“Geosciences are important for humanity” is the central message of a model presented to promote the geosciences as essential to the development of Canada and the world. Components of the geosciences directly or indirectly address all 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals, and geoscientific knowledge is essential in efforts to address climate change. Despite this broad relevance, many Canadians remain unaware of the importance of the geosciences, partly because the discipline is not consistently offered as a standalone high school course in all provinces and territories. The number of students entering undergraduate geology major programs declined by over 40% between 2015 and 2022, and this creates challenges within Canada’s workforce. Currently, gaps in the workforce are filled through immigration, but the federal government is now starting to limit immigration. The seven components of the proposed model include: public engagement to promote the geosciences in varied settings; engagement with politicians and policy makers; engagement with resource and other industries; development and implementation of strategic plans to promote improved awareness of the geosciences; development of public education, outreach and communication programs; promotion of courses and engagement programs at post-secondary institutions; and coordination with geoscience societies and geological surveys. Hosting the International Geological Congress (IGC) 2028 could unite the Canadian geoscience community by strengthening connections between academic geoscientists and government, advocating for a Canadian Research Chair related to geoscience education and outreach, developing an inventory for geoscience education and outreach programs, and exploring creative ways to develop standalone geoscience courses in high school. If all Canadian geoscientists use the model components to emphasize the importance of the geosciences to humanity, we can collectively work towards better public understanding of the relevance of the geosciences to most aspects of life in Canada and improve the future of our vital discipline.

How can we not afford to scientifically probe magma? Fifteen years of accidental drilling encounters with magma have shown that it can be done safely with recovery of magmatic and partial melt samples quenched in situ. More could be gained if preceded by thorough scientific preparation and followed by long-term monitoring. Through the panoply of instruments now available, we can measure temperature, pressure, strain, heat and mass transport and changes over time. In 2009, the Iceland Deep Drilling Program well #1 reached rhyolitic magma at 2100 m depth under Krafla Caldera. The project was exemplary in sharing provocative results, but only hints at what is possible. Equilibrium temperatures were estimated by traditional petrologic techniques to be 850 – 1100 C. Pressure estimates range from 40 – 90 MPa with both extremes seemingly problematic, because for the first time we know the depth of a magma body to 4 significant figures. The lowest value is below lithostatic and the highest could be inherited from deeper levels. Now it appears that the lower pressure is what magma “feels”. But without drilling, would traditional estimates be good enough? Magma is somewhere between 1500 – 4000 m depth and with temperature corresponding to some type of magma? Actually, we would not even know that shallow magma is there but now in hindsight we see it geophysically. Ground-truth testing is how methodologies are improved. Our situation is like speculating about the nature of the Moon without sampling it. The cost of probing Earth’s magma is high and the probability of success uncertain, but far less so on either count than for extraterrestrial exploration. On Earth we are more restrained by self-imposed limits than by our technical capabilities. Besides understanding the differentiation of our planet, we have two compelling reasons for bold exploration: 1) We need the baseload, magma resource with its far higher temperature, energy density, and more extensive thermal fracturing than conventional geothermal; 2) We need to raise the level of reliability of eruption forecasts by testing our magma-dynamic models directly, thereby saving countless lives. As with other endeavors that are expensive for a single country to undertake but that benefit all humankind, a way forward is through an international infrastructure, where teams of scientists can conduct experiments with magma and superhot fluids. This is analogous to particle accelerators and the complement to outer space travel: inner space. The Krafla Magma Testbed is a much-needed step and an opportunity for all planetary, magma, volcano, and hydrothermal scientists to test their methods and ideas. KMT will drill a doublet of wells to magma for long-term monitoring and experimentation, respectively. The project, now organized as a legal entity within the Iceland Geothermal Research Cluster (GEORG), in partnership with the National Power Company of Iceland (Landsvirkjun), Iceland Energy GeoSurvey (ISOR), and a multinational team of scientists and engineers, under the aegis of the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP), is ready. Magma could have been intentionally explored before. It is time to ask, “Why not now?”

