User Research Facilities in the Earth Sciences

February 2006Volume 2, Number 1

ISSN 1811-5209

User Research Facilitiesin the Earth Sciences

User Facilities around the World

X-ray, Neutron, and Mass Spectrometry Techniques

Scientific Advances Made Possible by User Facilities

Accessing User Facilities

New Opportunities at Emerging Facilities

User Research Facilities in the Earth Sciences Stephen R. Sutton, Guest Editor

User Facilities around the World Gordon E. Brown Jr., Stephen R. Sutton, and Georges Calas

Synchrotron Radiation, Neutron, and MassSpectrometry Techniques at User Facilities Stephen R. Sutton, Marc W. Caffee, and Martin T. Dove

Scientific Advances Made Possible by User Facilities Gordon E. Brown Jr., Georges Calas, and Russell J. Hemley

Accessing User Facilities and Making your Research Experience Successful Richard J. Reeder and Antonio Lanzirotti

New Opportunities at Emerging FacilitiesJohn B. Parise and Gordon E. Brown Jr.

DepartmentsEditorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3From the Editors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Triple Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5Meet the Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Travelogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36Mineral Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Society News

Société Française de Minéralogie et de Cristallographie 44European Association for Geochemistry . . . . . . . 46Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland . . 48The Clay Minerals Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50International Association of GeoChemistry . . . . . . 52Mineralogical Society of America . . . . . . . . . . . 54Geochemical Society . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56Mineralogical Association of Canada . . . . . . . . . 58International Mineralogical Association . . . . . . . . 60European Mineralogical Union . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

Conference News . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62Parting Shot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63Advertisers in this Issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

1

Volume 2, Number 1 • February 2006ABOUT THE COVER:

Main entrance of theAdvanced Photon

Source (APS) at theUS Department ofEnergy's Argonne

National Laboratoryin Argonne, Illinois

(USA). The APS is oneof many synchrotron

radiation facilitiesaround the worldopen to scientistsand students who

have a need forbrilliant photonbeams in their

research. PHOTO

COURTESY OF THE APS

7

15

9

23

37

Elements is published jointly by theMineralogical Society of America, theMineralogical Society of Great Britainand Ireland, the Mineralogical Associationof Canada, the Geochemical Society, The Clay Minerals Society, the EuropeanAssociation for Geochemistry, the Inter-national Association of GeoChemistry,and the Société Française de Minéralogieet de Cristallographie. It is provided as a benefit to members of these societies.

Elements is published six times a year.Individuals are encouraged to join anyone of the participating societies toreceive Elements. Institutional subscribersto any of the following journals—American Mineralogist, The CanadianMineralogist, Clays and Clay Minerals,Mineralogical Magazine, and ClayMinerals—will also receive Elements aspart of their 2006 subscription. Institu-tional subscriptions are available forUS$125 a year in 2006. Contact themanaging editor ([email protected])for information.

Copyright ©2006 by the MineralogicalSociety of America

All rights reserved. Reproduction in anyform, including translation to otherlanguages, or by any means – graphic,electronic or mechanical, includingphotocopying or information storageand retrieval systems – without writtenpermission from the copyright holderis strictly prohibited.

Publications mail agreement no. 40037944

Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to:PO Box 503 RPO West Beaver Creek Richmond Hill, ON L4B 4R6

Printed in Canada ISSN 1811-5209www.elementsmagazine.org

31

The MineralogicalSociety of Americais composed of indivi-duals interested inmineralogy, crystallog-raphy, petrology, and

geochemistry. Founded in 1919, theSociety promotes, through educationand research, the understanding andapplication of mineralogy by industry,universities, government, and thepublic. Membership benefits includespecial subscription rates for AmericanMineralogist as well as other journals;25% discount on Reviews in Mineralogyand Geochemistry series and Mono-graphs; Elements; reduced registrationfees for MSA meetings and shortcourses; and participation in a societythat supports the many facets ofmineralogy. For additional information,contact the MSA business office.

PRESIDENT: John W. Valley, Universityof Wisconsin–MadisonPAST PRESIDENT: Robert M. Hazen,Carnegie Inst. WashingtonVICE PRESIDENT: Barb Dutrow, LouisianaState UniversitySECRETARY: George Harlow, AmericanMuseum of Natural HistoryTREASURER: John M. Hughes, MiamiUniversity (Ohio)SOCIETY NEWS EDITOR: Andrea Koziol,University of DaytonMineralogical Society of America 3635 Concorde Pkwy Ste 500Chantilly, VA 20151-1125, USATel.: 703-652-9950Fax: [email protected]

The MineralogicalSociety of GreatBritain and Ireland,also known as theMinSoc, is theinternational society

for all those working in the mineralsciences. The Society aims to advancethe knowledge of the science ofmineralogy and its application toother subjects including crystallogra-phy, geochemistry, petrology,environmental science and economicgeology. The Society furthers itsobjects through scientific meetingsand the publication of scientificjournals, books and monographs. TheSociety publishes three journals,Mineralogical Magazine (print andonline), Clay Minerals (print andonline) and the e-journal MINABSOnline (launched in January 2004). Forfull details on how to join the Societyand its events and publications,consult the Society’s website atwww.minersoc.org or contact thegeneral office.

PRESIDENT: Ben Harte, University ofEdinburghVICE PRESIDENTS: Ian Parsons, Universityof Edinburgh, and Jim G. MacDonald,University of GlasgowTREASURER: Neil J. ForteyGENERAL SECRETARY: Mark E. Hodson,University of ReadingEXECUTIVE SECRETARY AND NEWS EDITOR:Adrian H. Lloyd-LawrenceMineralogical Society41 Queen’s GateLondon SW1 5HRUnited KingdomTel.: +44 (0)20 7584 7516 Fax: +44 (0)7823 [email protected]

The MineralogicalAssociation of Canadawas incorporated in1955 to promote andadvance the knowl-edge of mineralogy

and the related disciplines of crystallo-graphy, petrology, geochemistry, andeconomic geology. Any person engagedor interested in the fields of mineralo-gy, crystallography, petrology, geo-chemistry, and economic geology maybecome a member of the Association.Membership benefits include asubscription to Elements, reduced costfor subscribing to The CanadianMineralogist, a 20% discount on shortcourse volumes and special publica-tions, and a discount on theregistration fee at our annual meeting.

PRESIDENT: Daniel J. Kontak, NovaScotia Department of NaturalResources, NS PAST PRESIDENT: Norman M. Halden,University of Manitoba, MB VICE PRESIDENT: Kurt Kyser, Queen’sUniversity, ONSECRETARY: Andy McDonald,Laurentian University, ONTREASURER: Mati Raudsepp, Universityof British Columbia, BCMineralogical Association of CanadaP.O. Box 78087, Meriline Postal Outlet 1460 Merivale Road Ottawa, ON, Canada K2E 1B1Tel.: 613-226-3642Fax: 613-226-4651canmin.mac.ottawa@sympatico.cawww.mineralogicalassociation.ca

The Clay MineralsSociety (CMS) beganas the Clay MineralsCommittee of the USNational Academy ofSciences – National

Research Council in 1952. By 1962,the CMS was incorporated with theprimary purpose of stimulatingresearch and disseminating informa-tion relating to all aspects of clayscience and technology. The member-ship includes those interested inmineralogy, crystallography, geology,geochemistry, physics, chemistry,biology, agronomy, soils science,engineering, materials science, andindustrial science and technology.The CMS holds an annual meeting,workshop, and field trips, andpublishes Clays and Clay Mineralsand the CMS Workshop Lectures series.Membership benefits include reducedregistration fees to the annual meeting,discounts on the CMS WorkshopLectures, and Elements.

PRESIDENT: Cliff Johnston, PurdueUniversityPAST PRESIDENT: Duane M. Moore,University of New MexicoVICE PRESIDENT: Richard K. Brown,Wyo-Ben Inc.SECRETARY: Warren D. Huff, Universityof CincinnatiTREASURER: Andrew R. Thomas,Chevron TexacoSOCIETY NEWS EDITOR: Lynda Williams,Arizona State UniversityThe Clay Minerals Society3635 Concorde Pkwy Ste 500Chantilly VA 20151-1125, USATel.: 703-652-9960Fax: [email protected]. www.clays.org

The GeochemicalSociety is an interna-tional non-profitorganization forscientists involved inthe practice, study,

and teaching of geochemistry. Ourprincipal roles are to provide ourmembers with programs and servicesthat will help them to be better geo-chemists; to enrich the professionaldevelopment and careers of geochemiststhrough information, education,relationships, and resources; and toadvance the thought and applicationof geochemistry.

Membership includes a subscription toElements, access to the online quarterlynewsletter Geochemical News, as well asan optional subscription to Geochimicaet Cosmochimica Acta (24 issues peryear). Members receive discounts onpublications (GS Special Publications,MSA, Elsevier and Wiley/Jossey-Bass),and on conference registrations,including the V.M. GoldschmidtConference, the fall AGU meeting,and the annual GSA meeting. Formore details on our programs or infor-mation on how to join, please visit ourwebsite at: http://gs.wustl.edu

PRESIDENT: Susan L. Brantley, Pennsylvania State UniversityVICE PRESIDENT: Marty Goldhaber, USGSSECRETARY: Jeremy B. Fein, Universityof Notre DameTREASURER: Youxue Zhang, Universityof MichiganBUSINESS MANAGER: Seth DavisGeochemical SocietyWashington UniversityEarth & Planetary SciencesOne Brookings Drive, Campus Box #1169St. Louis, MO 63130-4899, USATel.: 314-935-4131Fax: [email protected]://gs.wustl.edu/

The EuropeanAssociation forGeochemistry wasfounded in 1985 topromote geochemicalresearch and study in

Europe. It is now recognized as thepremiere geochemical organizationin Europe encouraging interactionbetween geochemists and researchersin associated fields, and promotingresearch and teaching in the publicand private sectors.

OfficersPRESIDENT: Bruce Yardley, Leeds, UKVICE PRESIDENT: Alex Halliday,Oxford, UKPAST PRESIDENT: Terry Seward, Zurich,SwitzerlandTREASURER: Catherine Chauvel,Grenoble, FranceSECRETARY: Mark Hodson, Reading, UK

Committee MembersStephen Banwart (UK), Philippe VanCappellen (Netherlands), ChristianFrance-Lanord (France), Jérôme

Gaillardet (France), Sigurður Gíslason(Iceland), Alex Halliday (UK), CarstenMuenker (Germany), Eric Oelkers(France), Graham Pearson (UK),Andrew Putnis (Germany), Susan Stipp(Denmark), Gerhard Wörner (Germany)

Membership information:www.eag.eu.com/membership

The InternationalAssociation of Geo-Chemistry (IAGC) hasbeen a pre-eminentinternational geo-chemical organization

for over 40 years. Its principalobjectives are to foster cooperationin, and advancement of, applied geo-chemistry, by sponsoring specialistscientific symposia and the activitiesorganized by its working groups, andby supporting its journal AppliedGeochemistry. The administration andactivities of IAGC are conducted by itsCouncil, comprising an Executive andten ordinary members. Day-to-dayadministration is performed throughthe IAGC Business Office.

PRESIDENT: John Ludden, FranceVICE PRESIDENT: Russell Harmon, USASECRETARY: Attila Demeny, HungaryTREASURER: Gunter Faure, USABUSINESS MANAGER: Mel Gascoyne,CanadaIAGC Business OfficeBox 501Pinawa, Manitoba R0E 1L0 Canada [email protected]

The Société Françaisede Minéralogie et deCristallographie,the French mineralogyand crystallographysociety, was founded

on March 21, 1878. The purpose ofthe society is to promote mineralogyand crystallography. Membershipbenefits include the "bulletin deliaison" (in French), the EuropeanJournal of Mineralogy and nowElements, and reduced registration feesfor SFMC meetings.

OfficersPRESIDENT: Catherine MevelVICE PRESIDENT: Patrick Cordier, A-M. KarpoffSECRETARY: Daniel R. NeuvilleASSISTANT SECRETARY: Etienne BalanTREASURER: Céline Rommevaux-JestinASSISTANT TREASURER: Gian-Carlo ParodiEDITOR: Jean Dubessy

Committee MembersA-M. Boullier, M. Buatier, P. Barbey, B.Devouard, O. Grasset, J-L. Hazemann,J. Ingrin, D. de Ligny, M. Madon, G.Panczer, D. Prêt, J. Rose, J. RouxSFMCCampus Boucicaut Bâtiment 7140 rue de Lourmel75015 Paris, FranceContact : Daniel R. Neuville,[email protected]

E L E M E N T S FEBRUARY 2006

Participating Societies

2

Institutional subscribers to CMS, MAC, MS, and MSA journals are entitled to access the onlineversion of these journals as part of their subscription.American Mineralogist Contact the Mineralogical Society of America (MSA) Business Office([email protected]). Identify your institution and provide your IP address.The Canadian Mineralogist Contact [email protected], and provide your IP addressand subscription number.Clays and Clay Minerals Go to the Ingenta website, which hosts the electronic journal(www.ingenta.com), or start at The Clay Minerals Society (CMS) website (www.clays.org).You will find further instructions about registering and requesting access.Mineralogical Magazine and Clay Minerals. Go to the Ingenta website, which hosts theelectronic journal (www.ingenta.com). You will find further instructions about registering andrequesting access.

E L E M E N T SFEBRUARY 2006

Editorial

3

In August of 2005, USPresident George W. Busheffectively endorsedteaching intelligent design(ID) alongside evolution inhigh school biology classes.ID holds that certain

features of the universe and of living thingsare best explained by an “intelligent cause”rather than a physical process such as naturalselection or molecular reactions. Less thanthree months later, the Kansas State Board ofEducation in the American Midwest approvednew high school science standards that castdoubt on the theory of evolution, opening thedoor for teaching ID. To do so, the Kansasschool board also approved a redefinition ofscience, stating that science is no longerlimited to the search for natural explanationsof phenomena.

