"Getting a Grip on Geysers"- An Interview with Mara Reed

by Lorena Salvado, San Marin High School 

Geysers are one of the most fascinating geological phenomenons- with only a few 1000 on our planet, each requires specific conditions of magma streams, water, and geological networks to work. Most of today's geysers were formed 14,000 years ago- after the last glacial era of our planet. They operate under very intricate conditions-with lots of mystery around their exact workings, which is why Mara Reed became intrigued by them. Reed is a Ph.D. candidate at UC Berkeley's Department of Earth and Planetary Science, and she works at geyser sites - mainly in Yellowstone National Park- spending her days researching and collecting data. She came to Marin Science Seminar on Wednesday February 7th, 2024 and gave a talk about the current research concerning geysers as well as their importance. In this interview, she will share a few tidbits about her work and give some advice. 

Mara Reed

What is your favorite geyser hike?

I enjoy hikes to the edge of Shoshone Geyser Basin in Yellowstone’s backcountry. If you hike in June or July, you’ll see incredible wildflowers along the way. It can be done as a long day hike (18 miles round trip) but most people choose to backpack. The trail passes by some interesting geyser formations. Just be sure to stay on the path, for your safety and the protection of the thermal features.

How much of your time is spent out in the field versus in the lab, which part do you like more?

I actually do my best to stay out of the lab! Most of my work involves spending just a couple weeks in the field every year, and then spending the rest of the time managing, analyzing, and writing about the field data. I find the lab work that relates to water chemistry or rock properties very “fiddly,” and would rather be outside.

How does geothermal energy collection affect geysers (In Iceland or other locations)?

There is almost always a negative effect, whether from large scale power production (like in Iceland and the US) or from smaller scale heating (like in New Zealand). Geysers need water and heat to operate, and geothermal wells can take both of those things away. The US once had a few geyser fields in Nevada, including significant ones at Beowawe and Steamboat Springs, but geyser activity declined and then ceased after geothermal power production started. I think geothermal energy is necessary if we want to get away from fossil fuel reliance but I do hope the world’s remaining geyser fields stay protected.

Do you think that knowledge of geysers on planet earth could affect our developments or research on other planets ( i.e. Mars or the Moon)?

We do find geyser-like features on other solar system bodies, including Enceladus (moon of Saturn) and Europa (moon of Jupiter), but we think they  form and operate differently than geysers on Earth. I think hydrothermal areas and geysers are good laboratories to study how life lives and even thrives in extreme environments. We now know that there are microorganisms that live directly inside Old Faithful Geyser’s vent, which is pretty incredible. Understanding the present day life that exists in these environments can help us understand how life formed on our planet and where we might look for life elsewhere in the solar system.

How can the public help with geysers or geyser research?

We are very fortunate to have the world’s most concentrated geyser field in our backyard. The biggest thing people can do is to be a good steward of these areas. For visitors to Yellowstone, that means following the rules—keep to the trails and don’t mess with the geysers. It’s not just a safety thing. Geyser formations and bacteria mats are extremely delicate. Damage can be permanent. For anyone really interested in geysers and contributing to geyser monitoring, I would recommend reaching out to the Geyser Observation and Study Association (GOSA) for resources and tips on getting involved. Most geysers are still not monitored by scientific equipment, so visual observations of geyser activity are still a very important resource for scientists.

What's a piece of advice you would give to someone wanting to pursue a career in geyser research?

Since geyser science intersects with many different fields, it’s helpful to have a broad knowledge base. A solid foundation in physics, chemistry, and hydrogeology will serve you well. For those interested in pursuing scientific research in general, there are many opportunities at the college level. Some universities have strong undergraduate research programs (this is something to think about when choosing where to apply to college), but you can also apply for Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) programs where you can get paid to do research, usually over the summer at a certain university. Early exposure to research helps you figure out if you like doing it and what research questions interest you. 

