Browsing by Subject "ENERGY"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Ideas and perspectives: Strengthening the biogeosciences in environmental research networks
    (Biogeosciences, 2018-08-15) Richter, DD; Billings, SA; Groffman, PM; Kelly, EF; Lohse, KA; McDowell, WH; White, TS; Anderson, S; Baldocchi, DD; Banwart, S; Brantley, S; Braun, JJ; Brecheisen, ZS; Cook, CS; Hartnett, HE; Hobbie, SE; Gaillardet, J; Jobbagy, E; Jungkunst, HF; Kazanski, CE; Krishnaswamy, J; Markewitz, D; O'Neill, K; Riebe, CS; Schroeder, P; Siebe, C; Silver, WL; Thompson, A; Verhoef, A; Zhang, G
    © Author(s) 2018. Long-term environmental research networks are one approach to advancing local, regional, and global environmental science and education. A remarkable number and wide variety of environmental research networks operate around the world today. These are diverse in funding, infrastructure, motivating questions, scientific strengths, and the sciences that birthed and maintain the networks. Some networks have individual sites that were selected because they had produced invaluable long-term data, while other networks have new sites selected to span ecological gradients. However, all long-term environmental networks share two challenges. Networks must keep pace with scientific advances and interact with both the scientific community and society at large. If networks fall short of successfully addressing these challenges, they risk becoming irrelevant. The objective of this paper is to assert that the biogeosciences offer environmental research networks a number of opportunities to expand scientific impact and public engagement. We explore some of these opportunities with four networks: the International Long-Term Ecological Research Network programs (ILTERs), critical zone observatories (CZOs), Earth and ecological observatory networks (EONs), and the FLUXNET program of eddy flux sites. While these networks were founded and expanded by interdisciplinary scientists, the preponderance of expertise and funding has gravitated activities of ILTERs and EONs toward ecology and biology, CZOs toward the Earth sciences and geology, and FLUXNET toward ecophysiology and micrometeorology. Our point is not to homogenize networks, nor to diminish disciplinary science. Rather, we argue that by more fully incorporating the integration of biology and geology in long-term environmental research networks, scientists can better leverage network assets, keep pace with the ever-changing science of the environment, and engage with larger scientific and public audiences.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Public perception of bioenergy in North Carolina and Tennessee
    (Energy, Sustainability and Society, 2016-12) Radics, RI; Dasmohapatra, S; Kelley, SS
    © 2016, The Author(s). Background: The goal of the study is to examine the general public’s understanding and perceptions of bioenergy and biofuels in North Carolina (NC) and Tennessee (TN). The study focuses on the public concerns, support and risk evaluations of alternative bioenergy feedstocks and biofuels, and includes an assessment of the economic, environmental, social, and policy impacts of bioenergy production and use. Methods: A sample of consumers in NC and TN were surveyed in the fall of 2013 and spring of 2014 for their perceptions about bioenergy and specifically, biofuels for transportation. Five hundred eighty-six consumers completed the questionnaire electronically (376 in NC and 210 in TN). Results: Respondents reported that the price and vehicle compatibility with biomass-based transportation fuels were the most important factors in their choice of biofuels over gasoline at a pump. Results show that the acceptance of bioenergy depends on the extent of knowledge and available information to consumers about the energy source. A principal component analysis (PCA) indicated seven distinct dimensions of consumer’s perception about bioenergy. The key dimensions are the following: how bioenergy benefits the society, risks of bioenergy use, government support for bioenergy, increase in food cost, conditional use of trees, support for low-cost biofuel alternative to current energy, and market attributes of bioenergy purchase. Conclusions: The findings from this study reflect the need for communicating the benefits and risks from the use of bioenergy to the general public through trustworthy channels of communication and targeted policy, market, and institutional support.