Scientists are generally highly respected bysociety at large. In public opinion polls that Ihave seen in the last few years, the public trustsscientists for being unbiasedeven more than they dojudges. Scientists are viewedas well-trained practitionersof astute observation andcalculation, framed withoutbias. Sure, the system is notperfect. Some examples of scientific fraud, perpetratedby misguided scientists forpersonal gains, are wellknown. The good news isthat these incidents areextremely rare consideringthe enormous numbers ofscientific endeavors that occur each day in labsand field studies around the world, conductedby hundreds of thousands of scientists. There-fore, society’s view of scientists is somewhatpredictable. One of the long-term benefits ofthis is that science is relatively well funded,especially considering that it is often compet-ing for funding with pressing societal needs.

With the backdrop of the Kansas situation,the public’s inherent trust of scientists, andthe often generous financial support offundamental scientific endeavors (e.g. see thecosts of user facilities described in this issue),a dangerous trend involving the misuse ofscience, for political and ideological gain, hasbeen developing. This trend is now the targetof numerous investigative reports (manyextensive) in the print, radio, and televisionmedia. The evidence is clear, the conclusionsfrom it inescapable. A growing number ofpoliticians, especially in the United States,wielding tremendous power and influence, are denying, distorting, or otherwise misusingscientific findings and reports that they findinconvenient or contradictory towards their

programmed political or ideological agenda.And it goes well beyond the selling of ID as science to an unsuspecting American public.

Given the overall and overwhelming trust ofscience and scientists, it was hard at first tonotice this storm as it was gathering. Was thesuppression of a White House Office ofScience report on the detrimental effects ofacid rain during the Reagan years just a blipon the radar screen? Not many people noticedat the time, at least compared to how manypeople are noticing now. At issue: the politicalmisuse of science now seems to have hitalarming levels, at least in the United States.Among many examples, perhaps the one mostindicative of the seriousness of this trend isthe misrepresentation and blatant misuse ofthe 2001 report from the US NationalAcademy of Sciences (NAS) in its unequivocalendorsement of the 2001 United Nations’Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) findings. Historically, this IPCC reportmay stand as the long-term scientific land-

mark work on the influenceof humans on averageglobal temperature rise andultimately, human-drivenglobal climate change. Yetthe Bush administrationhas continuously softenedthe language of the IPCCand NAS reports. In onecelebrated case that cameto light in the summer of2005, the New York Timesreported that Mr. PhilipCooney, the Chief of Stafffor the White House

Council on Environmental Quality, dilutedscientific wording in a key 2003 US Environ-mental Protection Agency report that clearlymade the connection between greenhouse gasemissions and global climate. Mr. Cooney is alawyer with no scientific training.

The late pre-eminent anthropologist JosephCampbell celebrated the spiritual awakeningof the earliest peoples, and tried to find unityin the religions of today, while at the sametime recognizing the ancient to moderninfluence of science and technology on beliefsystems. The late Pope John Paul II, a humanand religious icon revered around the world,accepted the modern theory of evolution.Within their own personal callings, these menspent brilliant lifetimes spinning new under-standing into their web of the world andbeyond. Neither would ever have dreamed ofdistorting, suppressing, or misusing legitimate,consensus-based scientific research. Thosewho would do otherwise, to promote personal,political, or ideological agendas, must beexposed and put aside.

Michael F. Hochella [email protected]

SCIENTIFIC EDITORSMICHAEL F. HOCHELLA JR., Virginia

Tech ([email protected])IAN PARSONS, University of

Edinburgh ([email protected]) E. BRUCE WATSON, Rensselaer Poly-

technic Institute ([email protected])

ADVISORY BOARD PETER C. BURNS, University of Notre

Dame, USARANDALL T. CYGAN, Sandia National

Laboratories, USA ROBERTO COMPAGNONI, Università

degli Studi di Torino, ItalyADRIAN FINCH, University of

St Andrews, UK BICE FUBINI, Università degli Studi

di Torino, Italy MONICA GRADY, The Natural History

Museum, UK JOHN E. GRAY, US Geological SurveyALAIN MANCEAU, CNRS, Grenoble,

France DOUGLAS K. MCCARTY, Chevron

Texaco, USA KLAUS MEZGER, Universität Münster,

Germany JAMES E. MUNGALL, University

of Toronto, Canada TAKASHI MURAKAMI, University

of Tokyo, Japan HUGH O’NEILL, Australian National

University, Australia NANCY ROSS, Virginia Tech, USA EVERETT SHOCK, Arizona State

University, USA NEIL C. STURCHIO, University

of Illinois at Chicago, USA JOHN W. VALLEY, University

of Wisconsin–Madison, USA DAVID J. VAUGHAN, The University

of Manchester, UK

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEEJEREMY B. FEIN, Geochemical SocietyNORMAN M. HALDEN, Mineralogical

Association of Canada JOHN M. HUGHES, Mineralogical

Society of AmericaCATHERINE MEVEL, Société Française

de Minéralogie et de CristallographieKATHRYN L. NAGY, The Clay

Minerals SocietyERIC H. OELKERS, European

Association for GeochemistryRUSSELL S. HARMON, International

Association of GeoChemistryPETER TRELOAR, Mineralogical

Society of Great Britain and Ireland

MANAGING EDITORPIERRETTE [email protected]

EDITORIAL OFFICE INRS-ETE490, rue de la Couronne Québec (Québec) G1K 9A9 CanadaTel.: 418-654-2606Fax: 418-654-2525

Layout: POULIOT GUAY GRAPHISTESCopy editors: TOM CLARK,

DOLORES DURANTPrinter: CARACTÉRA

The opinions expressed in this maga-zine are those of the authors and donot necessarily reflect the views ofthe publishers.

www.elementsmagazine.org

The Political Misuse of Science

A growing number of

politicians . . . are

misusing scientific findings

and reports that they

find inconvenient or

contradictory towards their

. . . ideological agenda

INTRODUCING BRUCE WATSONAt the end of 2005, I fin-ished my term as editor forElements. Editors serve stag-gered three-year terms, sothat a new editor is appointedeach year. By this means, weintend that Elements remaina vital and current voice forthe wide variety of topicsthat make up our disciplines.

With this in mind, I am verypleased to introduce my

replacement, Bruce Watson. Bruce is currently an Institute Professor ofScience at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. He is a past president of theMineralogical Society of America, a member of the National Academy ofScience, and a recent recipient of the Goldschmidt Medal of the Geo-chemical Society. His research addresses the many processes affectingthe behavior of the chemical elements in the Earth.

A native of New Hampshire, he attended Williams College (where hisinterest in geology was kindled) and later transferred to the Universityof New Hampshire, where he received a BA in geology in 1972. After asummer field season with the US Geological Survey, he entered graduateschool at MIT with the intention of becoming a volcanologist. The lureof geochemistry at MIT in the 1970s was strong, however, and Bruce wasparticularly drawn to experimental approaches. He received his PhD ingeochemistry from MIT in 1976.

Over a 30-year career, Bruce has pursued such research topics as mineral–melt partitioning, diffusion (in melts, crystals, and fluids), tex-tural aspects of partially molten and fluid-bearing rocks, and kinetic dis-equilibria in materials as diverse as iron meteorites and marine carbon-ates. In parallel with this “process-oriented” theme, he has maintaineda long-term interest in accessory minerals as hosts for geochemicallyinteresting trace elements and isotopes and has contributed papers onsuch topics as solubilities and dissolution rates, lattice diffusion of radi-ogenic isotopes, and inclusion–host relationships. Zircon is his hands-down favorite mineral: over the past 27 years, he has published about 20papers addressing the survivability, (diffusive) retentivity, and crystal-lization behavior of this remarkable mineral, which serves as the crustalgeochemist’s primary window into the Earth’s distant past.

Bruce’s past editorial service includes two assignments with Geochimicaet Cosmochimica Acta (associate editor, 1985–1988; editorial board mem-ber, 1991–1995), and he has acted as editor of Chemical Geology(1991–1995), editor for petrology and geochemistry of Neues Jahrbuch fürMineralogie (1988–1995), and editorial board member for Geofluids(2003–present).

Bruce has a deep appreciation for the central role of the mineral sciencesand geochemistry in the broader sphere of Earth and environmental sci-ences, and he brings this perspective to Elements. Welcome to the team.

Rod Ewing

BIENVENUE À LA SOCIÉTÉ FRANÇAISE DE MINÉRALOGIE ET DE CRISTALLOGRAPHIE (SFMC)With this issue we warmly welcome one of the world’s oldest miner-alogical organizations, the Société Française de Minéralogie et de Cristal-lographie, to the group of participating societies listed in each issue ofElements. Although the founding organizations behind Elements are fromcountries where English is the main language, it has always been ourhope that organizations that normally use other languages would jointhe consortium. The arrival of France is therefore especially significant,and we hope that national societies in other non-English-speaking coun-tries will follow their lead. It is perhaps appropriate that France has beenfirst to make this decision, because our managing editor, graphic design-er, and printer are all based in Québec, where English is most certainlynot the main language. We can thank French flair for the professionalstyle and quality of Elements. Welcome aboard!

THE AESE AWARDS We mentioned these awards in the last issue of Elements. We shareexcerpts from the letter Meg Smath, chair of the Association of Earth Sci-ence Editors’ Awards Committee, sent Rod Ewing.

I am pleased to inform you that we have conferred upon you ourAward for Outstanding Editorial or Publishing Contributions. Thereason you were nominated was your creation and editing of Ele-ments. That simple sentence does not do justice to the tremendouseffort you undertook, first in convincing all the different societiesto share the dream with you, and then in making it happen. Whatyou have achieved is a truly outstanding publication. In fact, AESEwas so impressed by Elements that we named it one of the winnersof our Outstanding Publication Award for 2005. This is the firsttime we have given this award to a journal; all previous winnershave been monographs.

We realize of course that Elements did not come about from yourefforts alone, but … you are “certainly the person who began it …and … most certainly carefully [oversaw] its infancy….”

AESE does not give out its Award for Outstanding Editorial or Pub-lishing Contributions every year, and not without careful delibera-tion. You join a select group of distinguished Earth scientists andwriters: Julia Jackson (2002), John McPhee (1995), Gerald Friedman(1993), Allison (Pete) Palmer (1991), William H. Freeman Jr. (1985),Walter Sullivan (1983), Wendell Cochran (1982), Robert Bates(1981), Brian Skinner (1979), Philip Abelson (1976), Marie Siegrist(1974), Edwin Eckel (1973).

ABOUT THIS ISSUE We continually try to identify timely, front-row topics to bring to youin each issue of Elements. This issue of Elements is a bit different, in thatit centers around the tools that many of us use to perform our science.Some of these tools are relatively inexpensive, and some are valued at(literally) billions of dollars. But whatever the cost or the function, thetools described here have one critical aspect in common. They are allshared, and as such are available to the scientific community at large.These shared facilities, or “user facilities” as we call them, are of unimag-inable benefit. Without them, such instruments and facilities would beavailable only to a select few, or more likely, not at all. User facilities, bigand small, have changed the face of how we do our science.

We would like to thank Dr. Nicholas Woodward of the US Departmentof Energy for sponsoring a user-facility workshop in 2004, from wherethe idea for this issue of Elements ultimately came, and Dr. Stephen Sut-ton of the University of Chicago and Argonne National Laboratory, forbringing the idea of this issue for Elements to reality.

THANKS As we start the new year, we would like to extend our most heartfeltthanks to all who have helped make Elements happen, issue after issue,in our launch year: guest editors, authors, contributors, copy editors,graphic artist, and all those who work behind the scenes. Working withRod on this project has been a highlight and an inspiration for all of us(we will have more to say about this in the June issue, in which we willformally thank him). Even though he is officially “retired” from themagazine, he will continue to carry his duty until the June issue, forwhich he is principal editor.

Best wishes to all of you for 2006.

Michael F. Hochella Jr., Ian Parsons, Bruce Watson,and Pierrette Tremblay


From the Editors

4

Did you know that a PDF file of every issue of Elements is posted on ourwebsite, with a one-issue delay (for example, a PDF file of this issue will beposted by the time you receive your printed copy of issue 2).

Check our website www.elementsmagazine.org

undertaken by the US. This continent-scale experiment looks at thestructure and dynamics of North America using seismology and geodetictechnology (to study stress and deformation); it also examines faultmechanisms by direct measurement from a drill hole across the SanAndreas Fault (www.earthscope.org). This rich landscape of continent-scale dynamics will lay the groundwork for new understanding of large-scale geochemical cycling and the interactions among mineralogy, geochemistry, petrology, deep structure, and dynamics.

Building on this foundation of capability for large-scale Earth observa-tions, the ocean science community has proposed an ocean observatoryinitiative (OOI) that would use electro-fiber optic cables to connectocean instruments to each other and to shore. OOI will provide the firstsustained capability to observe the interior of the ocean and its seafloor(www.orionprogram.org). The hydrologic science community hasjoined with the engineering community to propose a series of hydrological observatories that will allow scientists to observe entirewatersheds and incorporate study of engineered components of those systems. These new large-scale observing systems will provide extraordi-nary context for individual investigator research. In fact, such observingsystems hold the promise of providing the observational and process-oriented framework that will allow studies of much smaller-scale phenomena and processes to be extrapolated to larger scales. Such scaling has been a formidable challenge in the past.

Reconciling laboratory experiments with the more complex real environment has also been a major challenge. A second major trend,related to the observatories, is the development of in situ sensors thatcan be remotely controlled from the laboratory over wired and wirelessnetworks (e.g. www.cens.ucla.edu). The potential of such instruments to

provide high-quality environmental characterizationprovides the opportunity to study small-scale materialsand processes in the field as a bridge to lab experiments,further enhancing the scalability of studies done at themicroscale or even the nanoscale.

Geoscientists are some of the most demanding con-sumers of high-performance computing. About 40% ofthe NSF-funded computing in excess of 1 Teraflop pro-cessing speed is done by geoscientists. Your futuredemands have been reflected in a call for geosciencecomputing at the petascale (http://www.geo-prose.com/proj-ects/pdfs/petascale_broch.pdf). This capability will be criti-cal for representing and translating the complexity of geosystems to models that simulate envi-ronments we cannot recreate (Earth’s interior, past envi-ronments), for achieving a simulation of processes based

on first principles (e.g. complex multi-element chemical reactions onsurfaces), and for integrating dense in situ observation into holistic rep-resentations of the environment to unveil large-scale phenomena.