How can we not afford to scientifically probe magma? Fifteen years of accidental drilling encounters with magma have shown that it can be done safely with recovery of magmatic and partial melt samples quenched in situ. More could be gained if preceded by thorough scientific preparation and followed by long-term monitoring. Through the panoply of instruments now available, we can measure temperature, pressure, strain, heat and mass transport and changes over time. In 2009, the Iceland Deep Drilling Program well #1 reached rhyolitic magma at 2100 m depth under Krafla Caldera. The project was exemplary in sharing provocative results, but only hints at what is possible. Equilibrium temperatures were estimated by traditional petrologic techniques to be 850 – 1100 C. Pressure estimates range from 40 – 90 MPa with both extremes seemingly problematic, because for the first time we know the depth of a magma body to 4 significant figures. The lowest value is below lithostatic and the highest could be inherited from deeper levels. Now it appears that the lower pressure is what magma “feels”. But without drilling, would traditional estimates be good enough? Magma is somewhere between 1500 – 4000 m depth and with temperature corresponding to some type of magma? Actually, we would not even know that shallow magma is there but now in hindsight we see it geophysically. Ground-truth testing is how methodologies are improved. Our situation is like speculating about the nature of the Moon without sampling it. The cost of probing Earth’s magma is high and the probability of success uncertain, but far less so on either count than for extraterrestrial exploration. On Earth we are more restrained by self-imposed limits than by our technical capabilities. Besides understanding the differentiation of our planet, we have two compelling reasons for bold exploration: 1) We need the baseload, magma resource with its far higher temperature, energy density, and more extensive thermal fracturing than conventional geothermal; 2) We need to raise the level of reliability of eruption forecasts by testing our magma-dynamic models directly, thereby saving countless lives. As with other endeavors that are expensive for a single country to undertake but that benefit all humankind, a way forward is through an international infrastructure, where teams of scientists can conduct experiments with magma and superhot fluids. This is analogous to particle accelerators and the complement to outer space travel: inner space.  The Krafla Magma Testbed is a much-needed step and an opportunity for all planetary, magma, volcano, and hydrothermal scientists to test their methods and ideas. KMT will drill a doublet of wells to magma for long-term monitoring and experimentation, respectively. The project, now organized as a legal entity within the Iceland Geothermal Research Cluster (GEORG), in partnership with the National Power Company of Iceland (Landsvirkjun), Iceland Energy GeoSurvey (ISOR), and a multinational team of scientists and engineers, under the aegis of the International Continental Scientific Drilling Program (ICDP), is ready. Magma could have been intentionally explored before. It is time to ask, “Why not now?”

<p>Driven by the need to understand magmatic systems, to improve volcano monitoring strategy, and to develop next-generation, high-enthalpy, geothermal energy, we introduce the <strong>Krafla Magma Testbed (KMT) </strong>– located in Northeast Iceland. KMT aims to establish the first magma observatory – an international, open access, scientific platform to advance ductile zone to magma research via drilling and novel sensor systems. This frontier undertaking will enable direct, in situ sampling, instrumentation and manipulation, and monitoring of magma and its interface with solid Earth’s crust, vastly advancing models of high-temperature crustal processes. </p> <p>This initiative is enabled by past geothermal drilling at Krafla volcano that was serendipitously intersected and thus determined the exact location of magma for the first time. This unprecedented experience, including safe control of the wells, provides the basis for KMT, which stands to transform modern volcanology and geothermic disciplines. </p> <p>KMT will develop a long-term infrastructure (>25 years) for the conduct of interdisciplinary scientific, engineering, technological, and educational activities. The Krafla volcano has the advantage of a long history of geological study, volcano monitoring, and drilling as well as supporting surface facilities combining to produce the safest and most efficient base from which to explore Earth beyond the solidus.  </p> <p>KMT will be the place to develop (1) our science of hot and molten Earth; (2) new ways of understanding and monitoring volcanoes; (3) our ability to extract and exploit geothermal energy sources; and (4) new technology and materials that function in the most extreme conditions in planetary systems. </p> <p>The value of potential gains in fundamental understanding of crustal processes is beyond our possibility to estimate. There is the prospect of an order of magnitude gain in geothermal energy productivity. The need to improve understanding of the source of catastrophic eruptions and to better forecast them is a compelling humanitarian one.</p>

