Review of the WATERS Network Science Plan (2010) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Evaluation of the WATERS Network Science Plan
2 Evaluation of the WATERS Network Science Plan
Pages 12-27
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 12... ...
The Science Plan envisions an integrated approach involving the natural, engineering, and social sciences to study fundamental processes and activities in the built and natural environments. The overarching science question presented in the plan is: "How can we protect ecosystems and better manage and predict water availability and quality for future generations, given changes to the water cycle caused by human activities and climate trends?
|
From page 13... ...
, the Science Plan was intended as a broad vision document, and in this light, the document succeeds in communicating a high-level vision for transforming water science and engineering research through establishment of an observatory network. In particular, the overarching question presented in the Science Plan successfully conveys the broad rationale for a major research undertaking.
|
From page 14... ...
. In particular, the integrated WATERS Network could provide a valuable opportunity to integrate the social sciences and water science.4 The Science Plan was conceived as a high-level vision statement and not as a design document.
|
From page 15... ...
Engineering Improved Water Infrastructure A second challenge put forth in the WATERS Science Plan is to understand better how to construct and operate engineered infrastructure to manage water quantity and quality. Sufficient data are lacking on the complex interactions among chemical constituents, pathogenic organisms, and water infrastructure, as is the research infrastructure to test entirely new configurations to optimize water and energy management.
|
From page 16... ...
Thus, the WATERS Network science team will need to consider what key second-level science questions on water quality have the greatest potential to transform the decisions of water managers and improve ecological integrity and human health and how data collected from sensors contribute toward these objectives. Although the proposed experimental facility for testing water infrastructure would be an important contribution to science and engineering research, the committee also questioned whether such a facility stretches the concept of an observatory network too far, thereby diluting limited resources for the network as a whole.
|
From page 17... ...
. All of these, as well as others suggested in the Science Plan, will depend critically on integrating work in the natural and social sciences and on linking data from physical observatories with longitudinal archival and survey data that allow social scientists to track changes in the human system over time.
|
From page 18... ...
PROTOTYPE NETWORK To lend a bit more specificity to what might be accomplished in addressing the three grand challenges, the Science Plan presents a "prototype network" to illustrate how the proposed WATERS Network would allow the combination of models and data to address pressing societal problems through interdisciplinary research. The Science Plan includes three example observatories in this prototype network that leverage prior work from WATERS test-bed projects and elsewhere: the Sierra Nevada for "Snow-Dominated Water Resources in the Mountain West," the Chesapeake Bay for "Non-Point Source Pollution into Receiving Wa
|
From page 19... ...
. The Science Plan's mountain snowpack example lays out the societal issues and science challenges well.
|
From page 20... ...
The discussion is not as effective as that for the Sierra example, however, in part because the Science Plan does not clearly explain how the WATERS Network would complement the extensive long-term research, monitoring, and management efforts in the Chesapeake Bay to create significant advances in understanding. Moreover, the monitoring strategies discussed in the Science Plan appear to focus on physical parameter measurements (e.g., flow, temperature)
|
From page 21... ...
The Science Plan describes the compelling science challenges associated with the urban water cycle. It uses the example of the Pittsburgh watershed to outline ways that the WATERS Network could help address these challenges in an urban setting and at the interface between the engineered and natural environments.
|
From page 22... ...
To justify a national network, the WATERS team should make a stronger case that these science questions require intersite comparison to answer or identify other integrated questions and hypotheses that are posed across sites. ADDITIONAL BENEFITS OF THE WATERS NETWORK In addition to the benefits noted above and also in the Science Plan, the WATERS project has the potential to bring several widespread benefits to the global scientific community.
|
From page 23... ...
For example, climate change is a global issue, yet many countries cannot provide adequate safe drinking water much less the resources to examine the impacts of climate change on their water resources. For example, WATERS could make major contributions on behalf of the United States to the Global Water System Project, which is addressing human interactions with the hydrologic cycle in terms of natural and built environments; the Group on Earth Observations, which is developing the data and information components of the Global Earth Observation System of Systems; and the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment, which is focusing on hydrologic prediction systems.
|
From page 24... ...
Considering the lack of cyberinfrastructure details in the Science Plan, the most that the committee can offer in terms of a critique is to note several general areas that deserve attention. Once WATERS moves toward more detailed planning, the design team will derive cyberinfrastructure requirements that will inform their design decisions and architecture.
|
From page 25... ...
6. Phased deployment: Given the broad distribution of the WATERS cyberinfrastructure and the rapid rate of technology evolution, the WATERS team should consider various deployment schedules.
|
From page 26... ...
, the Science Plan was intended as a broad vision document, and in this light the document succeeds in communicating a high-level vision for transforming water science and engineering research through establishing an observatory network. The Plan outlines the opportunity to collect, analyze, and integrate hydrologic, environmental science and engineering, and social sciences data at a level that has not previously been possible.
|
From page 27... ...
Evaluation of the WATERS Network Science Plan 27 Although the committee finds the high-level vision for science to be well done in the Science Plan, as the WATERS Network moves ahead through the conceptual design phase, a much more detailed "science plan" will need to be developed in parallel with the design to make sure that the necessary coordination between the desired science and the feasibility of network construction is accomplished. That is, the natural progression from high-level vision to detailed description of scientific objectives will have to occur.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.