Finally, encouraging efforts to develop greater inter-operability betweenlarge data sets is a major priority for the NSF and the community. Theopportunity to link one’s own observations with a rich mix of other relevant observations promises to allow geoscientists to draw moreextensive and/or more interdisciplinary conclusions about their ownwork and its relation to other fields.

These important developments represent new tools, which are as impor-tant as new instruments. I believe that these tools, combined with thecreative genius of this community, will ensure that the next decade willbe as exciting as the past one has been.

Dr. Margaret S. Leinen headsthe Directorate for Geosciencesat the National Science Foun-dation in the United States.She is a past president of theOceanography Society, andprior to her appointment atNSF, she served as Dean of theGraduate School of Oceanog-raphy and Vice Provost forMarine and EnvironmentalPrograms at the University ofRhode Island. Her researchfocuses on the history of biogenic sedimentation in theoceans and its relationship toglobal biogeochemical cycles.As Dr. Leinen is the topadministrator of the NSFDirectorate that funds manyof our readers, we asked her tooffer some insights into thestate of geochemical research.She kindly consented.

I’ve never had the nerve to refer to myself as a geochemist or mineralo-gist in spite of using geochemistry and mineralogy extensively in myown research. Rather, I am an admirer of the three fields that cometogether in Elements. I have been especially delighted bythe new journal because it so successfully reachesbeyond the individual and group scholarship represent-ed in Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta to the excitementthat happens when geoscientists bring multiple fields ofexpertise to bear on important problems and scientificquestions. Looking at the past year it is clear that othersare important partners in your excitement—biology,nanotechnology, geophysics, to name but a few.

Reading the pages of the first four issues of Elements is anexhilarating tour of new directions in mineralogy, geo-chemistry, and petrology. The articles make clear thatthe pace of innovation and evolution in the fields hasaccelerated in the last decade: new paradigms are elbow-ing out many old rules. For example, research demon-strates that the physical properties of minerals and theirreactivity change with size because surface energy is no longer small rel-ative to the total phase energy in nanoparticles. Over the past decade theinteractions between geological and biological processes have emergedclearly. We have moved from a point of view that emphasized physicaland chemical Earth processes to one that recognizes that nearly allprocesses we study are touched by the biology that is such a uniquecharacteristic of our planet in the solar system. These changes in miner-alogy, geochemistry, and petrology mirror rapid changes in geoscienceas a whole.

I would like to highlight four major changes in the way we study geosciences that are affecting most of the fields funded by the NationalScience Foundation. I think they will have a profound effect on yourthree fields as well…

First, geoscientists have proposed and have received the first funding forobservations that allow us to look at processes operating at very largespatial scales and decadal time scales. The EarthScope project is thelargest and most complex geological experiment that has ever been

FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN GEOCHEMISTRYAND MINERALOGY: A VIEW FROM THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Triple Point

Margaret S. Leinen

I would like to highlight

four major changes in the

way we study geosciences

that are affecting most of

the fields funded by the

National Science Founda-

tion. I think they will

have a profound effect on

your three fields as well…


Gordon E. Brown Jr. isKirby Professor in theSchool of Earth Sciences atStanford University and isalso professor and chair ofthe Stanford SynchrotronRadiation LaboratoryFaculty at the Stanford

Linear Accelerator Center. In addition, Brownserves as director of the Stanford Environ-mental Molecular Science Institute. Currentresearch by Brown and his students involvesmolecular-scale studies of environmentalcontaminants in both natural and syntheticsystems, including those containing microor-ganisms. Brown and his students use a varietyof synchrotron radiation techniques, coupledwith other experimental and theoreticalmethods, to study the chemical and biologicalprocesses that sequester and/or transformcontaminant species, particularly atmineral–aqueous solution interfaces. Brownhas been a user of synchrotron radiationfacilities since 1977 and has served on thescience advisory committees of a number ofsynchrotron radiation sources.

Georges Calas isprofessor of mineralogy atthe Université Paris VI anddeputy director of theInstitute of Mineralogy,Universités Paris VI & VII,CNRS, and Institut dePhysique du Globe de Paris.

His research interests concern the control ofthe physical and chemical properties ofminerals, glasses, and melts by molecular-scaleprocesses and how this relates to problems inEarth and environmental sciences andmaterials science. He has been using synchro-tron radiation since the early 1980s, and hisgroup is also involved in neutron scattering in glasses and melts. A former member of theScientific Advisory Committee of ESRF and of the Scientific Council of LURE, he has alsoparticipated in a scientific review panel at APS.

Marc Caffee is aprofessor of physics atPurdue University. Hereceived his PhD in 1986from Washington Univer-sity. His studies were onthe use of neon isotopicand nuclear track records

found in gas-rich meteorites as gauges of earlysolar activity. During a postdoctoral fellow-ship at Lawrence Livermore National Labora-tory, he investigated the noble gas inventoryand degassing history of Earth’s mantle usingXe in mantle emanations. Later, at LLNL he

focused on geoscience applica-tions of accelerator mass spec-trometry (AMS). In 2001 heaccepted a position at PurdueUniversity and is the director ofthe NSF-funded PRIME Lab, aninterdisciplinary AMS laboratory.

Martin Dove is professorof computational mineralphysics in the Departmentof Earth Sciences, Universi-ty of Cambridge, anddirector of the NationalInstitute for EnvironmentalScience based in Cam-

bridge. His research work is primarilyconcerned with understanding the behaviorof minerals at the molecular scale, andinvolves the use of neutron scattering coupledwith computer simulations. Martin initiallystudied physics at Birmingham University(BSc and PhD). He held postdoctoral positionsin physics (Edinburgh) and theoreticalchemistry (Cambridge) before joining theDepartment of Earth Sciences in Cambridge.

Russell J. Hemley is a staff scientist at theGeophysical Laboratory,Carnegie Institution ofWashington. His researchexplores the behavior ofmaterials over a broadrange of thermodynamic

conditions, from low to very high pressures,and how this relates to problems in Earth andplanetary science, physics, chemistry, mate-rials science, and biology. He obtained degreesin chemistry (Wesleyan University, BA 1977;Harvard University, MA 1980, PhD 1983)before joining the Carnegie Institution in1984. He is a fellow of the American PhysicalSociety, the American Geophysical Union,and the American Academy of Arts andSciences, and a member of the NationalAcademy of Sciences.

Antonio (Tony)Lanzirotti received hisPhD in geochemistry fromStony Brook University in1995 and is currently withthe Consortium forAdvanced RadiationSources (CARS) at the

University of Chicago. He is the beamlinescientist for the X26A hard X-ray microprobeat the National Synchrotron Light Source(NSLS) at Brookhaven National Laboratory. He recently served as chair of the NSLS Users’Executive Committee, an organizationbroadly concerned with representing theinterests of the NSLS users and with helpingto promote and encourage research at theNSLS. His research interests include develop-ment of state-of-the-art X-ray microbeamtechniques for the in situ trace elementanalysis of Earth and environmental samples.

These include studies in microbeam X-rayabsorption spectroscopy, fluorescenceanalysis, computed microtomography,and diffraction microcrystallography.

John B. Parise holdsjoint appointments ingeosciences and chemistryat Stony Brook University.He received his PhD fromthe James Cook University,Australia, in 1980. Hisresearch interests include

mineralogy and synthetic solid-state chem-istry, with emphasis on the characterizationof atomic structure as a function of pressure,temperature, and composition using scatter-ing techniques. Parise’s group makes extensiveuse of intense neutron and X-ray sources at national and international facilities. Alongwith colleagues at the Geophysical Laboratoryand the Oak Ridge National Laboratory(ORNL), he is involved with the constructionof the next generation of high-pressure beam-lines at the Spallation Neutron Source at ORNL.

Richard J. Reeder isprofessor of geochemistryat Stony Brook University.He received his PhD fromthe University of Californiaat Berkeley in 1980. Hisresearch interests includefundamental processes that

operate at mineral–water interfaces, the chemical behavior of contaminants in envi-ronmental systems, and phase transitions inminerals. Reeder’s research group has madeextensive use of synchrotron-based techniquesfor studies of metal partitioning into carbon-ate and phosphate minerals. He is a formereditor of American Mineralogist and is currentlydirector of the Center for EnvironmentalMolecular Science located jointly at StonyBrook University and Brookhaven NationalLaboratory on Long Island.

Stephen R. Sutton,senior scientist at theUniversity of Chicago,received BS (physics) andPhD (Earth and planetarysciences) degrees fromWashington University (St. Louis, USA). He has

been involved in synchrotron radiationresearch for 20 years, currently as co–projectleader for the GeoSoilEnviroCARS beamlines(Sector 13) at the Advanced Photon Source(Argonne National Laboratory, USA) andspokesperson for beamline X26A at theNational Synchrotron Light Source(Brookhaven National Laboratory, USA). His research is focused on X-ray fluorescencemicroprobe development and applications in the Earth, planetary, and environmentalsciences, including studies of extraterrestrialmaterials.

Meet the Authors

Electrons stream through a narrow vacuum tube at near thespeed of light, encountering more than one thousand pre-cisely tuned magnetic fields that alter their trajectories andcause them to emit X-rays. After traveling a one-kilometrecourse, the electrons miraculously return to withinmicrometres of their starting point, and then repeat theharrowing journey…nearly a million times a second! As theX-rays race from the electron path, a carefully positionedexperiment room receives them. In this radiation-proofroom, a nanogram mineral specimen, heated by an infraredlaser beam, sits trapped within a high-pressure device heldby an elaborate positioning instrument. The X-rays slaminto the crystal and reflect off its lattice planes, producing adiffraction pattern collected by a two-dimensional detector.Outside the room, a team of students and scientists eagerlywatch a computer monitor as the emerging pattern revealsthe inner structure of the mineral under the extreme con-ditions, and they begin to contemplate how our view of theEarth’s interior will be changed by the new results. Simul-taneously, fifty other scientific teams around the “ring” areconducting experiments in biology, materials science,chemistry, and physics, as well as in Earth, planetary andenvironmental sciences.

The preceding describes just one of the exciting, advancedanalytical facilities—a synchrotron X-ray source—that areavailable to members of the Earth science community.These so-called “user facilities” have emerged over the pastcouple of decades and have been specifically constructed toserve the research needs of the scientific community,including Earth scientists. Their impact has been great,allowing thousands of cutting-edge experiments to be con-ducted each year by scientists and students around theworld. At US Department of Energy (DOE) user facilitiesalone, nearly 10,000 individuals in all fields of science con-ducted experiments in 2004, and ~80% used synchrotronradiation facilities. The advanced technology available atthese facilities has opened up completely new areas of geo-science endeavor. For the first time, scientists have been

able to study the properties of can-didate mantle and core materialsat relevant temperature and pres-sure, visualize the interactions ofimmiscible fluids in soil columns,determine the speciation of tracecontaminants in heterogeneoussediments, and examine the reac-tions that take place at mineral–water interfaces, for example.

These facilities represent anextremely effective use of research

resources. Essentially, resources are pooled to develop andoperate advanced instrumentation for shared use by theentire scientific community. As a result, expenditures toinstall multiple units at multiple sites are minimized.Another significant benefit is the cross-fertilization of ideasthat occurs when scientists from different disciplines inter-act at the shared facilities.

Are Earth scientists using these shared facilities? The answeris a resounding yes! And, their utilization is increasing. Forexample, statistics compiled by the US DOE show that at itsfour synchrotron facilities, the number of users associatedwith the “Geosciences and Ecology” scientific disciplineapproximately doubled over the five-year period from 1999to 2004. The 2004 users accounted for nearly 10% of thetotal users.

In this issue, we provide an overview of user facilities, whatthey are, what they can be used for, how they can beaccessed, and what the future holds. Regretfully, it is impos-sible to be comprehensive in the space available, and somevaluable facilities and methods have undoubtedly notreceived the attention they deserve. This issue includes ref-erences to additional information, including web addressesfor some facilities and informational clearinghouses. Theauthors include Earth scientists involved in facility devel-opment and management, as well as individuals who areprimarily users of facilities. The seeds for these articles wereplanted during a DOE-sponsored workshop, facilitated byDr. Nicholas Woodward (DOE Geosciences Research Pro-gram Director) and held in May 2004, entitled “GeosciencesUser Facilities – Enhancing Instrumentation Access.” Theworkshop was organized by Prof. Richard Reeder (StonyBrook University), Prof. Marc Caffee (Purdue University),and me, and many of the authors of these articles wereworkshop participants.

As described in the article by Gordon Brown Jr. (StanfordUniversity), Georges Calas (Universités de Paris) and me,user facilities have come into operation over the past ~30years, and the number around the world is substantial andgrowing, particularly in the US and Europe. These facilitiesrange in size from laboratories managed by large researchteams to single instruments managed by individuals. In

7E L E M E N T S , V O L . 2 , P P . 7 - 8 FEBRUARY 20067

Stephen R. Sutton,1 Guest Editor

1 Department of Geophysical Sciences and Consortium for AdvancedRadiation Sources, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA;e-mail: [email protected]

The past several decades have seen an explosion in the availability ofstate-of-the-art research facilities, facilities that have been specificallyconstructed and operated for use by the general scientific community.

Earth scientists have recognized the power of these methods for frontierresearch and are taking advantage of them in increasing numbers. “User-friendliness” is the key that makes these shared instruments very effectivecomponents in our arsenal of collaborative and interdisciplinary research tools.

KEYWORDS: user facilities, research resources, synchrotron radiation

Aerial views of the 800 mcircumference European

Synchrotron RadiationFacilty (ESRF) in

Grenoble, France. PHOTO

COURTESY ESRF

User Research Facilitiesin the Earth SciencesUser Research Facilitiesin the Earth Sciences

8E L E M E N T S FEBRUARY 2006

some cases, a facility is focused on a particular type of exci-tation source; examples are synchrotron radiation accelera-tors and neutron sources at national or international labo-ratories (FIG. 1). In other cases, a facility is a collection ofvaried analytical instruments focused on a particular area ofscience; an example is an analytical center at a university.In addition, there are single instrument facilities, such asuniversity-based accelerator mass spectrometers or ionmicroprobes.