The International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) www.iugs60.org is the global champion for what is variously referred to as Earth sciences, Solid Earth Science or Geological Sciences. It is part of the International Science Council (ISC) https://council.science/ and works with several related ISC Unions and UNESCO. Our Earth is faced with mounting challenges related to the climate crisis, which are largely due to the extraction and burning of fossil fuels. The geological sciences have in past decades paved the way in understanding how to locate these fuels for industry to extract and society to use. The geological sciences also underpin mineral extraction, provision of building materials, groundwater, quality of soils and many other issues all of which are essential for human life on Earth. The transition is underway and geoscientists will lead on several issues, most of which will raise ethical issues: subsurface energy systems in terms of ground stability, seismicity, extent of the resource the safety of the process; mining and the need for critical metals to satisfy new energy technologies – this includes more mining locally and ethically, thus affecting global mining regions and ethically, but also mining in extreme conditions e.g., on the seafloor or the moon; intensive farming and food production and the impacts on water supply and soil quality; the continued need for gold to underpin cryptocurrency; the need for sustainable investment and the move away from oil and gas investments. There are many more examples and all require a reasoned approach involving a delicate interplay of engineering, business, scientists including social and economic experts, and the public. The geological sciences will continue to be the part of the Earth systems science domains that drive economic growth. International Unions and meetings such as EGU are fora in which these debates can happen, however all too often they fail to bring together all the stakeholder in the debate. We as geoscientists need to create the space to engage with the wider communities in the next industrial revolution.

This chapter describes a qualitative study of the experiences of structured clinical management (SCM) practitioners in UK National Health Service (NHS) services. To date, there have been no published qualitative studies of the experiences of mental health professionals providing SCM to service users with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD). When considering the implementation and future development of an intervention, the qualitative experiences of both practitioners and service users helpfully inform high-quality improvement initiatives. It aims to help inform and shape the implementation of SCM in any type of mental health service. Analysis of the data highlights themes which demonstrates that SCM not only benefits the service user (clinical evidence) but also the practitioner and the wider system.

Super-hot geothermal systems (SHGS) would be much more efficient in generating electric power than conventional systems. The heat source is expected to be magma accumulated just below the producing reservoir. These comprise a system of coupled, stacked liquid reservoirs, one of magma and one of hydrothermal fluid. Between them is hot rock, so hot that it will be ductile. The liquids in both reservoirs are expected to convect. In the hydrothermal reservoir, convection is by porous flow, where the fluid constitutes < 10 vol.% of the reservoir. For the magma reservoir, the circulating liquid+crystal suspension constitutes 100 vol.% of its container. Heat is advected upward through the magma, conducted through its ductile rock lid, and then advected upward by hydrothermal fluid where it can be extracted for power production. The rate-controlling step in transporting energy from deep crust to near surface is conduction through the magma’s lid, for which thickness is the critical factor. Heat flux from magma to hydrothermal fluid is inversely proportional to the thickness of the lid. The response time between a perturbation in one reservoir and its effect on the other is proportional to the square of the lid thickness. Most of the thermal energy in the system is contained within the magma, because magma’s energy is released not just be cooling but by latent heat of crystallization. Direct evidence for such a model is provided by accidental encounters with silicic magma by geothermal drilling at Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii; Krafla Caldera, Iceland; and Menengai Caldera, Kenya. The most complete data comes from the Iceland Deep Drilling Project’s IDDP-1 within Landsvirkjun’s (National Power Company of Iceland) Krafla Geothermal Project. IDDP-1 produced a sustained power output estimated at >100 MWt. The magma’s lid is < 20 m with a thermal gradient of > 20C/m, yielding a heat flow of > 40 W/m and a characteristic response time of about one year or less, well within the lifetime of a power plant. Thus, extracting superheated fluid from adjacent the magma body would in effect be using magma energy. There are, however, major challenges to putting magma energy into practice, including finding alloys and cements that will make the boreholes sustainable, treating the fluids so they can be introduced to turbines, and successfully prospecting for other magmatic sources. Besides its potential for power production, understanding where magma is and how it behaves is critical for mitigating risks to communities under threat of explosive eruptions. Thus was born the concept of the Krafla Magma Testbed (KMT). KMT will provide long-term infrastructure where science and engineering teams can conduct sampling, observations, and experiments in magma and its superhot rock envelope. Example analogues from other science fields are particle accelerators and telescope arrays. Critical experiments in Phase One of KMT include: 1) core through the rock-magma transition; 2) emplace a thermocouple string to measure heat flux through magma’s conductive lid; 3) provide (under)ground truth for testing geophysical techniques for locating magma. As the project progresses, further tests of drilling materials, borehole design, extreme sensors, and energy extraction will be conducted and a time series of magma samples obtained. KMT will be the first deep laboratory in the last frontier of Earth’s crust, with the potential to revolutionize both geothermal energy and volcanology.