Lion Geyser picture by Mara Reed 

You can watch Mara Reed's Marin Science Seminar presentation here, "Getting a Grip on Geysers" with Mara Reed, Ph.D. candidate at UC Berkeley’s Department of Earth and Planetary Science

You can learn more about Mara Reed and her work here : https://www.marareed.com/

As well as check out her awesome photography here : photography  

License for all photos used : license 

And additional information used in this article can be found here , "USGS How do Geysers Work" 

"Geoengineering and Terraforming: the manipulation of climate on Earth and other planets” - An Interview with Warren Wiscombe of NASA- Goddard Space Flight Center

"Geoengineering and Terraforming: the manipulation of  climate on Earth and other planets” - An Interview with Warren Wiscombe of NASA- Goddard Space Flight Center

En-Ya Zhang (MSS Intern, Terra Linda High School)

Warren Wiscombe worked at the NASA- Goddard Space Flight Center for thirty years, researching the interaction between the sun, clouds, and aerosols. He received a B.S. in Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T.) and a Ph.D. in Applied Maths from the California Institute of Technology (CalTech). This event, "Geoengineering and Terraforming: the manipulation of climate on Earth and other planets", took place on January 29, 2020, in Room 207, at Terra Linda High School. ( 320 Nova Albion Way)

1. Were you always interested in geoengineering and terraforming? Or were they topics that piqued your interest later on in life?

I started in climate in 1970.  For the first 10 years, we never discussed geoengineering because climate science was primitive and we were still hashing out the basics.  However, in the early 1980's, the work on Nuclear Winter (the famous TTAPS paper) caught everyone's attention, and that was a form of unintentional geoengineering.  It started us down the road of thinking about how humans could put aerosol in the stratosphere and alter the climate, even though the word geoengineering was not even defined yet.

The asteroid impact work of Alvarez et al. piggybacked on the Nuclear Winter work and even used the same models.  That work also caught the attention of all climate scientists at the time.

In spite of the attempt to rewrite history by young climate scientists, we were far from sure about global warming until the end of the 1980's.  Hansen was privately criticized by 90% of my colleagues for testifying to Congress in 1989 that "global warming is here", and in fact he was wrong in ascribing the US drought at that time to global warming.  So the climate field was obviously not rushing to counteract something they weren't sure was even real.

It was only as the 1990's wore on, and global temperatures contined their climb, that the idea of geoengineering gained any traction at all.  Toward the end of the 90's, Ken Caldeira raised the profile of ocean acidification, a consequence of CO2 rise that could not be counteracted except by removing CO2 from the atmosphere, which more or less began the CCS branch of geoengineering.

Even in the 2000-2010 period, there was a lot of internal conflict within the field about geoengineering.  I was an early advocate, and as Chief Scientist of a DOE climate program, I strongly urged DOE to start a geoengineering research program, but they were afraid of it and rebuffed my idea.  Paul Crutzen, then Phil Rasch and other early adopter, gave more credibility and respectability to geoengineering, but it was still an uphill battle against geoengineering deniers like Alan Robock, who staked out the moral high ground and claimed it was immoral to do geoengineering because there would be winners and losers and the losers would have no voice.

As to terraforming, it was a fringe subject until recently -- not disrespected, but hardly anyone in planetary science worked on it.  I followed the subject, but never worked on it.  Chris McKay of NASA Ames was its biggest student and spokesman on the research side.  Nobody would support implementation, because NASA had a "Planetary Protection Officer" whose sole job was to prevent any meddling with other planets.  NASA requires all spacecraft to be perfectly sterile, etc.  I have always supported terraforming because I strongly believe, based on my study of habitability, that we are likely the only intelligent species with technology for space travel in the entire galaxy.  Our species will die out if we remain on Earth -- that is 100% certain.  So our only shot at longevity is to go to other planets.  But our study of 1000s of exoplanets has revealed that few if any are suitable for human life.  So those exoplanets will need to be terraformed.  We need to start figuring out how to do that.  K.S. Robinson gave us some hints in his books Red Mars, Green Mars, but there is a lot more research to do.  Perhaps, for example, we need to prepare planets by sending appropriate bacteria 1000 years before we send humans.