Marc Caffee (Purdue University), Martin Dove (Universityof Cambridge) and I explore the analytical techniques avail-able at synchrotron radiation, neutron, and mass spectrom-etry user facilities. Each approach offers a unique windowinto the composition, structure, and history of Earth mate-rials, the processes that produce them, and the processesthey control. These analytical methods are highly comple-mentary and foster multidisciplinary research by scientificteams whose members have complementary expertise.

The research conducted at these facilities has impact in dis-ciplines across the Earth sciences, including geochemistry,mineralogy, mineral physics, molecular environmental sci-ence, and petrology. Examples of these forefront studies aresummarized in the article by Gordon Brown Jr., GeorgesCalas, and Russell Hemley (Carnegie Institution of Wash-ington). The large, multi-user facilities make possibleresearch that cannot be conducted at individual investiga-tor laboratories.

Although the analytical foci of these facilities are diverse, asdescribed by Richard Reeder (Stony Brook University) andAntonio Lanzirotti (University of Chicago), all have a com-mon mission—to ensure that these analytical instrumentsare accessible by investigators with innovative researchideas. This mission drives the facilities to work hard tomake access and utilization “user-friendly.” Assistance pro-vided includes easy-to-use websites for proposing experi-ments, straightforward computer programs for manipulat-ing the apparatus and collecting data, and even convenientand comfortable living quarters and amenities. User-friend-liness is the key to the effectiveness of a facility.

One of the remarkable changes that has taken place at userfacilities is the improvement in effectiveness. In the not-too-distant past, conducting research at one of these facili-ties required a major commitment in time to become anexpert in all aspects of the work, including instrumentdevelopment itself. The time between project initiation and

publication could be long. But today the instrumentation islargely in place, experienced practitioners are available toassist novice experimenters (FIG. 2), and the time to publi-cation is short. In most cases, a proposed experiment canreceive instrument access in less than a few months, andthe experimenter can complete a typical few-day experi-mental session with on-the-spot interpreted results. It is nolonger necessary to be an expert in a particular technique tomake effective use of it.

Advances in user facilities are ongoing, in terms of bothadvanced technologies and new facilities, and theseenhancements are summarized in the article by John Parise(Stony Brook University) and Gordon Brown Jr. Analyticalinstruments, such as detectors, are continually beingimproved, and innovations are quickly incorporated intouser facilities. In addition, new large research facilities arebeing constructed, extending the capabilities of existingmethods, making new methods feasible for the first time,and spearheading the creation of new scientific disciplines.

The main “take home” message in this issue is that it is noweasier than ever to conduct experiments at a user facility,and there is ample assistance through the entire process tomaximize the effectiveness and convenience of anyresearch project. Facilities now have easy-to-navigate, web-based “front doors” with clear information on how to applyfor access. The access proposal process is uncomplicatedand can be accomplished quickly. Experienced individualsare available to assist in experiment design, data collection,and data interpretation. There is no better time than now toget involved in research at a user facility.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSI would like to thank the authors of the articles in this issuefor their superb efforts in putting this issue together. EditorsMichael Hochella and Pierrette Tremblay were indispensa-ble in bringing these articles to life. Special thanks also toNicholas Woodward (US DOE – Geosciences Research Pro-gram Manager) and David Lambert (US NSF – Earth Sciences– Instrumentation and Facilities Program Manager) for theirencouragement.

8

Aerial view of the Advanced Light Source at LawrenceBerkeley National Laboratory overlooking San Francisco

Bay in California, USA. PHOTO COURTESY OF THE ADVANCED LIGHT SOURCE

FIGURE 1

User facilities provide a congenial environment for col-laborative research. Graduate student Amy Lazicki

(UC–Davis) and staff scientists William Evans (center) and HyunchaeCynn from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory collect X-raydiffraction patterns with the diamond anvil cell at GSECARS/APS. PHOTO

COURTESY GSECARS–UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

FIGURE 2

INTRODUCTIONDuring the past 20 to 30 years, a large number of nationalscientific user facilities have been developed in NorthAmerica, Europe, and elsewhere. These user facilities differin scale, complexity, construction cost, operations cost, andsize of user base relative to the typical analytical facilitiesthat most Earth scientists use in university and governmentlaboratories. Included among these facilities are synchro-tron light sources, pulsed beam (spallation) and continuous(nuclear reactor) neutron sources, accelerator-based massspectrometers, electron beam microcharacterization facili-ties, and nanoscience centers. In this article, we provide abrief overview of the facilities that are available, focusingon those in North America and Europe.

MAJOR SCIENTIFIC USER FACILITIESAROUND THE WORLDMost of the national scientific user facilities in the US aresupported by the Office of Science of the Department ofEnergy (DOE), and descriptions of them can be found atwww.science.doe.gov/bes/BESfacilities.htm. The locationsof many of these facilities are shown in FIGURE 1. In addi-tion, a booklet entitled Scientific Research Facilities prepared

by the DOE Office of Science canbe downloaded atwww.science.doe.gov/bes/srf.pdf. Anumber of widely distributednational user facilities also exist inEurope (FIG. 2). TABLE 1 summarizesthese facilities, as well as the twomajor synchrotron facilities inJapan. It also lists a number of theUS and European supercomputercenters where computer time ispotentially available to Earth sci-entists on a peer-reviewed proposalbasis.

At present, there are 58 synchro-tron light sources in 29 countries,including seven in the US andtwelve in Japan (the followingURLs list these synchrotron light

sources and their characteristics:w w w . c h e s s . c o r n e l l . e d u / c h e s s / s y n c f c l t . h t m ; www.lightsources.org). US light sources and the EuropeanSynchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) served about 8000users and 5000 users, respectively, in 2004.

Facilities in Asia have been at the forefront of instrumenta-tion development. For example, the Photon Factory (KEK)in Tsukuba, Japan, a second-generation synchrotron light

9E L E M E N T S , V O L . 2 , P P . 9 – 1 4 FEBRUARY 20069

Gordon E. Brown Jr.,1-2 Stephen R. Sutton,3

and Georges Calas4

1 Department of Geological & Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2115, USAE-mail: [email protected]

2 Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory, 2575 Sand Hill Road,MS 69, SLAC, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA

3 Department of Geophysical Sciences and Consortium for AdvancedRadiation Sources, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USAE-mail: [email protected]

4 Institut de Minéralogie et de Physique des Milieux Condensés, UMR CNRS 7590, Universités de Paris 6 et 7 et Institut de Physiquedu Globe de Paris, 140 rue de Lourmel, 75015 Paris, France E-mail: [email protected]

National and international communities of scientists from a variety ofdisciplines have been successful in convincing a growing number ofcountries to construct major user facilities that collectively serve these

communities. These user facilities make possible experimental studies thatcannot be done in individual investigator laboratories. In addition, they havecreated a new style of research, in which scientists working in shared facilitiesconduct studies that benefit from a merging of ideas and techniques fromdifferent disciplines. Earth science users of these facilities are growing innumber and are benefiting greatly from the multidisciplinary interactionssuch facilities stimulate and from the unique experimental capabilitiesthey provide.

KEYWORDS: synchrotron X-rays, neutron scattering, electron beam

microcharacterization, nanoscience research

View of the Swiss LightSource. PHOTO COURTESY

SWISS LIGHT SOURCE/PSI

User Facilities around the World

Locations of US scientific user facilities supported by DOE,Office of Basic Energy Sciences. The different color codes

used in the labels represent different classes of user facilities (e.g. bluerepresents synchrotron radiation sources), and the facility labels that arehachured (e.g. Linac Coherent Light Source) represent user facilities thatare currently under construction. Figure courtesy of Dr. Patricia Dehmer,Office of Basic Energy Sciences, DOE. Also shown are several othernational user facilities supported by other US agencies, including CHESS(NSF) and EMSL (DOE-OBER). A more complete listing of US nationaluser facilities, including mass spectrometry facilities and supercomputercenters, can be found in Table 1.

FIGURE 1


source, has been a productive user facility since 1982. Theworld’s largest third-generation synchrotron source isSpring-8 in Japan, a facility that has been in operation since1997. The Beijing (China) Synchrotron Radiation Facilityhas been supporting users since 1991.

In addition, many new synchrotron facilities are under con-struction or just beginning operations around the world.These include the Canadian Light Source (Saskatchewan),the Australian Synchrotron (Melbourne), Diamond (Didcot,Oxfordshire, UK), and SOLEIL (Gif-sur-Yvette, France).

In most countries, Earth science users are not charged foraccess to most major research facilities. Access is typicallygranted on the basis of peer-reviewed proposals (see Reederand Lanzirotti 2006). Support of research facilities is vari-able around the world. In the US, the DOE (www.doe.gov)is the steward for X-ray and neutron facilities used by Earthscientists (Astheimer et al. 2000) and by scientists fromother disciplines. Substantial support for US Earth scienceresearch facilities is also provided by the NSF (www.nsf.gov),primarily through its Instrumentation and Facilities Pro-gram (www.nsf.gov/geo/ear/if/facil.jsp). In Europe, researchfacilities are largely supported by governing bodies in thecountry of the home institution, but collaborative fundingis becoming more widespread, as exemplified by the ESRF(www.esrf.fr). Support for one of Canada’s newest user facil-ities, the Canadian Light Source (www.lightsource.ca), alsoderives from a partnership approach, in which fundingcomes from federal, provincial, municipal, industrial, andacademic sources.

CLASSES OF USER FACILITIESUser facilities range from large, multi-instrument laborato-ries (only parts of which are needed by any user) operatedby large management and research teams, to facilities withmultiple instruments operated by several investigators, andsingle instruments managed by individual researchers. Anexample of a large, multi-instrument laboratory is the Envi-ronmental Molecular Science Laboratory (EMSL) at PacificNorthwest National Laboratory (PNNL) (www.emsl.pnl.gov).EMSL is composed of six specialized facilities contain-ing advanced and one-of-a-kind experimental and compu-

tational resources for scientists engaged in fundamentalresearch at the interface of physical, chemical, and biologi-cal processes.

At a somewhat smaller scale, beamlines are available atgovernment-operated synchrotron radiation facilities andneutron sources. In some cases, these beamlines are dedi-cated to Earth sciences research (e.g. GeoSoilEnviroCARSSector 13 at the Advanced Photon Source (APS) – www.gsecars.org); however, more typically a fraction of a beam-line’s scientific program is devoted to this mission. Thesebeamlines often have multiple instruments sharing theexperimental time.

Research centers are typically sited at academic institutionsand normally house a variety of instruments organizedaround a particular type of technique or scientific theme.Examples include centers focused on accelerator massspectrometry, on electron beam characterization, and onsecondary ion mass spectrometry.

Finally, individual instruments are typically sited at universi-ties; some fraction of their experimental time is made avail-able to outside users. These instruments include electronmicroprobes/microscopes, X-ray diffractometers, X-ray photo-electron spectrometers, secondary ion mass spectrometers(SIMS), nano-SIMS, tomography equipment, magnetome-ters, and computational facilities.

WHAT IS A SYNCHROTRON LIGHT SOURCE?Synchrotron light sources are the most widely used userfacilities, and thus it is useful here to briefly describe theircharacteristics. A synchrotron light source consists of anelectron or positron source coupled to a particle accelerator.Charged particles are accelerated and then injected intostorage rings where they are further accelerated up to rela-tivistic speeds and to energies ranging from 500 MeV to8 GeV, depending on ring size. As bend magnets steer thecharged particles around the storage ring, energy is lost inthe form of synchrotron radiation. The energy of this radi-ation spans the range from far infrared (0.001 keV or1240 nm) to hard X-rays (100 keV or 0.0124 nm) and is

10

Average spectral brightness/brilliance versus photonenergy for selected synchrotron light sources in the US

(left) and Germany (right) compared with conventional sealed-tube androtating anode laboratory X-ray sources. Left figure courtesy of Prof.Herman Winick, SSRL; Right figure is from the following URL:http://tesla-new.desy.de/content/relatedprojects/index_eng.html

FIGURE 3Locations of major synchrotron radiation (S) and neutron(N) user facilities in Europe. Under construction (u.c.)

FIGURE 2


extremely intense, highly focused, and highly polar-ized relative to the X-rays produced by a sealed-tubeor rotating anode X-ray generator (Winick 1987). Asshown in FIGURE 3, the average brightness of synchro-tron light produced by bend magnets, or by specialmultipole magnetic devices called wigglers or undula-tors, is six to twelve orders of magnitude greater thanthat from conventional laboratory X-ray sources.Beamlines are built tangential to the electron orpositron orbit of the storage ring and capture the radi-ation emitted from a bend magnet, wiggler or undu-lator (FIG. 4). Experimental stations (beamstations) atthe end of these beamlines can be configured inmany ways to conduct scattering, spectroscopy, orimaging experiments using this extremely brightlight. Such light sources make new classes of experi-ments possible for the first time. Also they greatlyenhance the sensitivity of conventional types of studiesusing IR, UV-visible, and X-ray radiation, and theyincrease experimental throughput enormously. Anumber of examples of synchrotron radiationresearch on Earth and environmental materials aregiven in Brown et al. (2006).

The cost of a synchrotron light source ranges fromless than 100 million to greater than one billion USdollars, depending on its size and complexity. Forexample, the Advanced Photon Source located atArgonne National Laboratory is a 7 GeV storage ringthat produces extremely bright hard X-rays. Thissource, commissioned in 1996, cost about 1 billionUS dollars including the cost of most experimentalstations and beamlines (SEE FIG. 4).

The seven US synchrotron light sources currently haveapproximately 215 beamstations ranging in energy fromhard X-ray to soft X-ray/vacuum ultraviolet and far infrared.Among these beamstations, approximately 80 are currentlybeing used by Earth and environmental scientists to variousextents, and about 10% of the total beam time at thesefacilities is used by these two communities (Brown et al.2004). In Europe, about 275 synchrotron radiation beam-stations are available, and a similar proportion of beamsta-tions are used by Earth and environmental science users.