The ultimate source of geothermal energy is magma. This obvious consideration should be enough to establish close relationships between research in geothermal energy systems, and that connected with magmatic and volcanic systems, namely, volcanology. As a matter of fact, the two were closely linked decades ago, but then they diverged and continued to develop mostly as separate disciplines, each one having its own aims, projects, conferences, journals, and communities. Experts in geothermal system circulation, geothermal fluid flow dynamics and thermodynamics, and geothermal/volcanic fluid geochemistry, populate both communities, however, they rarely interact, and their advance in interpretation and modeling is poorly transferred to each other. That happens at a time when the demand for clean, renewable energy sources is increasingly high, and in a panorama whereby other renewable energy sources such as solar and wind have been able to expand and respond much more effectively than geothermal energy. It is a fact that the heat flux from the Earth interior can provide enormously more energy than to-date global production levels; in fact, geothermal energy is still exploiting just the skin of an immense reservoir extending to temperatures one order of magnitude higher than those of typical productive geothermal fluids, and existing at similarly shallow depths. Those reservoirs are represented by magma itself, and by the supercritical fluids circulating in its proximity. While the search for supercritical fluids has seen increased interest during last years, recent unexpected encounters of geothermal well drills with shallow magma are opening completely new perspectives, suggesting the feasibility of close-to-magma volcano monitoring and energy exploitation systems. The scientific, technological, and logistic challenges that such a breaking-through development requires are the subject of KMT: Krafla Magma Testbed, a project which gathers scientists and industries from all over the world in an international effort towards the realization of the first magma observatory ever. That will be represented by a permanent infrastructure open into rhyolitic magma at about 2 km depth inside the Krafla caldera, Iceland, and dedicated to research and experimentation on volcano monitoring and geothermal energy production systems in the third millennium, as well as on new technologies for extreme condition environments.

Logging data are measurements of physical properties of the formation surrounding a borehole, acquired in situ after completion of coring (wireline logging) or during drilling (Logging-While-Drilling, LWD). The range of data (resistivity, gamma radiation, velocity, density, borehole images,…) in any hole depends on the scientific objectives and operational constraints.

Logging data are measurements of physical properties of the formation surrounding a borehole, acquired in situ after completion of coring (wireline logging) or during drilling (Logging-While-Drilling, LWD). The range of data (resistivity, gamma radiation, velocity, density, borehole images,…) in any hole depends on the scientific objectives and operational constraints.

This short article provides my views - and not necessarily views that are shared by the British Geological Survey, where I was executive director from 2006-19, or by the Earth science community in general. I have outlined some of the trends that I see as important for the geosciences, largely from a solid-Earth perspective. I stress that fundamental discovery science in this sector must be, and will largely continue to be, led by the academic community but that Earth sciences research needs to be more focused on problem solving rather than refining our knowledge of the problems that face the Earth system. Academics and government laboratories have distinct but complementary roles in the pursuit of discovery and in applied geoscience research and training of geoscientists.

Although Pb, U, and Th may be fractionated between crude oil and formation waters, Pb isotopes are not. This unique property makes Pb isotopes a particularly useful marker of hydrocarbon generation and migration. Here we show that Pb isotopes offer a new vision of long-range (secondary) oil migration relevant to the formation of oil fields. North Sea oils are largely generated from Jurassic black shales, yet their Pb isotopes are mixtures of Cenozoic to Proterozoic end-members. The same observation is made for crude oils from the Paris Basin, the Barents Sea, Libya, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, and Australia. Bulk Pb in crude oil therefore, for the most part, is foreign to its source rock(s). Our high-precision Pb isotope data on 195 crude oils worldwide, the first such data set in the published literature, and 17 Northern European black shales indicate that deep-seated Pb components originating beneath the source rocks are ubiquitous in crude oil. This implies that oil fields are embedded in basinal convective systems of hydrous fluids heated from below. Plumes of hot fluids rise from the lower thermal boundary layer, which Pb isotopes require douse the basement, into the core of the porous-flow convective cell where they dissolve the newly formed hydrocarbons sequestered in the source rocks. The fluids finally unload unmixed formation waters and crude oil at the base of the upper (conductive) boundary layer where they can be trapped in favorable sites. Based on these new insights we argue that Pb isotopes in crude oil constitute a good tracer of oil migration.

