingredient in Special relativity is that space is not separated by time, but both are connected. So, actually the above conservation laws are all connected (and the first of the three equations in the figure says part of it). 

However, the one hundred years old second equation of the figure states that the stress tensors (a sort of generalisation of energy, that compares in the second member of the equation, please see Wikipedia) is strongly connected with the geometry of space. So, at large, energy, mass, time, space, matter are all connected, but energy is not conserved in the Universe (and BTW also some arguments about the thermodynamical death of the University are not very solid).  Please find a more detailed and technical explanation here; another explanation here

Energy is conserved on earth, with great precision (for a Hamiltonian treatment of Earth's fluid mechanics, please refer to the Salmon book, or his paper), and studying the arrangements of matter is important in hydrology. For us it is an approximation that works, and it is very stupid not to use it. 
When accounting for it obviously we have to deal with both kinetic and potential energy, but also internal energy has a big role, especially when we arrive to talk how liquid water becomes ice, or water vapour or viceversa, which continuously happens.  The third equation in Figure reminds it, being mass hidden in enthalpies, and in thermal capacity (for general references to Thermodynamics see here). 

The game becomes thermodynamic also for Hydrology and, actually, the third equation just gives a flavour of it, because when phases are involved, also their interfaces  and their mixing must be taken into account: otherwise we do not understand how drops form, or water is retained in vadose soils, or how it freezes, or how flows in plants.

But these are stories for another day.