The effects of a changing pollution climate on throughfall deposition and cycling in a forested area in southern England

This study compares two sets of measurements of the composition of bulk precipitation and throughfall at a site in southern England with a 20-year gap between them. During this time, SO2 emissions from the UK fell by 82%, NOx emissions by 35% and NH3 emissions by 7%. These reductions were partly reflected in bulk precipitation, with deposition reductions of 56% in SO4,38% in NO3, 32% in NH4, and 73% in H+. In throughfall under Scots pine, the effects were more dramatic, with an 89% reduction in SO4 deposition and a 98% reduction in H+ deposition. The mean pH under these trees increased from 2.85 to 4.30. Nitrate and ammonium deposition in throughfall increased slightly, however. In the earlier period, the Scots pines were unable to neutralise the high flux of acidity associated with sulphur deposition, even though this was not a highly polluted part of the UK, and deciduous trees (oak and birch) were only able to neutralise it in summer when the leaves were present. In the later period, the sulphur flux had reduced to the point where the acidity could be neutralised by all species — the neutralisation mechanism is thus likely to be largely leaching of base cations and buffering substances from the foliage. The high fluxes are partly due to the fact that these are 60–80 year old trees growing in an open forest structure. The increase in NO3 and NH4 in throughfall in spite of decreased deposition seems likely due to a decrease in foliar uptake, perhaps due to the increasing nitrogen saturation of the catchment soils. These changes may increase the rate of soil microbial activity as nitrogen increases and acidity declines, with consequent effects on water quality of the catchment drainage stream.

Farmers’ attitudes to disease risk management in England: a comparative analysis of sheep and pig farmers

The UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) identified practices to reduce the risk of animal disease outbreaks. We report on the response of sheep and pig farmers in England to promotion of these practices. A conceptual framework was established from research on factors influencing adoption of animal health practices, linking knowledge, attitudes, social influences and perceived constraints to the implementation of specific practices. Qualitative data were collected from nine sheep and six pig enterprises in 2011. Thematic analysis explored attitudes and responses to the proposed practices, and factors influencing the likelihood of implementation. Most feel they are doing all they can reasonably do to minimise disease risk and that practices not being implemented are either not relevant or ineffective. There is little awareness and concern about risk from unseen threats. Pig farmers place more emphasis than sheep farmers on controlling wildlife, staff and visitor management and staff training. The main factors that influence livestock farmers’ decision on whether or not to implement a specific disease risk measure are: attitudes to, and perceptions of, disease risk; attitudes towards the specific measure and its efficacy; characteristics of the enterprise which they perceive as making a measure impractical; previous experience of a disease or of the measure; and the credibility of information and advice. Great importance is placed on access to authoritative information with most seeing vets as the prime source to interpret generic advice from national bodies in the local context. Uptake of disease risk measures could be increased by: improved risk communication through the farming press and vets to encourage farmers to recognise hidden threats; dissemination of credible early warning information to sharpen farmers’ assessment of risk; and targeted information through training events, farming press, vets and other advisers, and farmer groups, tailored to the different categories of livestock farmer.

Use of high-resolution NWP rainfall and river flow forecasts for advance warning of the Carlisle flood, north-west England

On the 8 January 2005 the city of Carlisle in north-west England was severely flooded following 2 days of almost continuous rain over the nearby hills. Orographic enhancement of the rain through the seeder–feeder mechanism led to the very high rainfall totals. This paper shows the impact of running the Met Office Unified Model (UM) with a grid spacing of 4 and 1 km compared to the 12 km available at the time of the event. These forecasts, and forecasts from the Nimrod nowcasting system, were fed into the Probability Distributed Model (PDM) to predict river flow at the outlets of two catchments important for flood warning. The results show the benefit of increased resolution in the UM, the benefit of coupling the high-resolution rainfall forecasts to the PDM and the improvement in timeliness of flood warning that might have been possible. Copyright © 2008 Royal Meteorological Society

The implications of climate change for the water environment in England

This paper reviews the implications of climate change for the water environment and its management in England. There is a large literature, but most studies have looked at flow volumes or nutrients and none have considered explicitly the implications of climate change for the delivery of water management objectives. Studies have been undertaken in a small number of locations. Studies have used observations from the past to infer future changes, and have used numerical simulation models with climate change scenarios. The literature indicates that climate change poses risks to the delivery of water management objectives, but that these risks depend on local catchment and water body conditions. Climate change affects the status of water bodies, and it affects the effectiveness of measures to manage the water environment and meet policy objectives. The future impact of climate change on the water environment and its management is uncertain. Impacts are dependent on changes in the duration of dry spells and frequency of ‘flushing’ events, which are highly uncertain and not included in current climate scenarios. There is a good qualitative understanding of ways in which systems may change, but interactions between components of the water environment are poorly understood. Predictive models are only available for some components, and model parametric and structural uncertainty has not been evaluated. The impacts of climate change depend on other pressures on the water environment in a catchment, and also on the management interventions that are undertaken to achieve water management objectives. The paper has also developed a series of consistent conceptual models describing the implications of climate change for pressures on the water environment, based around the source-pathway-receptor concept. They provide a framework for a systematic assessment across catchments and pressures of the implications of climate change for the water environment and its management.