The NE Fennoscandian Shield comprises the Northern (Kola) Belt in Finland and the Southern Belt in Karelia. The belts host mafic-ultramafic layered Cu-Ni-Cr and Pt-Pd-bearing intrusions. They were studied using precise isotope analyses with U-Pb on zircon and baddeleyite and Sm-Nd on rock-forming silicates and sulfides. The analyses indicate the 130 Ma magmatic evolution with major events at 2.53, 2.50, 2.45, and 2.40 Ga. It is considered to be governed by the long-lived mantle plume activity. Barren phases were dated at 2.53 Ga for orthopyroxenites and olivine gabbro in the Fedorovo-Pansky massif. Main PGE-bearing phases of gabbronorite (Mt. Generalskaya), norite (Monchepluton), and gabbronorites (Fedorovo-Pansky and Monchetundra massifs) yielded ages of 2.50 Ga. Anorthosites of Mt. Generalskaya, the Fedorovo-Pansky and Monchetundra massifs occurred at the 2.45 Ga PGE-bearing phase. According to regional geochronological correlations, this widespread event emplaced layered PGE-bearing intrusions of Finland (Penikat, Kemi, Koitelainen) and mafic intrusions in Karelia. Dikes of the final mafic magmatic pulse at 2.40 Ga are present in the Imandra lopolith. Slightly negative εNd values and ISr values of 0.703–0.704 suggest the layered intrusions to originate from an enriched EM-1-like mantle reservoir.

The NE Fennoscandian Shield comprises the Northern (Kola) Belt in Finland and the Southern Belt in Karelia. The belts host mafic-ultramafic layered Cu-Ni-Cr and Pt-Pd-bearing intrusions. They were studied using precise isotope analyses with U-Pb on zircon and baddeleyite and Sm-Nd on rock-forming silicates and sulfides. The analyses indicate the 130 Ma magmatic evolution with major events at 2.53, 2.50, 2.45, and 2.40 Ga. It is considered to be governed by the long-lived mantle plume activity. Barren phases were dated at 2.53 Ga for orthopyroxenites and olivine gabbro in the Fedorovo-Pansky massif. Main PGE-bearing phases of gabbronorite (Mt. Generalskaya), norite (Monchepluton), and gabbronorites (Fedorovo-Pansky and Monchetundra massifs) yielded ages of 2.50 Ga. Anorthosites of Mt. Generalskaya, the Fedorovo-Pansky and Monchetundra massifs occurred at the 2.45 Ga PGE-bearing phase. According to regional geochronological correlations, this widespread event emplaced layered PGE-bearing intrusions of Finland (Penikat, Kemi, Koitelainen) and mafic intrusions in Karelia. Dikes of the final mafic magmatic pulse at 2.40 Ga are present in the Imandra lopolith. Slightly negative epsilon Nd values and ISr values of 0.703-0.704 suggest the layered intrusions to originate from an enriched EM-1-like mantle reservoir.

This manuscript is a useful contribution of data from numerous oil and gas wells in China and a world-wide compilation.It provides very useful data that is on-line in the PANGEA data-base.I would expect these data to be used by a number of users both from academia and industry and this is a good example of open data.The only thing I struggle with is the static view of basins in these models.The oil and gas community model the source rocks as expelling gas and oil simply due to subsidence and compaction -as in Figure 9.This is largely because the oil and gas producers are mainly interested in the reservoir rather than the source -so they focus on the trapping process.Here the authors attempt to define limits for expulsion and

The IBM POWER9 architecture offers a substantial set of novel and performance-improvement features that are made available to both scale-up and scale-out applications via system software. These features provide significant performance improvements for cognitive, cloud, and virtualization workloads, many of which use dynamic scripting languages. In this paper, we describe some of the key features.