NEUTRON SCATTERING FACILITIESNeutron scattering centers represent another major type ofnational user facility that has had a significant impact onEarth sciences research. As shown in Table 1, there are fourmajor neutron scattering facilities in the US and Canadaand six in Europe. As pointed out by Sutton et al. (2006),neutron scattering is much more sensitive to light ele-ments, including hydrogen, than X-ray scattering, and it isalso sensitive to different isotopes of the same element. Thelatter characteristic allows neutron scattering experimentson isotopically substituted materials that focus on the struc-tural role of a particular element where a relatively low-abundance isotope scatters more strongly than the natu-rally abundant isotope of that element. Examples of thetypes of research carried out at these facilities include neu-tron scattering on isotopically substituted silicate glasses(Cormier et al. 2001), magnetic ordering in wüstite at highpressure (Ding et al. 2005), and neutron scattering studiesof hydrogen in novel clathrate hydrates (Lokshin et al.2004).

A major disadvantage of neutron scattering relative to X-rayscattering is that large samples are required in neutron scat-tering because of the relatively low neutron scatteringpower of nuclei and the low neutron fluxes of existing neu-tron sources. This situation will change dramatically with

the completion of the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) atOak Ridge National Laboratory in the United States, whichwill provide neutron fluxes that are 100 to 1000 times moreintense than the highest flux neutron source currentlyexisting (the ISIS pulsed neutron source at RutherfordAppleton Laboratory in the United Kingdom). Thisimprovement will permit the use of much smaller samples,which will reduce difficulties in dealing with samples thatare compositionally inhomogeneous on the millimeterscale. It will also reduce data collection times and samplethroughput substantially. In addition, significant develop-ments in high-pressure neutron diffraction have takenplace recently. New opportunities are arising from the con-struction of the SNS, where a beamline dedicated to high-pressure neutron scattering will be built (see Parise andBrown 2006).

MASS SPECTROMETRY FACILITIESMass spectrometry laboratories are available as user facili-ties, and these include primarily ion microprobe and accel-erator mass spectrometry (AMS) instruments. These facili-ties make it possible for members of the Earth sciencecommunity to obtain isotopic measurements for studies ofthe geochronology of the early Earth, cosmochemistry, ero-sion rates, mantle dynamics, meteorite chronology, andradiocarbon dating, for example. Ion microprobes at leastpartially supported by the US National Science FoundationInstrumentation and Facilities Program (NSF-IF; www.nsf.gov/geo/ear/if/facil.jsp) include the Northeast National IonMicroprobe Facility at Woods Hole Oceanographic Institu-tion (Massachusetts) and the National Ion MicroprobeFacility at the University of California–Los Angeles. InEurope, examples of national ion microprobe facilities

Distribution of beamlines at the Advanced Photon Source,Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, US. The

various Collaborative Access Team (CAT) designations are shown for eachsector. FIGURE FROM WWW.APS.ANL.GOV/ABOUT/RESEARCH_TEAMS/BEAMLINE_WEB-SITES.HTM

FIGURE 4

include (1) the UK Ion Microprobe Facility, which is locatedin the Department of Geology and Geophysics, Universityof Edinburgh, Scotland; (2) the Nordic Ion MicroprobeFacility, located at the Swedish Museum of Natural History,Stockholm, Sweden; and (3) the National Ion MicroprobeFacility, located at the Centre de Recherches Pétro-graphiques et Géochimiques, Nancy, France. AMS facilitiespartially supported by NSF-IF include the Purdue Rare Iso-tope Measurement Laboratory at Purdue University (Indiana)and the Arizona AMS Laboratory at the University of Ari-zona. In Europe, more than 15 AMS facilities are currentlyintegrated in a network sponsored by the European ScienceFoundation (www.stats.gla.ac.uk/iaams/).

SUPERCOMPUTER CENTERSOver the past 25 years, a number of supercomputer centershave been established at US multipurpose national labora-tories by the US Department of Energy (see Table 1). MajorEarth, atmospheric, and ocean science problems are beingaddressed using these supercomputers, including climatemodeling, atmospheric chemistry simulations, ocean circu-lation models, simulation of the early universe, inversion ofseismic data to generate 3-D tomographic images of Earth’sinterior, reactive transport modeling of contaminants ingroundwater aquifers, and molecular environmental scienceproblems, including molecular-scale simulations of mineral–water interfaces. A recent National Academy of Sciencesreport (Graham et al. 2005) presenting a comprehensiveoverview of supercomputing in the US and abroad can beobtained at http://books.nap.edu/html/up_to_speed/ notice.html. A similar overview describing supercomputing facili-ties in European countries has been produced by the Acad-emic Research Computing Advanced Facilities DiscussionGroup Europe (ARCADE: www.arcade-eu.info/index.html).Several of the more recent US supercomputers have blazingspeed and enormous storage capacities. For example, the3328-processor IBM BlueGene/L - eServer Blue Gene Solu-tion 65536 supercomputer at the National Energy ResearchScientific Computing Center (NERSC), located at LawrenceLivermore National Laboratory, is currently the most pow-erful computer on Earth, according to the TOP500 List of

Supercomputers (www.top500.org/lists/ 2005/06/); it oper-ates at a maximum speed of 136.8 Teraflops. In addition,Yokohama, Japan, is the site of the Earth Simulator Center,which is built around a NEC Vector SX6 supercomputerthat runs at 35.8 Teraflops (currently the fourth-fastestcomputer on Earth). The purpose of this center is to makequantitative predictions and assessments of variations inthe atmosphere, oceans, and solid Earth; to forecast naturaldisasters and environmental problems; and to conduct sim-ulations relevant to industry, bioscience, and energy. Accessto US supercomputers, such as the HP Cluster Platform6000 rx2600 Itanium2 at PNNL, which runs at a speed of8.6 Teraflops (currently the 30th-fastest computer on Earth),is available to the scientific community on a peer-reviewedproposal basis. Once approved, investigators can access thissupercomputer remotely.

CONCLUDING REMARKSThe impact of user facilities, both experimental and com-putational, around the world is growing, and these facilitiesare causing a revolution in the way science is conducted. Asan example of the changes such facilities have created overthe past 30 years, a modern third-generation synchrotronlight source and fast-readout CCD detector make it possibleto collect a complete set of X-ray intensity data from a typ-ical large unit cell protein crystal in several minutes. In con-trast, one of us (GEB) spent at least five weeks collecting dif-fraction data on five olivine single crystals with small unitcells in the late 1960s as part of his PhD work. This enor-mous change in experimental capability is now being felt inmany different fields of science, including the Earth sciences.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSWe are grateful to the governments of the countries thathave funded the construction of user facilities and that con-tinue to fund their operation costs. Such facilities arefunded in large part by the Office of Science, Department ofEnergy in the US, by the Ministry of Research in France, andby national scientific funding agencies in other countries(see TABLE 1 footnotes).


NORTH AMERICAN, EUROPEAN, AND JAPANESE NATIONAL SCIENTIFIC USER FACILITIES

User Facility Location Main Currently Available Year of FirstSponsor Techniques and/or Research Topics Operation

US and Canadian Synchrotron Light SourcesNational Synchrotron Light Source I (X-Ray) Brookhaven National Lab (BNL), Upton, NY DOE-BES (1) Spectroscopy, scattering, 1982(2.8 GeV – 2nd generation) microscopy, tomographyNational Synchrotron Light Source II (VUV) BNL DOE-BES Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy, 1982(0.8 GeV – 2nd generation) tomography, IR, photoemissionStanford Synchrotron Radiation Laboratory (SSRL) Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC), DOE-BES Spectroscopy, scattering, 1974 (SPEAR2)(3 GeV – 3rd generation) Stanford, CA tomography, photoemission 2004 (SPEAR3)Advanced Light Source (ALS) Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL), DOE-BES Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy, 1993(1.5–1.9 GeV – 3rd generation) Berkeley, CA tomography, IR, photoemissionAdvanced Photon Source (APS) Argonne National Lab (ANL), DOE-BES Spectroscopy, scattering, 1996(7 GeV – 3rd generation) Argonne, IL microscopy, tomographyCornell High Energy Synchrotron Source Ithaca, NY NSF (2) Spectroscopy, scattering 1979(CHESS) (5.5 GeV – 2nd generation)Synchrotron Radiation Center (SRC) Stoughton, WI NSF Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy, 1987(0.8–1 GeV – 2nd generation) photoemission, lithographyCenter for Advanced Microstructures Baton Rouge, LA State of LA Lithography, spectroscopy, microscopy 1990and Devices (CAMD)(1.5 GeV – 2nd generation) Canadian Light Source (CLS) University of Saskatchewan, Canada Canadian Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy, 2004(2.9 GeV – 3rd generation) Consortium (3) IR scatteringEuropean and Japanese Synchrotron Light SourcesEuropean Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) Grenoble, France European Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy, 1994(6.0 GeV – 3rd generation) Consortium (4) tomographySynchrotron Radiation Source (SRS) Daresbury Laboratory, CCLRC (5) Spectroscopy, scattering 1980(2 GeV – 2nd generation) Warrington, UK

TABLE 1

ä



European and Japanese Synchrotron Light Sources (cont’d)Hamburger Synchrotronstrahlungslabor HASYLAB Deutsche Elektronen-Synchrotron BMBF (6) Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy 1993 (DORIS III)(4.5 &12 GeV – 2nd generation) (DESY), Hamburg, Germany (PETRA II)Berliner Elektronenspeicherring-Gesellschaft BESSY, Berlin-Adlershof, BMBF Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy 1979 (BESSY I)für Synchrotron Strahlung (BESSY) Germany 1998 (BESSY II)(1.7–1.9 GeV – 3rd generation)Swiss Light Source (SLS) Paul Scherrer Institut, Swiss Spectroscopy, scattering 2001(2.4 GeV – 3rd generation) Villigen, Switzerland Government (7)Sincrotrone Trieste (ELETTRA) Trieste, Italy Italian Spectroscopy, scattering 1978(2.2–2.4 GeV – 3rd generation) Consortium (8)Angströmquelle Karlsruhe (ANKA) Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Germany German Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy 2000(2.5 GeV – 3rd generation) Consortium (9)MAX II Lund University, Sweden Vk (10), Spectroscopy, scattering 1996(1.5 GeV – 3rd generation) Lund UniversitySource Optimisée de Lumière Saint-Aubin, Gif-sur-Yvette, France French Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy To be d’Energie Intermédiaire du LURE (SOLEIL) Consortium (11) commissioned(2.75 GeV – 3rd generation) in 2006DIAMOND Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, CCLRC (12) and Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy To be (3 GeV – 3rd generation) Didcot, UK Wellcome Trust commissioned

in 2007Photon Factory (KEK) Tsukuba, Japan Japanese Spectroscopy, scattering, microscopy 1982(2.5 GeV – 2nd generation) GovernmentSpring-8 (JASRI) Nishi Harima, Japan Japanese Spectroscopy, scattering 1997(8 GeV – 3rd generation) GovernmentUS and Canadian High-Flux Neutron SourcesHigh-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) Oak Ridge National Lab DOE-BES Neutron scattering 1966

(ORNL), Oak Ridge, TNIntense Pulsed Neutron Source (IPNS) ANL DOE-BES Neutron scattering 1981Manual Lujan Jr Neutron Scattering Center Los Alamos National Lab DOE-BES Neutron scattering 1985(Lujan Center) (LANL), Los Alamos, NMSpallation Neutron Source (SNS) ORNL DOE-BES Neutron scattering Under

constructionCanadian Neutron Beam Centre (CNBC) Chalk River, Ontario, Canada NRC (13) Neutron scattering 1950European High-Flux Neutron SourcesInstitut Laue Langevin (ILL) Grenoble, France European Neutron scattering 1967High Flux Reactor Consortium (14)ISIS Pulsed Neutron Source Rutherford Appleton CCLRC Neutron scattering 1985

Laboratory, Didcot, UKLaboratoire Léon Brillouin (LLB) Centre d’études nucléaires, CEA, CNRS Neutron scattering 1981Neutron Reactor Saclay, FranceSwiss Spallation Neutron Source Paul Scherrer Institut, ETH (7) Neutron scattering Under (SINQ) Villigen, Switzerland constructionFRM Garching Neutron Reactor TU Munich in Garching, Germany BMBF Neutron scattering 2004 (FRM II)FRJ-2 Research Reactor FZJ, Jülich, Germany BMBF Neutron scattering 1962Berlin Neutron Scattering Center (BENSC) Hans Meitner Institute, Wannsee, Germany BMBF and Neutron scattering 1993

Land BerlinUS Electron Beam Microcharacterization CentersCenter for Microanalysis of Materials University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, DOE-BES Electron microscopy, surface microanalysis, NA

Urbana-Champaign, IL diffraction, backscatteringElectron Microscopy Center ANL DOE-BES High-resolution TEM 1981for Materials Research (EMCMR)National Center for Electron Microscopy (NCEM) LBNL DOE-BES High-resolution electron-optical 1983

microcharacterizationShared Research Equipment (SHaRE) Program ORNL DOE-BES Electron beam microcharacterization NAExamples of US and European Mass Spectrometry FacilitiesArizona AMS Laboratory University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ NSF Radiocarbon dating and studies involving 1981

other cosmogenic isotopesPurdue Rare Isotope Measurement Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN NSF Radiocarbon dating, exposure dating, erosion 1989Laboratory (PRIME) rates, meteorite chronology Northeast National Ion Microprobe Facility Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, NSF Solar/presolar processes, early Earth evolution, 1996(NENIMF) Woods Hole, MA mantle dynamicsNational Ion Microprobe Facility University of California – Los Angeles, CA NSF Geochronology, cosmochemistry 1996Ion Microprobe Facility University of Edinburgh, Scotland NERC Geochronology, climatology, 1987

early Earth evolution, volcanologyNational Ion Microprobe Facility Centre de Recherches Pétrographiques CNRS Geochronology, 2001

et Géochimiques, Nancy, France cosmochemistry, erosion ratesNordic Geological Ion Microprobe Facility Swedish Museum of Natural History, European Geochronology, petrology 2001 (NORDSIM) Stockholm, Sweden Consortium (15)US Nanoscale Science Research CentersMolecular Foundry LBNL DOE-BES STM, AFM, TEM, mass spectrometers, Under

NMR, e-beam lithography constructionCenter for Nanophase Materials ORNL DOE-BES Synthesis, characterization, theory, Under Science (CNMS) modeling, simulation design constructionCenter for Integrated LANL and Sandia National DOE-BES Nanophotonics, nano-electronics, Under Nanotechnologies (CINT) Lab (SNL) nanomechanics construction

