Hi, I am a Junior in high school and I have a general question, although I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this. I know the difference between environmental science and environmental studies majors, which is that the former is more science based while the latter is a BA degree.

I've always been passionate about the environment and would definitely love to have a career based around that. However, the problem is that I don't enjoy Chemistry or Physics class that much, two classes that I hear are basically must-takes in the Environmental Science major. Maybe it's because I didn't learn about them in the context of the environment, but I just don't see myself enjoying learning about them.

Meanwhile, I like writing and reading, which is more about what Environmental Studies seem to be focused on. However, from what I've seen, Environmental Studies isn't really valued and has limited career opportunities due to it not being a science degree. Based on these factors, should I take an Environmental Science major instead of Environmental Studies?

Thank you!

Hello guys how is the contaminated land job market looking like in Australia ? and what are possibilities of getting a job from India who have 3 years of experience on this sector?

Hello! I recently graduated with an interdisciplinary education of environmental science & economics. I plan to go to graduate school and have applied to Northeastern University, John’s Hopkins, University of Pennsylvania, Indiana University, University of Wisconsin, and Utrecht University (in the Netherlands). So far, I have gotten into all but Wisconsin and Utrecht, just haven’t heard back from them yet.

From my acceptances, Indiana is the only research university (rest are professional masters and I would have the opportunity to do research if wanted) and the only one that offered me funding. My funding is worth about $17,000 off tuition plus a $2,000 summer internships stipend.

I want to go into renewable energy, specifically nuclear or fusion research. How do I choose a program? Do I follow the money, go where the resources are good, or go to the better program? I am the first person in my family to pursue environmental science/grad school, so the process is a bit confusing. Any help is very greatly appreciated. Thank you!!

Green infrastructure is increasingly becoming a core strategy for climate resilience in urban areas. From green roofs to wetlands restoration, what does current research reveal about their impact on mitigating floods, improving air quality, and promoting biodiversity? Share studies, articles, or experiences related to this growing field.

I’m participating in a hackathon, and the theme is all about using AI to tackle recycling and reduce waste. I’m looking for innovative ideas or inspiration that could make a real impact.

Got any creative suggestions or thoughts?

This research aims to explore the potential of solar-powered photocatalysts in the purification of water, focusing on eco-friendly and cost-effective materials to improve water quality in areas where access to clean drinking water is limited. The study will involve the synthesis and testing of various photocatalysts, such as Titanium Dioxide (TiO₂), Bismuth Vanadate (BiVO₄), and Graphene Oxide (GO), under natural sunlight conditions, combined with pre-treatment and post-treatment methods for enhanced water purification.

The research will focus on identifying the most efficient and sustainable photocatalysts for degrading contaminants in water, including organic pollutants and bacteria. Additionally, the project will evaluate the role of pre-treatment methods (such as filtration using activated carbon and sand) and post-treatment methods (such as further filtration or UV disinfection) in maximizing the purification process. The ultimate goal is to develop an affordable and environmentally friendly water purification method that can be implemented in rural or underserved areas with highly contaminated water sources.

I plan to conduct the research in a high school laboratory with a limited budget, and I would like to ensure I have all necessary materials, tools, and equipment to achieve accurate and equipment to achieve accurate and reproducible results. Could you please advise if there are any additional tools or materials that I might need to successfully conduct this research?

Your expertise and guidance would be greatly appreciated as I work towards finding sustainable, cost-effective solutions to provide clean drinking water to those in need.

Right now, I'm a very stressed and confused undergraduate student of Microbiology. Please guide me towards the right Master's Program based on my interests. I would be super grateful if the suggestions can come from professions in the field. If you have the time and patience to read this long post and offer some advise, I will be really thankful.

There are too many Master's Program offered by different universities which all seem to intersect at some point like:

• Cell and Molecular Biology

-Molecular Life Sciences -Molecular Medicine -Molecular Biosciences -Molecular Biotechnology -Molecular Biology and Evolution -Biochemistry and Molecular Biology -Molecular Cell Biology -Marine Microbiology -Microbiology -Evolution, Ecology and Systematics -Ecology, Environment and Conservation -Ecology -Ecology, Evolution and Environment

Please help me pick one of these based on my interests:

1. Molecular Biology:

From the moment I first read about central dogma in high school, I was fascinated. Studying gene expression on a deeper level in my undergraduate, I knew this was what I wanted to do. My interest ranges from Proteomics to Epigenetics. But if I have to pick one and be specific, I want to study the molecular mechanisms of cancer and apply it to cancer biology research to develop immunotherapies for cancer, especially like CAR T cell therapy for leukemia. My interest in leukemia is very personal as I lost my mother to Acute Leukemia. But I'm also aware that things don't go as smoothly as in your head and it's not a linear or path as I'm thinking right now. Research is much more nuanced and full of complexities. Me having this roadmap doesn't mean anything and it's never as simple as I'm making it sounds, I understand.

2. Cell Biology:

I had studied about organelles in school before but my first exposure to "real" cell biology was in my undergraduate where the mechanisms of Apoptosis and Cell Signalling were revealed to me. I was so intrigued, still am. With Cell Biology too, I want to understand the cellular mechanisms of cancer ranging from p53 gene and apoptosis to signalling in cancer cells and tumour cell plasticity. Basically, I want to study about proto-oncogenes and tumour suppressor genes (like the p53 gene, i love that gene so much) and how we can leverage p53 gene to develop cancer therapies. And is there any relevance in industry?

(NOTE: I understand my interests may sound childish and very surface-level with no real-life practicality or feasibility. And cancer research is extremely complex and dynamic. But it is only based on the level of studying I've done in my undergraduate, which is not an advanced course. This is also majorly why I want to choose a good master's program so I have the ability to choose a good research topic for myself in PhD.)

3. Environmental Sciences/ Environmental Microbiology:

This interest may purely be driven by emotions and my strong sense of justice but I want to contribute to the environment, give back to my Earth. But I genuinely have no idea how environment biology works on an advanced level.

I'm interested in working on Sustainable Energy and Bioremediation. But I have not studied environmental sciences in detail on an advanced level ever (not even as much as I've studied Molecular or Cell Biology). So, I'm lost on that. It's a risky field for me to dive into because I don't know the "scope" of it.

I would love to be guided on how feasible a career in environmental sciences is, and if I ever want to switch over to industry, if there is demand. I ask this because I'm not from an affluent background and I need to support myself and my parent. As much as I want to entirely devote my life to research, I also need a safety net in terms of finances.

4. Microbiology:

Given my background in microbiology, I do love microbiology but I have horrible contamination OCD so I want to stay far away from infection biology or clinical microbiology. I mention this because I interned at a Virology Lab with a clinical focus and I realised, I can't survive doing wet lab research in clinical microbiology because of my anxiety.

Although, it hurts me to part ways with my lovely microbes, I find that I'm just not interested in the clinical aspect of microbiology. I'm more interested in the ACTUAL study of microbes, like studying the metabolism of extremophiles like deep-sea microbes, the human microbiome, probiotics. Is what I want to study still profitable in the industry?

5. Immunology:

Again, my interest in immunology lies only to develop immunotherapies for cancer, like Monoclonal Antibodies, Interferons, CAR T Cell therapy.

That's all I can think of right now. As you can see, I have emphasized on my interest in Cancer Biology multiple times. My interest and desire to work on cancer probably comes from an emotionally-driven thought process and I should try to work on separating my thoughts from my emotions, I understand. It may also come off childish, I'm aware.

From each point, I would HIGHLY APPRECIATE if someone working in the same field can tell me how valid my thought process is, how feasible it is, and if it has any relevance in the industry. I ask for industrial relevance because of my need to support myself and not having a financial backup. I hope you all guide me to the right step. Thank you for reading.

Background: I have a bachelors in Environmental Science major in Urban Planning from a uni in Asia.

Goal: Get an environmental consulting job in Australia that can lead to PR after masters.

Will it be worth it? Is the industry too saturated? How long do fresh grads usually get enviro consulting jobs? Is a masters more important or work experience is more valued by employers?

Grand Ethiopian Renessance Dam (MAXAR Technoligies, 2021)

One of the biggest conflicts in the Middle East and Eastern Africa is brewing over natural resources. In this case—the water from the Nile River and how upstream damming affects the countries Ethiopia, Sudan, and Egypt, and their share of water and hydropower.

A new article in Communications Earth & Environment provides a scientific framework for operating the Nile's "mega" dams during prolonged droughts. The goal is to balance generating sustainable hydropower while minimizing the water deficit for people living downstream.

The research, co-authored by Essam Heggy, co-principal investigator at the University of Southern California Viterbi School of Engineering Center for Arid and Water Research Exploration (AWARE) within the USC Ming Hsieh Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, evaluates the efficiency of multiple drought-mitigation policies related to the operations of the Nile's mega-dams.

Most of the Nile River flows originate from the highlands in Ethiopia and flow northward to the lowlands in Egypt and to the Mediterranean. The rising dispute is over what control the dam operators should have over the flowing water during prolonged periods of drought. While Egypt relies on the Nile for water, Ethiopia relies on its newly completed mega-dam, named Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD), for hydroelectric power.

Corresponding author Essam Heggy explains the source of tension as follows, "Nile upstream hydropower dams will bring electricity to 60% of the population of Ethiopia while 98 % of Egypt's annual renewable water resources come from the same river; the upstream is in a dire need for energy and downstream is in a dire need for water."

He adds, "Over a decade of negotiation, no cooperative operation framework has been reached due to the lack of a metric assessment of the mega-dam operations on both the up and downstream interests during prolonged drought (multi-years of drought). These droughts are expected to worsen, causing severe consequences to the river riparian."

The challenge, says Heggy, is to determine how to operate the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) during prolonged drought and to accurately predict what the gains and losses are, both up and downstream of the Nile's Dams.

The new paper reframes the notion of prolonged drought and tries to come up with what the authors believe is an ideal operation policy allowing GERD to generate sustainable energy. The framework suggests allowing for ~87% of GERD's optimal hydropower without a dam-induced downstream water deficit for Egypt in the midst of hydro-climatic extremes.

The authors hope to increase the resilience for prolonged droughts to the more than 300 million inhabitants of the Eastern Nile Basin who live under highly uncertain climatic projections.

Heggy and colleagues from Catholic University of Louvain, Northern Michigan University, NARSS and National Research Centre in Egypt, utilized an up-to-date hydraulic model to assess the efficiency of several suggested policies that address the uncertainty around the impacts of upstream dams during prolonged drought. They also looked at 100-year-long historical data and simulated several operations policies to generate sustainable hydropower and minimizing downstream water stress.

Their simulated policies get at the heart of the issue: determining mitigations by better defining prolonged drought condition in the Eastern Nile Basin with one metric: the critical level of the Aswan High Dam. Heggy references other journals to show the competing definitions of drought held by countries in the region.

A new approach to reduce conflict

The Nile in Egypt is fed by two branches: The Blue Nile from the Ethiopian Highlands accounting for more than 80% of the river's flow, and the White Nile from Lake Victoria accounting for the rest.

Heggy and colleagues suggest the following: Instead of only looking to the current flow of the Blue Nile as an indicator of prolonged drought, policymakers should rely on the level of the Aswan High Dam as the indicator of this extreme hydro-climatic condition, coming up with a figure of Aswan High Dam being at 165 meters (~78 billion cubic meters) as the figure at which drought should be declared and the mitigation measures should be activated.

The authors' belief is that this approach can resolve disagreement on what constitutes "dry years" and "flow volume." It also incorporates water budget contributions from the White and Blue Nile flows. In addition, the study's authors outlined what they believe is an optimized policy in which the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam in Ethiopia can still generate sustainable energy of more than 87% of its optimal hydropower without triggering a dam-induced downstream water deficit in Egypt.

Mohamed Ramah, a Ph.D. graduate researcher at Catholic University of Louvain, stated, "Only the metric assessment of both demands of upstream hydropower and downstream water budget can resolve the conflict, not only calling for increasing upstream hydropower dams while undermining downstream water deficit as advocated by scientific interest groups."

Heggy says, "Sharing the Nile's water and hydropower resources under increasingly uncertain climatic forecasts is a wake-up call for policymakers to fight this uncertainty together with open science and bring water and climate research to the level where they can achieve peace and prosperity."

As part of an assignment for my environmental studies class, I’m reaching out to professionals in the environmental field to conduct informational interviews. I’m looking to learn more about different career paths, industry challenges, and gain valuable advice for newcomers.

If you work in any environmental sector (such as conservation, sustainability, renewable energy, environmental science, etc.), I would love the opportunity to ask you about your career and experiences.

I have a bachelor and masters of science degree. I am currently job searching and am trying to figure out what jobs I am actually qualified for. My research for my masters mainly focused on Acarology and vector borne diseases but I have experience with field ecology, laboratory techniques, beekeeping, and statistical analysis. What I want to do is either be a biology instructor (doesn't have a route for moving up with pay/position) or some type of field ecologist like a park naturalist or helping with someone else's research doing outside field work. I really want to teach as I have a lot of teaching experience from the Army and during my M.S. I do not want to do lab work or a lot of statistical analysis. Industry jobs would be cool.

Hello all! I am currently obtaining my Bachelor's degree in Environmental Science. I also am pursuing a Master's Degree in Environmental Science, with a focus in ecology. I am wondering what the job outlook is like in this field? Are there careers to get into where there will be no field work and possible work from home opportunities? If not, are there full time positions in a laboratory setting M-F with weekends off? I'm almost done with my studies and I'm worried about getting into a career and the schedule not being consistent, having low pay and working very long hours. By this time, I plan on having a family. What careers do you suggest getting into first with my bachelor's, and what degrees do you suggest after obtaining my Master's degree? Thank you all for your time! This has been a lingering cloud over my head and any advice would be deeply appreciated! I've watched "day in the life" videos as well and I will say anything water related is fascinating and studying living organisms in general is very intriguing to me. I have always worked in laboratory settings and believe that is my strong suit. The video linked is also very interesting to me. Any advice is appreciated!

SOLAR ENERGY IS NOT CLEAN ENERGY

The current politically correct strategy for addressing global warming is not only ineffective but is also creating a massively worse situation that threatens to doom mankind and most life on the planet.Almost all of the efforts to alleviate global warming to date have been focused on carbon dioxide (CO2), the most benign of the greenhouse gases.

 The principal strategy has been to replace coal and gas electrical production with "clean energy," especially wind and solar photovoltaics (solar panels). Nitrogen TriFluoride (NF3), a gas used in the manufacture of computers, flat screen televisions and SOLAR PANELS is 17,200 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2. 

While CO2 levels in the atmosphere have barely inched upward, NF3 use has increased by 10-11% a year, and recent studies have shown that NF3 levels in the atmosphere are eight times greater than originally predicted.Proponents of terraforming Mars have advocated using NF3 and other super greenhouse gases to warm the Martian atmosphere to Earthlike levels.  More likely, however, is that NF3, etc., will turn the Earth's climate Venus-like, a planet where lead is molten on the surface. 