Improving productivity and water use efficiency: a case study of farms in England

The idea of Sustainable Intensification comes as a response to the challenge of avoiding resources such as land, water and energy being overexploited while increasing food production for an increasing demand from a growing global population. Sustainable Intensification means that farmers need to simultaneously increase yields and sustainably use limited natural resources, such as water. Within the agricultural sector water has a number of uses including irrigation, spraying, drinking for livestock and washing (vegetables, livestock buildings). In order to achieve Sustainable Intensification measures are needed that enable policy makers and managers to inform them about the relative performance of farms as well as of possible ways to improve such performance. We provide a benchmarking tool to assess water use (relative) efficiency at a farm level, suggest pathways to improve farm level productivity by identifying best practices for reducing excessive use of water for irrigation. Data Envelopment Analysis techniques including analysis of returns to scale were used to evaluate any excess in agricultural water use of 66 Horticulture Farms based on different River Basin Catchments across England. We found that farms in the sample can reduce on average water requirements by 35% to achieve the same output (Gross Margin) when compared to their peers on the frontier. In addition, 47% of the farms operate under increasing returns to scale, indicating that farms will need to develop economies of scale to achieve input cost savings. Regarding the adoption of specific water use efficiency management practices, we found that the use of a decision support tool, recycling water and the installation of trickle/drip/spray lines irrigation system has a positive impact on water use efficiency at a farm level whereas the use of other irrigation systems such as the overhead irrigation system was found to have a negative effect on water use efficiency.

Generalized sine-Gordon/massive Thirring models and soliton/particle correspondences

We consider a real Lagrangian off-critical submodel describing the soliton sector of the so-called conformal affine sl(3)((1)) Toda model coupled to matter fields. The theory is treated as a constrained system in the context of Faddeev-Jackiw and the symplectic schemes. We exhibit the parent Lagrangian nature of the model from which generalizations of the sine-Gordon (GSG) or the massive Thirring (GMT) models are derivable. The dual description of the model is further emphasized by providing the relationships between bilinears of GMT spinors and relevant expressions of the GSG fields. In this way we exhibit the strong/weak coupling phases and the (generalized) soliton/particle correspondences of the model. The sl(n)((1)) case is also outlined. (C) 2002 American Institute of Physics.

Zu Richard Beer-Hofmanns siebzigsten Geburtstag

Leo Hirsch

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 4 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Richard Bach (p. I 2, 131-358)

