“SMAP radar image acquired from data from March 31 to April
3, 2015. Weaker radar signals (blues) reflect low soil moisture or lack of
vegetation, such as in deserts. Strong radar signals (reds) are seen in
forests. SMAP's radar also takes data over the ocean and sea ice.
http://www.nasa.gov/jpl/smap/nasa-soil-moisture-mission-produces-first-global-maps
Credits: NASA/JPL-Caltech/GSFC”
While hiking the other day (state land in Northeastern Wisconsin) I passed from a sandy type soil to
a soil with higher organic and clay content. I started to notice understory
flora differences. Now, I do not know enough botany to be one of those folks who
can rattle off the names of plants as they walk (me jealous), but I could see differences.
It occurred
to me, has anyone done serious soil modeling with variation for each soil type
across a range of temperatures and precipitation?
I know different
folks are biting on different parts of this beast, I personally saw the huge
experiment the U of Arizona is doing at the Biosphere 2 site.Most soil type data and precipitation data that we need probably already exists (at least for modeling to mid century, and perhaps the paleoclimatology type geologists could lend a had for farther than that...) From all the soil records in different regions. by using those, could we time travel so to speak?
The soil is the placenta of civilization. All other things held equal, good soil leads to complex societies, poor soils lead to simplification.
For those of us in the agricultural lands of the upper Midwest,
this is our “permafrost melt” question. It is in "slow motion", compared to the Arctic thrill. Yet, it is the
key factor, data, information we need for adaptation planning. Are we doing
enough, is it being “scaled” down enough, to higher resolution in both space and temporally via GIS to be useful in local planning?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment