Geology topics

Geoffrey DeBenedetto

Publications and source records attributed to Geoffrey DeBenedetto.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2022

Can we accurately estimate sediment budgets on Mars?

Sediment budgets are fundamentally important for planetary science. However, only one primary method, based on remote sensing, is currently available for determining extraterrestrial sediment budgets. For determining sediment budgets on Earth, both in-situ and remote sensing methods are available. Despite the widespread use of the two methods, there has been surprisingly little research on how well the sediment budgets produced by these two approaches reconcile with one another, which highlights the lack of quantitative understanding of errors for sediment budgets measured with remote sensing in planetary research. Therefore, there is a general need to expand our knowledge of sediment budgets. Here we use a background review and analog case study of an aeolian dunefield in Grand Canyon, Earth to frame a path forward for addressing shortcomings of remote sensing sediment budgets on Mars. We estimate a 53% percent difference in the sediment budget determined with remote sensing relative to in-situ methods for a simple endmember scenario of a dunefield within a unimodal wind directional regime and no external sediment supply. However, when we incorporated key sources of uncertainty in remote sensing change detection following methods commonly used by geomorphologists on Earth, the estimates of sediment budget differences relative to the in-situ method spanned a much larger range, from 3% to 138%. Our case study also suggests that sediment budget errors could be much larger under more complex wind direction, sediment supply, and physiographic settings, and that variability in those landscape characteristics might be used to better estimate errors for dunefield sediment budgets. We conclude that by comparing sediment budgets derived from in-situ measurements of sediment fluxes and from remote sensing measurements at many more analog sites on Earth, the aeolian research community, and the geomorphology discipline, could gain an understanding of the errors of the remote sensing method, which is used by investigators on other planetary bodies such as Mars. This could improve the ability to quantify sediment budgets on Mars – and, in the future, other planetary environments where high-resolution topographic data are available – as well as directly improve our ability to interpret extraterrestrial landscape evolution related to climate, weather, and geologic history.

Earth and Planetary Science Letters↗

USGS2020

Using small unmanned aircraft systems for measuring post-flood high-water marks and streambed elevations

Floods affected approximately two billion people around the world from 1998–2017, causing over 142,000 fatalities and over 656 billion U.S. dollars in economic losses. Flood data, such as the extent of inundation and peak flood stage, are needed to define the environmental, economic, and social impacts of significant flood events. Ground-based global positioning system (GPS) surveys of post-flood high-water marks (HWMs) and topography are commonly used to define flood inundation and stage, but can be time consuming, difficult, and expensive to conduct. Here, we demonstrate and test the use of small unmanned aircraft systems (sUAS) and close-range remote sensing techniques to collect high-accuracy flood data to define peak flood stage elevations and river cross sections. We evaluate the elevation accuracy of the HWMs from sUAS surveys by comparison with traditional GPS surveys, which have acceptable accuracy for many post-flood assessments, at two flood sites on two small streams in the United States. Mean elevation errors for the sUAS surveys were 0.07 m and 0.14 m for the semiarid and temperate sites respectively, and those values are similar to typical errors when measuring HWM elevations with GPS surveys. Results demonstrate that sUAS surveys of HWMs and cross sections can be an inexpensive and efficient alternative to GPS surveys, and we provide insights that can be used to decide whether sUAS or GPS techniques will be most efficient for post-flood surveying.

Remote Sensing↗

USGS2019

Reach-scale monitoring and modeling of rivers--Expanding hydraulic data collection beyond the cross section

For over 125 years, the U.S. Geological Survey streamgage network has provided important hydrologic information about rivers and streams throughout the Nation. Traditional streamgage methods provide reliable stage and streamflow data but typically only monitor stage at a single location in a river and require frequent calibration streamflow measurements. Direct measurements are not always feasible, therefore improved sensors and methods are being deployed at gages to better document streamflow conditions between measurements. The technology and techniques of reach-scale monitoring allow the U.S. Geological Survey to collect more data across the full range of streamflow without requiring that a hydrographer be present. The U.S. Geological Survey Arizona Water Science Center’s reach-scale monitoring program will enhance the Arizona streamgage network with more accurate streamflow measurements and provide more extensive streamflow records and geomorphological datasets for our agency partners and the public. Reach-scale monitoring installations and techniques are applicable to streams of the western United States and likely throughout the Nation.

Arizona↗