https://www.amazon.com/NF3-Apocalyptic-Super-Greenhouse-Gases/dp/B0DQD8QDRK/ref=sr_1_3?crid=ZY5G2Y6YH3NE&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.YE1t4IsDXloDXPozu9_hA9_ILEz9QTjwMMtISM-6M5_GjHj071QN20LucGBJIEps.nieiC6POdeki42FXztoo0peDtWOVNqjHK9YX5W9BvGY&dib_tag=se&keywords=nf3%2C+sf6+and+the+apocalyptic+super+greenhouse+gases&qid=1734297880&sprefix=nf3%2C+sf6+and+the+apocalyptic+super+greenhouse+gases%2Caps%2C189&sr=8-3

Hello fellow Redditors! We've been keeping an eye on air pollution and how it directly impacts public health and the environment. Bhumi recently dived into some of the latest innovations in air pollution control technologies, and I think it's a topic that needs more visibility.

Air pollution, as many of us know, is a silent killer. It's not just about the haze over cities or the smog that hangs thick; it's also about tiny particles that can infiltrate our lungs and bloodstreams, causing heart disease, respiratory problems, and even affecting mental health. But as daunting as it sounds, there are promising advancements that are paving the way to tackle this global issue more effectively.

For instance, the introduction of more sophisticated filtration systems that target the finest particulates, and innovative methods for monitoring emissions via satellite technology, are changing the way we approach air quality management. Moreover, the rise of biofilters in industrial applications is notable, which utilise natural processes to capture and degrade pollutants.

Taking a deeper dive on Bhumi’s blog, the post addresses how these technologies not just help in reducing pollution but also, in a broader sense, contribute to our fight against climate change by monitoring and reducing CO2 emissions. It’s an interconnected battle, where gains in one area can significantly impact another.

While this paints a hopeful picture, it's also essential to discuss the accessibility of these technologies. Are they accessible across the globe, including in developing economies where air pollution is rampant due to industrial progress? Or are they still a distant dream for some areas?

This moves us to ponder — how do we make these technologies more universally accessible? Should governments invest more into researching and subsidising such technologies? Or is it up to private sectors to lead the charge with policy support?

Would love to hear your thoughts or any additional insights you might have on this matter! What do you think are the best ways forward in technologies for air pollution control?

https://preview.redd.it/ay3w35hhss6e1.png?width=1089&format=png&auto=webp&s=c28de16899af5a1c735b0c0b0b761e8f4ba28810

I have finally been offered an entry level job as an environmental scientist, it's been 2 years since I graduated college and I have been working in a different field since. Needless to say plant etymology was not used a ton in my old field, and it has been ages since I took that course in college. Are there any youtube videos, or online resources particularly good at refreshing me on that? Particularly south TX plants if possible. TIA

Hi all! I work at a tech startup and I'm trying to get more insight into the geospatial space and how it's applied to various aspects of environmental science. I put together a brief survey to get some feedback on pain points/challenges around geospatial data specifically. Also would love to chat with anyone working with geospatial data in their day to day to learn more about your work :)

Hello, Reddit community!

I’ve been pondering over the effectiveness of international agreements in addressing air pollution—a topic that we at Bhumi care deeply about, given our work with farmers in Southeast Asia to manage crop waste, which is a significant contributor to regional air pollution.

Today, I revisited our recent blog post on global efforts to combat this issue (you can check it out at Bhumi's website). It got me thinking about the multifaceted approach needed to tackle such a pervasive environmental problem. While international agreements aim to set unified standards for air quality and emissions, the actual outcomes often vary greatly between countries. This discrepancy usually stems from differences in economic capabilities, technological advancement, and political will.

What strikes me is the balance—or often, the imbalance—between developing economies, where industrial growth is sometimes prioritized over environmental concerns, and developed nations, which may have more resources to implement cleaner technologies. This global disparity poses a significant challenge in genuinely curbing air pollution on a worldwide scale.

I'm curious about your thoughts on this matter. How effective do you think international efforts like the Paris Agreement have been in aligning global actions against air pollution? Are there other local or regional initiatives that you feel have been successful or promising in your area? What role can individuals and communities play in complementing these larger agreements?

Looking forward to reading your insights and discussions!