24 Briefe zwischen Richard Bach und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Alfred Chalk und Max Horkheimer, 17.10.1939, 14.11.1939; 3 Briefe von Morduch Lexandrowitsch und der American Consulate General, 1939; 4 Briefe von der American Consulate General und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Amtstgericht Berlin, 15.03.1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Stiedry, 05.12.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den Collector of Custom, 26.10.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Josef Maier und Carson Alexandrowitsch, 28.06.1938, 29.06.1938; 1 Brief von Margarete Baruch an Alice Maier, 11.04.1938; 1 Brief von Emanuel List an Carson Alexandrowitsch, 23.02.1938; 1 Abschrift des Briefes von der Metropolitan Opera Association New York an Morduch Lexandrowitsch, 22.02.1938; 1 Brief von Jacques Barzun an Max Horkheimer, 09.07.1947; 4 Briefe zwischen K. Baschwitz und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1946; 2 Briefe zwischen E. Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 08.04.1935, 27.05.1935; 4 Briefe zwischen Fritz Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Lina Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 20.07.1942, 16,08,1942; 4 Briefe zwsichen Rudolf Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 1937; 15 Briefe zwischen Gertrud Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den Collector of Customs, 15.03.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen I. Hannah Davidson vom Jewish Community Center San Francisco und Max Horkheimer, 19.09.1938, 29.09.1938; 2 Briefe zwsichen I. Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 25.09.1938, 29.09.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Klopfer, 27.09.1938; 3 Briefe zwischen Y.M.H.A. - Y.W.H.A The Jewish Center of Saint Louis und Max Horkheimer, 19.09.1938, 1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Julius Rosenberg, 17.09.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Jwish Center Salt Lake City, Utah, 07.09.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Jewish Community Center San Fransisco, 07.09.1938; 3 Briefe zwischen dem New York Section of the National Council of Jewish Women und Max Horkheimer, 07.04.1938, 1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Baum und Max Horkheimer, 12.03.1946, 25.05.1946; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Charles A. Beard , 12.12.1934; 1 Brief von Charles A. Beard an C. A. Beard; 5 Briefe von Friedrich Pollock an Charles A. Beard, 1940-1941; 5 Briefe zwischen Lilo Beck und Max Horkheimer, 1940-1941; 7 Briefe zwischen Maximilian Beck und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940; 1 Brief von Paul Tillich an Max Horkheimer , 01.10.1940; 1 Brief von dem Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars New York an Max Horkheimer, 19.04.1940; 5 Briefe zwischen Konrad Bekker und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1939; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Ludwig Bendix, 1921, 1937; 1 Brief von Peter Bendmann an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Ruth Benedict, 30.07.1937; 1 Brief von Eric Russel Bentley an Max Horkheimer, 30.01.1945; 1 Brief von George Berg an Max Horkheimer, 12.07.1945; 2 Briefe zwischen Egon Bergel und Max Horkheimer, 18.08.1938, 22.08.1938; 1 Brief von Marie Jahoda an Max Horkheimer, 14.07.1928; 1 Brief von Theodor W. Adorno an Kurt Bergel, 09.09.1939; 15 Briefe zwischen Klaus Berger und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1943; 1 Brief von Frederick Pollock an Philip M. Hayden von der Columbia University New York, 05.03.1942; 1 Brief von Hans Venedey an Max Horkheimer, 05.03.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Ida Berger-Chevant, 18.02.1939;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 16 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Gerhart Jacoby Gordon (p. I 8, 202-379)

2 Briefe von A. Gandon an Max Horkheimer, Februrar 1936; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Lloyd K. Garrison, 25.03.1941; 4 Briefe zwischen Moritz Geiger und Max Horkheimer, 01.12.1935, 1935; 1 Lebenslauf von Alvin Johnsson an Friedrich Pollock; 1 Brief von Alvon Johnson an Friedrich Pollock, 39.09.1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Harald Genssler, 04.09.1949; 1 Brief von der George Washington University Washington an Max Horkheimer, 01.03.1939; 2 Briefe von Wolfgang Gerloff an Max Horkheimer, 1934, 1939; 2 Briefe zwsichen Hans Gerth und Max Horkheimer, 28.10.1937, 16.11.1937; 1 Brief von M. Getzer anMax Horkheimer, 04.05.1934; 12 Briefe zwsichen Edgar V. M. Gilbert und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1940; 1 Brief von der Gillespie, Kinsports & Bears Travel Agency New York an Max Horkheimer, 16.04.1935; 1 Entwurf von Max Horkheimer an Morris Ginsberg, Dezember 1935; 19 Briefe zwsichen Morris Ginsberg, Ethel Ginsberg und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Robert Morrison MacIver und Max Horkheimer, 18.08.1937, 16.08.1937; 1 Brief von H. Girsberger an Max Horkheimer, 17.08.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Glass, 24.12.1940; 1 Brief von der Glidden Buick Corporation New York an Max Horkheimer, 05.06.1940; 1 Heiratsanzeige von Vera Gold; 4 Briefe zwischen Oskar Goldberg und Max Horkheimer, 1941, 27.08.1941; 10 Briefe zwischen Hans Goldmann und Max Horkheimer, 1934-1937; 14 Briefe zwischen Alfons Goldschmidt und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1938; 7 Briefe zwsichen dem Greater New York Coordinating Committee for German Refugees, New York und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Simon Guggenheim, 24.01.1938; 3 Briefe zwischen Aron Goldschmidt und Max Horkheimer, 02.02.1939, Mai 1942; 2 Briefe zwischen Berta Goldschmidt und Max Horkheimer, 14.01.1941, 25.02.1941; 4 Briefe von Emma Goldschmidt an Juliette Favez, 1938-1940; 5 Briefe zwischen Emma Goldschmidt und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Ernst L. Goldschmidt und Max Horkheimer, 08.07.1937, 18.06.1937; 1 Brief von Thea Goldschmidt an Max Horkheimer, 16.04.1935; 14 Briefe zwischen Kurt Goldstein und Max Horkheimer, 1934-1941; 19 Briefe zwsichen Gerhart Jacoby Gordon und Max Horkheimer, 1934-1937;