2. Geoengineering is a rather controversial topic. Do you think that the outcome of the process would be worth the consequences?

I think humans have been doing geoengineering for 10,000 years or more, certainly since the start of agriculture, and even before that with widespread burning of forests and grasslands.  So to me the only question is, do you geoengineer purposely, or inadvertently?  I pick purposely.  Also, geoengineering is training wheels for terraforming, which I also favor.  Hard as it seems right now, geoengineering the Earth is a lot easier than terraforming other planets, and it is time for us to get started on that steep learning curve.

I don't buy the moral arguments against geoengineering.  Survival of humanity and civilization trumps fear of unintended consequences.


3. What kinds of geoengineering projects do you do at the NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center?

Goddard didn't do any work on geoengineering when I was there.  They were afraid of the topic.  Scientists as a group are actually quite timid.  Science managers are even more timid.  There is very little real risk-taking, and risk-takers are often harshly criticized.  I don't think the public quite realizes how conservative science is.


4. Do you think that terraforming Mars would be a possibility in the near future? Why or why not?

Not in the near future.  We don't even have an algorithm for doing it, a checklist if you will.  My own concern is that you don't just plop down humans on Mars and expect things to work out.  You have to prepare the soil and the atmosphere first.  If you study soil on Earth, you realize that it doesn't exist on Mars, because "soil" is full of microbes that make plants possible.  Mars has no such microbes.  If we are going to grow stuff on Mars, we need a better atmosphere and we need soil that works (the guy in The Martian grew potatoes using human poop, but they never mentioned whether other necessities, like nitrogen-fixing bacteria, would also be needed).  As to the atmosphere, you need a thicker atmosphere with more CO2, and you need some O2 to form an ozone layer to protect plants from UV radiation.  You need to move the plentiful water from under the surface into the atmosphere, where some of it will dissociate into H2 and O2.

Edgar Rice Burroughs described some of this in his Princess of Mars series of books in the 1800s.  The Martians were making their own atmosphere.


5. What do you think is the most effective form of geoengineering? Why does is have a more positive impact that others?

The Royal Society report on geoengineering (I showed the cover in my talk) has a scatterplot of the various geoengineering methods with affordability on one axis and effectiveness on the other.  Stratospheric aerosols wins hands down -- it is the cheapest and most effective.  Reforestation comes in 2nd -- just as affordable as aerosol, but not as effective (although it does draw CO2 out of the air, which aerosol does not, so actually I think it is a better all-around solution).  A 2019 paper estimated what level of reforestation would be required to draw down the CO2 over the next 50 years or so, and it was quite reasonable in terms of area required, and cost.  It was in all the news.  If you need to find it, let me know and I'll locate it.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), of which reforestation is an example, lags way behind aerosol as a geoengineering technology.  There are some great ideas, but they have never been proven at any kind of reasonable scale.  I like the idea of injecting CO2 into rocks under the ocean (the video I showed) but it remains just an idea.  Years of work are needed to even do a demonstration at scale, much less begin to actually reduce CO2 in the air.

CCS is a better technique because it gets at the heart of the problem -- too much CO2 in the air -- and it deals with ocean acidification, which aerosol (or Solar Radiation Management) does not.  However, if we are to do anything in the next 30 yr, SRM is the only technology available.

6. What do you think is the most interesting component of terraforming?

How do we seed an exoplanet with microbes, and can the process be radically accelerated so that it succeeds in a timeframe relevant to humanity (like 1000 years as opposed to a million years)?


7. What do you think is the most difficult part of terraforming?


Preparing the atmosphere for human occupation.  We have some ideas, but study of the evolution of Earth's atmosphere has shown how hard it is to accomplish much on time scales below a million yr.   It took over a billion yr to bring the O2 up to modern levels, starting 2.4 billion yr ago, for example.  CO2 is also complex, since on Earth it participates in a complex carbon cycle involving rain, plankton, plate tectonics, burial of carbonate sediments at sea, plus volcanoes, all of which serve to regulate CO2 -- one or more of these factors are likely to be absent on any given exoplanet.