ä


REFERENCESAstheimer R, Kristin B, Brown GE Jr, Hoy J,

Jones KW, Sturchio NC, Sutton SR,Waychunas GA, Woodward NB (2000)Inside Rocks. Geotimes, AmericanGeological Institute, November: 20-23

Brown GE Jr, Calas G, Hemley RJ (2006)Scientific advances made possible by userfacilities. Elements 2: 23-30

Brown GE Jr and 22 co-authors (2004)Molecular Environmental Science: AnAssessment of Research Accomplish-ments, Available Synchrotron RadiationFacilities, and Needs. A Report Preparedon Behalf of EnviroSync – A NationalOrganization Representing MolecularEnvironmental Science Users ofSynchrotron Radiation Sources. SLACPub. SLAC-R-704, 60p, www.slac.stan-ford.edu/pubs/slacreports/slac-r-704.html

Cormier L, Calas G, Gaskell PH (2001)Cationic environment in silicate glassesstudied by neutron diffraction withisotopic substitution. Chemical Geology174: 349–363

Ding Y, Xu J, Prewitt CT, Hemley RJ, MaoHK, Cowan JA, Zhang J, Qian J, Vogel SC,Lokshin K, Zhao Y (2005) Variablepressure-temperature neutron diffractionof wustite (Fe1-xO): absence of long-rangemagnetic order to 20 GPa. AppliedPhysics Letters 86, DOI:10.1063/1.1852075

Graham SL, Snir M, Patterson CA (2005)Getting Up To Speed: The Future ofSupercomputing. National AcademiesPress, Washington, DC, 288 pp

Lokshin KA, Zhao YS, He DW, Mao WL,Mao HK, Hemley RJ, Lobanov MV,Greenblatt M (2004) Structure and

dynamics of hydrogen molecules in thenovel clathrate hydrate by high pressureneutron diffraction. Physical ReviewLetters 93: 125503

Parise JB, Brown GE Jr (2006) Newopportunities at emerging facilities.Elements 2: 37-42

Reeder RJ, Lanzirotti A (2006) Accessingfacilities and making your researchexperience successful. Elements 2: 31-35

Sutton SR, Caffee MW, Dove MT (2006)Synchrotron radiation, neutron, andmass spectrometry techniques at userfacilities. Elements 2: 15-21

Winick H (1987) Synchrotron radiation.Scientific American 257: 88-99 .

Center for Functional Nanomaterials (CFN) BNL DOE-BES Fabrication and study Under of nanoscale materials construction

Center for Nanoscale Materials (CNM) ANL DOE-BES Bio-inorganic interfaces, complex oxides, Undernanocarbon, nanomagnetism, nanophotonics, constructionnanopatterning, X-ray nanoprobe

Other Examples of US and European User FacilitiesWilliam R. Wiley Environmental Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) DOE-BER Environmental chemistry, surface and interface 1997Molecular Science Laboratory (EMSL) (16) science, genomic researchBayerisches Geoinstitut Universität Bayreuth, Germany European Union High-pressure syntheses and experiments, 1986

analytical equipment; characterization of material properties

Williamson Research Centre for University of Manchester, United Kingdom NERC (17) Molecular environmental science 2001Molecular Environmental ScienceExamples of US, European, and Japanese Supercomputer CentersNational Energy Research Scientific LLNL DOE-OS (18) Climate modeling, materials research, early 1978Computing Center (NERSC) universe simulations, protein structuresSan Diego Supercomputer Center University of California, San Diego NSF Multidisciplinary 1985Scalable Computing Laboratory Ames Laboratory, University of Iowa DOE-ASCR (19) Multidisciplinary 1989National Center for Computational Science ORNL DOE-OS Multidisciplinary 1992(NCCS)Brookhaven Computing Facility BNL RIKEN (20) Multidisciplinary 1997(BCF) – Riken BNL Research Center & DOE Molecular Science Computing Facility PNNL (EMSL) DOE Molecular environmental science, atmospheric 2003(MSCF) chemistry, systems biology, catalysis,

materials scienceNASA/Ames Research Center NASA/Ames Mountain View, CA NASA Multidisciplinary 2005National Leadership Computing Facility (NLCF) ANL DOE Multidisciplinary 2007Earth Simulator Center Yokohama, Japan Japan Agency Atmosphere and ocean sciences, solid Earth 2002

for Marine-Earth Science and Technology

Barcelona Supercomputing Center Universitat Politécnica de Catalunya, Ministerio de Earth sciences, biology 2005(BSC) Spain Educación y

CienciaEcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne Lausanne, Switzerland Swiss National Multidisciplinary 2005

Science Foundation

NA Not available(1) US Department of Energy – Basic Energy Sciences

(BES)(2) US National Science Foundation (NSF)(3) Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research,

Alberta Innovation & Science, Boehringer Ingelheim,Canada Foundation for Innovation, City of Saskatoon,Western Economic Diversification, Ontario InnovationTrust, Saskatchewan Industry and Resources, NationalResearch Council, Natural Resources Canada,SaskPower, University of Alberta, University ofSaskatchewan, University of Western Ontario

(4) France, Germany, Italy, United Kingdom, Spain,Switzerland, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Finland,Norway, Sweden

(5) Council for the Central Laboratory of the ResearchCouncils (CCLRC), United Kingdom

(6) Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung(Federal Ministry for Education and Research)

(7) Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule (ETH), Zurich(8) AREA Science Park, Regione Friuli Venezia Giulia,

National Institute for the Physics of Matter (INFM),Sviluppo Italia, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche(CNR)

(9) Angströmquelle Karlsruhe, Land Baden-Württemberg(10) Vetenskapsrådet (Swedish Research Council)(11) Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS),

Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (CEA), France(12) Council for the Central Laboratory of the Research

Councils (CCLRC), United Kingdom

(13) National Research Council (NRC), Canada(14) France: CEA and CNRS; Germany: Forschungszentrum

Jülich (FZJ); United Kingdom: CCLRC(15) Nordic facility funded jointly by Sweden, Norway,

Finland, and Denmark(16) US DOE, Office of Biological and Environmental

Research (BER)(17) Natural Environment Research Council (NERC),

United Kingdom(18) US DOE, Office of Science (OS)(19) US DOE, Office of Advanced Scientific Computing

Research (ASCR)(20) Rikagaku Kenkyusho (RIKEN, The Institute of Physical

and Chemical Research) of Japan .


US Nanoscale Science Research Centers (cont’d)

INTRODUCTIONAnalytical methods available at user facilities are remark-able in their scope, and their capabilities are highly com-plementary. Some methods require samples to be exquis-itely prepared while others can be applied to “as-is”specimens. Some methods involve the coordination oflarge, multibuilding apparatus while others are carried outin a small room. Although the instruments are highly vari-able in their make-up, the techniques they offer represent apowerful force in tackling complex scientific problems.From chemical analyses of components in nanogram speci-mens from the interplanetary medium, to chronologicalstudies of the earliest rocks from the Earth’s crust, to theproperties of the mineral phases in the deep Earth, the sci-entific potential is huge and limited only by the imagina-tion and innovation of Earth scientists.

Here, we highlight some current capabilities to give a flavorof the information that can be obtained at user facilities.Our focus is on techniques using synchrotron radiation,neutrons, and mass spectrometry. Each provides a differentyet complementary view into the complex nature and his-tories of Earth materials and geological processes. Synchro-tron radiation is well-suited for experiments that define thearrangement of atoms and their electronic structures. Neu-trons can probe the structures and dynamics of light ele-ments. Mass spectrometry yields information on isotopiccomposition valuable for radiometric dating. Although the

operation of these instruments iscomplex at the lowest level, theyare designed, constructed, andoperated with novice users inmind. User-friendly software inter-faces and skilled technical assis-tance are available.

SYNCHROTRONRADIATIONSynchrotrons generate intenseradiation in the infrared to X-rayregime. The unique properties ofthis radiation (high brilliance,polarization, continuous energyspectrum, temporal structure)allow a wide variety of analytical

techniques. The application of these techniques can pro-vide crucial information about the nature of minerals andother Earth materials, including crystalline structure, chem-ical composition, chemical speciation, surface and interfacestructure, electronic structure, and porosity (e.g. Fenter etal. 2002). One of the major advantages to using synchro-tron light for investigating Earth materials is that the pene-trating power of the radiation permits studies in near-nat-ural conditions, for example, in the presence of water.Synchrotron experiments are conducted at a “beamline”consisting of optical equipment to condition the X-raybeam and a shielded experiment room containing a samplemanipulator and X-ray detectors (FIG. 1).

Earth materials are often heterogeneous, and X-raymicrobeam studies are valuable in unraveling this com-plexity. Spatial resolutions down to 100 nm are achievableusing zone plates, mirrors, and refractive optics. Most X-ray-based methods can be applied with high spatial resolution,including X-ray fluorescence (XRF), X-ray absorption finestructure (XAFS), X-ray diffraction (XRD), and computedmicrotomography (CMT). By applying these techniques ina nearly simultaneous fashion, it is possible to produce ele-mental maps with sub-part-per-million sensitivity anddetermine the speciation and mineralogy at selected loca-tions in the material. An example is a study of Ni- and Zn-contaminated soils from the Morvan region of France,which resulted in a quantitative assessment of the forms ofthese two elements (Manceau et al. 2003). Toxic andradioactive elements are also amenable to this approach. Ina plutonium sorption experiment on Yucca Mountain(Nevada, USA) tuff, Pu was found to be strongly associatedwith Mn-rich smectite phases and all but absent in the zeo-lite and iron-oxide grains that dominate the rock (Duff et al.1999).

15E L E M E N T S , V O L . 2 , P P . 1 5 - 2 1 FEBRUARY 200615

Stephen R. Sutton,1 Marc W. Caffee,2 and Martin T. Dove3

1 Department of Geophysical Sciences and Consortium for AdvancedRadiation Sources, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USAE-mail: [email protected]

2 Department of Physics and PRIME Laboratory, Purdue University,W. Lafayette, IN 47907-2036, USA E-mail: [email protected]

3 Department of Earth Science and National Institute for Environ-mental eScience, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EQ, UKE-mail: [email protected]

User research facilities around the world offer tremendous opportunitiesfor scientific experimentation by members of the Earth science com-munity. Synchrotron radiation sources, neutron sources, mass spec-

trometers, and others represent a powerful force in tackling complex scien-tific problems. In these techniques, Earth materials are bombarded withbeams of ions, subatomic particles and/or photons to learn the secrets oftheir properties and histories. Some of these methods can be applied tonanoscale materials with “desktop” instruments while others require macro-scopic samples and utilize large-scale devices residing in multiple buildings;and there is everything in between.

KEYWORDS: Synchrotron radiation, neutrons, mass spectrometry,

user facilities, analytical techniques

X-ray diffraction patternof stishovite (SiO2) in a

diamond anvil cell at 40GPa. From Prakapenka

et al. (2004), Journal ofPhysics and Chemistry

of Solids 65: 1537–1545

Synchrotron Radiation,Neutron, and MassSpectrometry Techniquesat User Facilities


X-ray absorption fine-structure spectroscopy (XAFS) providesdetailed information regarding the average electronic andmolecular energy levels associated with a specific element.This information permits determinations of oxidation state,coordination number, identity of nearest neighbors andbond lengths (e.g. Koningsberger and Prins 1988). Suchdata are crucial for understanding the structure of complexminerals, geochemical properties of Earth materials, andtransport mechanisms for ore-forming metals, for example.Speciation measurements can be obtained for trace ele-ments down to about 10 parts per million and with orwithout spatial resolution. The XAFS measurement consistsof collecting absorption intensity (or some product of theabsorption, such as X-ray fluorescence) as the energy of theexciting X-ray beam is scanned with high-energy resolution(<1 eV) through the X-ray absorption edge of the elementof interest. The resulting absorption spectra can then beinterpreted in terms of the molecular environment of thatatom (e.g. Stern and Heald 1983). The method is applicableto virtually all elements in the periodic table, and samplesin all forms (liquid, solid, gas) can be analyzed in this way.

XAFS is extremely valuable in low-temperature geochemicalstudies, such as for establishing the speciation of contami-nants in sediments (See Brown et al. 2006). For example,Zachara et al. (2004) showed that toxic hexavalentchromium from Hanford waste tanks was only partiallyreduced to trivalent chromium in the underlying sedi-ments. It is also possible to determine the speciation ofcations in glasses (e.g. Galoisy and Calas 1993) and in situmelts under controlled oxygen fugacity (Berry et al. 2003).

Synchrotron radiation also permits crystallography experi-ments in high-pressure devices, such as the large-volumepress (LVP) and the diamond anvil cell (DAC), both ofwhich can also be heated to high temperature. An advan-tage of in situ observations is that complications due toquench effects can be avoided. In this way, the extremeconditions deep in the Earth can be simulated, and deter-minations can be made of equations of state, crystal struc-tures, and phase relations of mantle and core materials, forexample. The DAC consists of two gem-quality diamondswith small facets opposed to compress a hole-bearing gasket(the sample chamber). Nanogram quantities of material(powder or single crystal) can be compressed to ~200 GPaand laser heated (FIG. 2) to several thousand degrees (i.e. to

outer core conditions). Pressure determinations are made insitu, using ruby fluorescence or diffraction from includedmaterials of known lattice parameters. Temperature is deter-mined from the color of the sample’s incandescence. Arecent flurry of DAC research activity has focused on thediscovery of a post-perovskite phase transition in MgSiO3

near 125 GPa (e.g. Murakami et al. 2004); this discovery isrelevant to improving our understanding of the structureand dynamics of the lowermost portion of the mantle(<300 km from the core–mantle boundary).

The LVP is a floor-standing hydraulic ram with externalheating and a larger (mm3) sample chamber than the DAC.Pressure and temperature (<30 GPa, <3000K, i.e. mantleconditions) are determined by load and thermocouple,respectively. For both the DAC and LVP, conventional X-ray diffraction experiments are conducted to characterizethe sample under these extreme conditions. A recentadvance has been the development of deformation toolingfor the LVP that allows samples to be deformed under highP-T conditions with well-controlled strain rates. By ana-lyzing the distortion of the Debye rings in powder diffrac-tion patterns, elastic lattice strain can be determined, whichis related to stress through elastic constants (Singh 1993).This approach has been used to determine the pressure andstrain dependence of the strength of Mg2SiO4 ringwoodite(Nishiyama et al. 2005).

Microtomography is the extension to finer spatial resolutionof tomographic imaging techniques used in medicine (CATscanning). By using high-brightness synchrotron radiationbeams, spatial resolutions in the µm range can be achievedat the expense of maximum sample size (typically in themm to cm size range). The internal microstructure of valu-able or fragile objects can be examined. In addition, ele-ment-specific tomography is possible either by collectingtransmission tomograms above and below an absorptionedge or by using fluorescence techniques. An attractiveaspect of microtomography is that virtually no samplepreparation is required and essentially any object can beimaged. Microtomographic images can be used to deter-mine the microdistribution of contaminants in plants,locate mineral inclusions in mantle-derived diamonds,visualize the inundation of soils by oil and water, determine

16

Photograph of the GeoSoilEnviroCARS undulator experi-mental station at the Advanced Photon Source (Argonne,

Illinois, USA) showing the surface and interface diffractometer (left) andX-ray microprobe (back center). COURTESY OF GEOSOILENVIROCARS, UNI-VERSITY OF CHICAGO

FIGURE 1

Laser-heated hydrous ringwoodite [γ-(Mg,Fe)2SiO4] sin-gle crystal (~100 µm) at 30 GPa in a diamond anvil cell.

A silicate perovskite plus magnesiowüstite assemblage formed at threedifferent temperatures is present within each of the round heated areas.PHOTO COURTESY OF S.D. JACOBSEN (CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON) AND

J.-F. LIN (LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY)

FIGURE 2

grain-size distributions in volcanic rocks, and observe themorphologies of vapor bubbles in melts (e.g. Rivers et al.2004).

Mineral surface reactivity depends on the identity andarrangement of surface functional groups. Interface scat-tering—the angular distribution of X-radiation scatteredfrom highly polished, atomically flat crystals—is one of thefew approaches that can be used to determine the arrange-ment of atoms at truncated surfaces and at mineral–waterinterfaces. Such studies utilize high-precision diffractome-ters (FIG. 1) and are valuable in developing a detailed under-standing of the chemical reactions at these surfaces andinterfaces. In addition, in conjunction with spectroscopicmethods, sorption experiments can reveal the bondingbehavior of solute species, particularly those of interestfrom a geochemical transport standpoint. Recent work hasfocused on reactivity and sorption of hydrated metal oxidesurfaces, such as hematite (Trainor et al. 2004) and ortho-clase (Fenter et al. 2000). This work demonstrates that thearrangement of atoms at the mineral–water interface canhave a dramatic control on reactivity (See Brown et al. 2006).

The discussion above, focusing on high-energy techniques,is far from an exhaustive description of methods used atsynchrotron user facilities to investigate Earth materials. Inparticular, soft X-ray and vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) syn-chrotron sources offer methods optimal for studies of lightelements. For example, scanning transmission microscopyis valuable for high-resolution (sub-50 nm) imaging andlight-element speciation mapping (e.g. carbon compounds).Synchrotrons are also attractive sources of infrared radia-tion allowing Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) analyseswith 100-fold intensity enhancement over laboratorysources plus spatially resolved capabilities at the ~10 µm scale.

NEUTRON METHODSBeams of neutrons provide an extremely versatile set oftools for mineral sciences, yet for a number of reasons themineralogical and Earth sciences communities are a longway from fully exploiting the potential of neutron scat-tering (Rinaldi 2002; Dove 2002).

The power of neutron scattering arises from two factors:first, neutrons have a mass that is similar to the masses ofatoms and second, neutrons interact with matter via short-range interactions with atomic nuclei or via dipolar mag-netic interactions with any magnetized ions. The pointabout the mass of the neutron means that beams of neu-trons can be tuned to have wavelengths comparable to typ-ical interatomic spacings while simultaneously having ener-gies that are comparable to the energies of thermalvibrations. Thus neutrons can uniquely give informationabout both the structure and dynamics of matter, andexperiments can be designed to optimize one or the other,or both at the same time.

The second point is important because the interactionbetween neutrons and atomic nuclei is nucleus specific,which means, for example, that Mg2+, Al3+, and Si4+ havedistinctly different neutron scattering cross sections, unlikescattering by X-rays. Thus neutrons are able to providedirect information about Mg2+/Al3+/Si4+ ordering in min-erals; for example, Welch and Knight (1999) studied cationordering of these species in an amphibole. Hydrogen, animportant component of many minerals, is a particularlyspecial case. The scattering from the 1H nucleus when thespins of the neutron and proton are along the same direc-tion is significantly different from the case where the spinvectors are aligned in opposite directions. On the otherhand, the deuterium nucleus, 2H, has no spin, and its inter-action with neutrons is different again. The significance of

all this is two-fold: first, neutrons can see hydrogen in dif-fraction experiments (typically deuterated samples are pre-ferred in such experiments), and second, the strong spin-dependence of the scattering of neutrons from 1H meansthat part of the scattering is sensitive to the positions anddynamics of individual 1H atoms (Dove 2002; Bée 1988).

The strength of the interaction between neutrons andmatter is usually relatively weak, both for scattering andabsorption (there are some notable exceptions that can beexploited). There are two positive consequences. One is thatit is possible to develop sample environment equipment,such as high-pressure equipment, without having to worrytoo much about beam attenuation (Zhao et al. 1999; LeGodec et al. 2001). The other is that a measurement is notdominated by scattering from the surface, as it is in X-raydiffraction. Thus neutrons provide a true probe of bulkproperties. The downside of the weak interaction withmatter, and the fact that neutrons are not usually producedin copious quantities, is that samples need to be quite large(cm3 scale) and experimental stations are built to a largerscale than in other techniques.

Two methods are used to produce beams of neutrons (Win-kler 2002). The traditional method exploits the fact thatnuclear fission reactors produce neutrons, and designs ofreactor cores can be optimized to reflect neutrons intobeam tubes leading to experimental stations (e.g. ILL,Grenoble, France). This typically results in a continuousbeam of neutrons containing a range of neutron wave-lengths. Monochromator crystals are used to select thedesired wavelength of the beam incident on the sample.The second method generates beams of neutrons bydirecting a beam of protons onto a metal target—the so-called “spallation” method in which neutrons are knockedout of the nuclei of the target atoms (e.g. ISIS, Oxfordshire,UK; FIG. 3). The spallation method lends itself to producingpulsed bursts of neutrons, and by measuring the time takenfor the neutrons to travel from the target to the detector, it


Interior of the ISIS Neutron Facility Experimental Hall(Chilton, UK). COURTESY OF THE COUNCIL FOR THE CENTRAL LAB-

ORATORY OF THE RESEARCH COUNCILS (CCLRC)

FIGURE 3

is possible to determine the wavelength. These two sourcesoften give rise to complementary experiment instrumenta-tion. For example, a powder diffractometer on a reactorsource will use a fixed wavelength and will have detectorsin a plane covering a wide range of scattering angles,whereas with a spallation source the full range of wave-lengths will be used, and detectors will be positionedaround the Debye-Scherrer rings for a range of scatteringangles.

We will describe two types of instruments, namely diffrac-tometers and spectrometers. Both measure the intensity ofthe scattered neutron beam as a function of scatteringvector Q (or Q = |Q|), but the two types of instruments aredifferentiated by the fact that spectrometers also measure asa function of energy change, E, at the same time. In manycases E can be related to the frequency, v, of a quantum ofexcitation, E = hv.

Diffractometers can be designed to perform traditionalmeasurements for both powder and single-crystal diffraction,and can be optimized for high resolution or high intensity(FIG. 4). The best high-resolution neutron powder diffrac-tometers give as high a resolution as one could want, withmeasurements being limited by natural line broadeningprocesses. Diffractometers can also be optimized for meas-urements with sample environment equipment, includinghigh-pressure apparatus. Of note is the fact that high-pres-sure work can be performed with spallation sources withmeasurements taken for scattering angles of 90°, enablingnearly complete elimination of scattering from the equip-ment (Zhao et al. 1999; Le Godec et al. 2001). It is now alsopossible to measure sample temperature at simultaneoushigh pressures and temperatures using neutron radiographyrather than thermocouples (Le Godec et al. 2001). Examples

of recent applications of diffraction measurements fromminerals are given in Dove (2002), Pavese (2002), and Red-fern (2002).

Other diffraction methods that are becoming increasinglypopular in mineral sciences are techniques focusing onlarger-scale structures. These include small-angle scattering(e.g. to measure the sizes of precipitates within solid solu-tion), measurements of texture maps, and measurements ofstrain distributions within mineral assemblages (Schäfer2002). Another application that has yet to be used inearnest in mineral sciences is diffraction or reflection from sur-faces; this application has been greatly used by chemists.

The diffraction measurements described so far focus onmeasurements of Bragg peaks. Other instruments can beoptimized to measure weaker, diffuse scattering. In the caseof powder diffraction, measurements of diffuse and Braggscattering, called “total scattering,” can provide informa-tion about pair distribution functions. This is particularlyuseful for studies of disordered crystalline materials, glasses,and melts, and is a diffraction technique that has a lot ofuntapped potential for research in mineral sciences (Doveet al. 2002).

Spectrometers are designed to measure the dynamics ofatoms within matter. Dynamical processes include coherentexcitations such as harmonic lattice vibrations (phonons)and spin waves (including sound waves and high-frequencybond-bending vibrations such as the O–H stretching vibra-tion), low-frequency tumbling of water molecules, and evenlower frequency diffusion motions. The frequency rangespans several orders of magnitude, and spectrometers canbe designed for different frequency ranges. The traditionalinstrument at reactor sources is the “triple-axis spectrom-eter,” which is designed to measure phonon dispersioncurves point by point. This instrument has two monochro-mator crystals, one to set the incoming wavelength, and theother to reflect neutrons of different wavelengths into asingle detector. It thus becomes possible to measure theintensity for specific changes in energy E and scatteringvector Q, and by mapping out measurements for a widerange of values of Q and E it is possible to construct a nearlycomplete picture of the dispersion curves. There is no com-parable instrument for spallation sources; instead spec-trometers are designed using choppers and banks of detec-


Schematic representation (left) and photograph (right) ofthe General Materials (GEM) diffractometer at the ISIS

Neutron Facility (Chilton, UK). The instrument is stacked with banks ofdetectors covering all scattering angles, with the highest resolutionobtained with the back-scattering detectors. This instrument is designedfor both diffraction and total scattering measurements. COURTESY OF THE

COUNCIL FOR THE CENTRAL LABORATORY OF THE RESEARCH COUNCILS (CCLRC)

FIGURE 4

tors, and give measurements for a whole range of Q and Evalues in a single setting. In addition to performing meas-urements of dispersion curves using single-crystal samples,by using polycrystalline samples and running experimentsthat will integrate over Q, it is possible to perform meas-urements of vibrational density of states. Chaplot et al.(2002) review the application of neutron spectroscopicmethods to the study of the dynamic properties of minerals.

As noted above, the spin dependence of the scattering ofneutrons from 1H means that a strong component of thescattering from hydrogen provides information about indi-vidual atoms in a process called “incoherent scattering.” Thishas been exploited in studies of the dynamics of hydrogen-containing molecules in solids and liquids (Bée 1988), andhas been used in some early studies of the motions ofhydrogen in minerals, including water in cordierite (Win-kler 1996).

One mineral for which a range of neutron scattering meas-urements have been performed is cristobalite. Early high-resolution neutron powder diffraction measurements wereused to characterize the disorder in the high-temperature βphase and to facilitate modeling of the thermodynamics ofthe low-temperature α phase (Schmahl et al. 1992). It wassubsequently proposed that the phase transition would beaccompanied by a large change in the low-frequencydynamics, and this was confirmed by neutron spectroscopymeasurements (Swainson and Dove 1993). Total scatteringstudies have been used more recently to provide detailedinformation about the structure of the disordered β phase(Tucker et al. 2001).

At the time of writing, we are seeing a dramatic increase inneutron scattering research capabilities, which matches thepace of development of facilities such as synchrotron radi-ation sources. These developments are described by Pariseand Brown (2006) in this issue.

MASS SPECTROMETRYMass spectrometry has become a vital technique for Earthscientists, allowing high sensitivity analyses of elementalabundance and isotopic composition. Such information isvaluable in chronological studies over the entire age of oursolar system, for example. Mass spectrometers range fromrelatively simple, bench-top instruments to complex appa-ratus that require dedicated facilities and are based onsophisticated technologies such as particle accelerators,focused ion beams, and lasers. The physical principle uponwhich these instruments are based is the mass separation ofcharged particles as they traverse a magnetic field. Many ofthese advanced mass spectrometry facilities are open to thescientific community as user facilities.

Most Earth and planetary materials are extremely heteroge-neous assemblages. In many instances the constituents areless than a millionth of a meter in size, much smaller thana human hair. Detailed information regarding the evolu-tionary history of the constituents can only be obtained viaa technically challenging, grain-by-grain analysis. The rig-orous challenges of spatial resolution coupled with sufficientsensitivity to detect the masses of a few thousand atoms arebeing met by secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS).

SIMS works by sputtering the surface of a grain with a pri-mary beam of ionized cesium or oxygen. As atoms residingnear the surface are liberated, some are ionized and col-lected into a spectrometer with high mass resolution. Vir-tually the entire periodic table is accessible, with detectionlimits of 10–100 ppb for many elements and precision ofisotope ratios as good as 0.1 per mil. These secondary ionsare mass analyzed by a combination of electrostatic and

magnetic components. Particle detection is achieved usinga combination of electron multipliers, Faraday cups, andimaging detectors, such as microchannel plates. Most ofthese so-called ion microprobes (FIG. 5) have the capability toperform both momentum and energy mass analysis and arecommonly available as user facilities. The mass resolvingpower (m/∆m) of SIMS instruments covers a large range, isadjustable on individual instruments, and typically extendsfrom ~1000 to 50,000 (inverse of the smallest mass fractionthat can be measured). Ion microprobe/SIMS instrumentsare capable of focusing the primary beam to spots as smallas 50 nm for in situ analysis of thin sections or grainmounts. In addition to performing elemental and isotopicabundance ratio measurements, many SIMS instrumentscan also create an image of the microdistribution of isotopicratios in a sample, effectively creating an isotopic map.

An exciting research direction in single-grain mass spec-trometry is the search for grains produced prior to the for-mation of our solar system. These “presolar grains” frommeteorites have isotopic compositions distinct from thoseof typical solar system material, so the precise isotopicabundances can shed light on the type of star that producedthem. Presolar silicon carbide grains (e.g. Bernatowicz et al.2003) range in diameter from 0.1 to 10 microns and havean abundance in meteorites of ~10 parts per million. Theirdistinctive isotopic signatures are large variations in12C/13C and 14N/15N, which are comparable to the rangesobserved in the atmospheres of carbon-rich giant stars. Thediscovery of rare presolar silicate grains (e.g. Anders andZinner 1993) was made possible by the imaging capabilityof SIMS techniques (FIG. 6). Currently, mass spectrometricmethods are being developed for “dating” these grains andusing them to characterize the chemical evolution of ourgalaxy (e.g. Clayton 1997). The extent to which thesestudies will be successful may well hinge on further advancesin mass spectrometric techniques and the availability ofthese advances to the general scientific community.

The ages of solar system materials are based on a number ofisotopic chronometers. These isotopic ratios are determinedusing a variety of mass spectrometers, including a new gen-eration of instruments collectively referred to as inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometers (ICP–MS). These instru-


CAMECA IMS-1280 large radius multicollector ion micro-probe optimized for analysis of stable isotope ratios at the

University of Wisconsin–Madison WiscSIMS Laboratory. PHOTO COURTESY

J. VALLEY

FIGURE 5

ments measure isotopes of Cr, Fe, Ca, Sr, Pd, Ag, Mn, Ni, Hf,W, Nd, Sm, U, Cm, Pb, Li, B, Be, Cu, Zn, Hg, Mo, andothers. ICP–MS utilizes several sample introduction tech-niques, including laser ablation and direct introduction ofa solution into the ionization region. Laser ablation enablesthe in situ analysis of isotopic structures of mineral grains.Ionization is achieved by argon plasma at atmospheric pres-sure. The ions are then introduced into the mass spectrom-eter through a differentially pumped region. The mass spec-trometer itself may consist of magnetic and/or electrostaticsectors followed by one or more detectors. The power ofhigh-resolution ICP-MS is in its ability to distinguishbetween molecules of very similar masses.

In one example of ICP–MS work, measurements of Pb iso-topes in meteoritic Ca–Al-rich inclusions give a chronolog-ical reference point of 4.566 ± 0.002 billion years for thefirst matter condensed in our solar system (Amelin et al.2002). The measurement of W isotopes by high-resolutionICP–MS, in conjunction with the initial 182Hf/183Hf, indi-cates that core formation in the iron meteorite parentbodies took place within 10 million years of the beginningof the solar system (Kleine et al. 2002). Other isotopic sys-tems indicate that by ~40 million years, Earth itself had dif-ferentiated (e.g. Halliday and Lee 1999) and that by 200million years melts had crystallized in the crust, formingzircons.

These zircons provide a wealth of information regarding theearly evolution of Earth. Zircon simultaneously concen-trates uranium and excludes lead, so it is a perfect mineralfor U–Pb chronometry. Zircon grains are highly resistant toweathering and can survive multiple geologic events. Theypreserve isotopic records of events occurring over much ofEarth history, most notably within several hundred millionyears after the formation of Earth. Their isotopic recordscan be deciphered using micro-analytical techniques, inparticular SIMS. Measurements of δ18O and trace elementcompositions can then be used to delineate geologicprocesses occurring in the early Earth (e.g. Wilde et al. 2001).

Mass spectrometric techniques have also shed considerablelight on the collisional processes responsible for the trans-port of asteroidal objects to Earth by using cosmic ray expo-sure ages to date the collisional events. Noble gases areuseful for determining cosmic-ray exposure ages in mete-

orites, principally 3He, 21Ne, 38Ar, 81Kr,and 124,126Xe. These measurements areperformed using noble gas mass spec-trometers, which typically have a massresolving power of <1000 and an abun-dance sensitivity of ~10-6. Radionuclidesused to determine cosmic-ray exposureages, pre-atmospheric sizes, andshielding depths include (with half-livesgiven in brackets) 10Be (1.5 Myr), 26Al(0.705 Myr), 36Cl (0.301 Myr), 53Mn(3.5 Myr), and 129I (16 Myr). The devel-opment of accelerator mass spectrometry(AMS) increased the detection sensi-tivity of all these radionuclides by virtueof detecting atoms rather than decayproducts. The abundance sensitivity isrealized by accelerating the ions to ≥1MeV. Ions accelerated to this energy can

pass through a thin carbon foil or a stripper gas at the accel-erator terminal, effectively disassociating molecular inter-ferences. AMS facilities are commonly made available asuser facilities, so that exposure age determinations are avail-able to the general scientific community.

In a variant of this collisional dating method, cosmic-rayexposure ages on terrestrial rocks can be used to date colli-sional events on Earth. In the case of Meteor Crater in Ari-zona (USA), the explosive force of the Canyon Diablo ironmeteorite excavated rock that, until that time, had beenshielded from exposure to cosmic rays. AMS measurementshave determined the subsequent accumulation of cosmo-genic 14C, 10Be, 26Al, and 36Cl, thereby establishing the ageof the crater at ~50,000 years (Nishiizumi et al. 1991;Phillips et al. 1991), consistent with the first absolute datingof the crater using thermoluminescence measurements ofimpact-heated sedimentary rocks (Sutton 1985).

Thus, mass spectrometry methods have provided pieces tothe geologic puzzle stretching in time from before the for-mation of the solar system 4.566 billion years ago to recentmeteorite collisions with Earth. Acquisition of this knowl-edge would not have been possible without the use of avariety of mass spectrometric techniques, many of which,notably those at AMS and SIMS facilities, have been devel-oped and are operated as user facilities.

CONCLUDING REMARKSWe are currently in a very productive period for userfacility–based research in the Earth sciences. A large numberof facilities exist representing a wide spectrum of analyticalcapabilities. Each technique provides a unique window intothe composition, structure, and history of Earth materials,the processes that produce these materials, and theprocesses they control. Equally significant, sufficient expe-rience in the operation of user facilities has been gained tomake them very effective in responding to and meeting theneeds of the research community. Many Earth scientists arecurrently taking advantage of the frontier capabilitiesoffered by user facilities, and their numbers are growing.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe authors thank Kevin McKeegan (UCLA), Adrian Finch(University of St. Andrews), and John Valley (University ofWisconsin–Madison) for providing valuable suggestions forimproving this article. .


SIMS maps (~30 µm wide) of oxygen isotopic microdis-tributions (16O left; 18O right) in oxide grains separated

from the Tieschitz meteorite. The arrows show the presence of a grainof anomalous (presolar) isotopic composition. PHOTO COURTESY OF L.NITTLER, CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON, DEPARTMENT OF TERRESTRIAL

MAGNETISM

FIGURE 6

REFERENCESAmelin Y, Krot AN, Hutcheon ID, Ulyanov

AA (2002) Lead isotopic ages of chon-drules and calcium-aluminum-richinclusions. Science 297: 1678-1683

Anders E, Zinner E (1993) Interstellar grainsin primitive meteorites: diamond, siliconcarbide, and graphite. Meteoritics 28:490-514

Bée M (1988) Quasielastic NeutronScattering: Principles and Applications inSolid State Chemistry, Biology, andMaterials Science. Adam Hilger, Bristol,437 pp

Bernatowicz TJ, Messenger S, PravdivtsevaO, Swan P, Walker RM (2003) Pristinepresolar silicon carbide. Geochimica etCosmochimica Acta 67: 4679-4691

Berry AJ, Shelley JMG, Foran GJ, O’NeillHSC, Scott DR (2003) A furnace designfor XANES spectroscopy of silicate meltsunder controlled oxygen fugacities andtemperatures to 1773 K. Journal ofSynchrotron Radiation 10: 332-336

Brown GE Jr, Calas G, Hemley RJ (2006)Scientific advances made possible by user facilities. Elements 2: 23-29

Chaplot SL, Choudhury N, Ghose S, RaoMN, Mittal R, Goel P (2002): Inelasticneutron scattering and lattice dynamicsof minerals. European Journal ofMineralogy 14: 291-329

Clayton DD (1997) Placing the Sun andmainstream SiC particles in galacticchemodynamic evolution. AstrophysicalJournal 484: L67-L70

Dove MT (2002) An introduction to the useof neutron scattering methods in mineralsciences. European Journal of Mineralogy14: 203-224

Dove MT, Tucker MG, Keen DA (2002)Neutron total scattering method:simultaneous determination of long-range and short-range order in disorderedmaterials. European Journal of Mineral-ogy 14: 331-348

Duff MC, Hunter DB, Triay IR, Bertsch PM,Reed DT, Sutton SR, Shea-McCarthy G,Kitten J, Eng P, Chipera SJ, Vaniman DT(1999) Mineral associations and averageoxidation states of sorbed Pu on tuff.Environmental Science & Technology 33:2163-2169

Fenter P, Teng H, Geissbühler P, HancharJM, Nagy KL, Sturchio NC (2000) Atomic-scale structure of the orthoclase(001)–water interface measured withhigh-resolution X-ray reflectivity.Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 64:3663-3673

Fenter P, Rivers M, Sturchio N, Sutton S,editors (2002) Applications of synchro-tron radiation in low-temperaturegeochemistry and environmental science.Reviews in Mineralogy & Geochemistry49, Mineralogical Society of America andGeochemical Society, 579 pp

Galoisy L, Calas G (1993) Structuralenvironment of nickel in silicateglass/melt systems: Part I. Spectroscopicdetermination of coordination states.Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 57:3613-3626

Halliday AN, Lee DC (1999) Tungstenisotopes and the early development ofthe Earth and Moon. Geochimica etCosmochimica Acta 63: 4157-4179

Kleine T, Münker C, Mezger K, Palme H(2002) Rapid accretion and early coreformation on asteroids and the terrestrialplanets from Hf-W chronometry. Nature418: 952-955

Koningsberger DC, Prins R, editors (1988)X-ray Absorption: Principles, Applica-tions, Techniques of EXAFS, SEXAFS, andXANES. John Wiley & Sons, 673 pp

Le Godec Y, Dove MT, Francis DJ, KohnSC, Marshall WG, Pawley AR, Price GD,Redfern SAT, Rhodes N, Ross NL,Schofield PF, Schooneveld E, Syfosse G,Tucker MG, Welch MD (2001) Neutrondiffraction at simultaneous hightemperatures and pressures, withmeasurement of temperature by neutronradiography. Mineralogical Magazine 65:737-748

Manceau A, Tamura N, Celestre RS,MacDowell AA, Sposito G, Padmore HA(2003) Molecular-scale speciation of Znand Ni in soil ferromanganese nodulesfrom loess soils of the Mississippi Basin.Environmental Science & Technology37: 75-80

Murakami M, Hirose K, Kawamura K, SataN, Ohishi Y (2004) Post-perovskite phasetransition in MgSiO3. Science 304: 855-858

Nishiizumi K, Kohl CP, Shoemaker EM,Arnold JR, Klein J, Fink D, Middleton R(1991) In situ 10Be-26Al exposure ages atMeteor Crater, Arizona. Geochimica etCosmochimica Acta 55: 2699-2703

Nishiyama N, Wang Y, Uchida T, Irifune T,Rivers ML, Sutton SR (2005) Pressure andstrain dependence on the strength ofsintered polycrystalline Mg2SiO4ringwoodite. Geophysical ResearchLetters 32: L04307, doi:10.1029/2004GL022141

Parise JB, Brown GE Jr (2006) Newopportunities at emerging facilities.Elements 2: 37-42

Pavese A (2002) Neutron powder diffrac-tion and Rietveld analysis: applicationsto crystal chemical studies of mineralsat non-ambient conditions. EuropeanJournal of Mineralogy 14: 241-249

Phillips FM, Zreda MG, Smith SS, ElmoreD, Kubik PW, Dorn RI, Roddy DJ (1991)Age and geomorphic history of MeteorCrater, Arizona, from cosmogenic 36Cland 14C in rock varnish. Geochimica etCosmochimica Acta 55: 2695-2698

Redfern SAT (2002) Neutron powderdiffraction of minerals at high pressuresand temperatures: some recent technicaldevelopments and scientific applications.European Journal of Mineralogy 14: 251-261

Rinaldi R (2002) Neutron scattering inmineral and earth sciences: preface.European Journal of Mineralogy 14:195–202

Rivers ML, Wang Y, Uchida T (2004)Microtomography at GeoSoilEnviroCARS.In: Bonse U (ed) Proceedings of SPIE:Developments in X-Ray Tomography IV,5535, SPIE, 783-791

Schäfer W (2002) Neutron diffractionapplied to geological texture and stressanalysis. European Journal of Mineralogy14: 263-289

Schmahl WW, Swainson IP, Dove MT,Graeme-Barber A (1992) Landau freeenergy and order parameter behaviour of

the α−β phase transition in cristobalite.Zeitschrift für Kristallography 201:125–145

Singh AK (1993) The lattice strains in aspecimen (cubic system) compressednonhydrostatically in an opposed anvildevice. Journal of Applied Physics 73:4278-4286

Stern EA, Heald SM (1983) Basic principlesand applications of EXAFS. In: Koch EE(ed) Handbook of Synchrotron Radiation,North-Holland, pp 995-1014

Sutton SR (1985) Thermoluminescencemeasurements on shock-metamorphosedsandstone and dolomite from MeteorCrater, Arizona 2. Thermoluminescenceage of Meteor Crater. Journal of Geophys-ical Research 90: 3690-3700

Swainson IP, Dove MT (1993) Low-frequency floppy modes in β-cristobalite.Physical Review Letters 71: 193-196

Trainor TP, Chaka AM, Eng PJ, Newville M,Waychunas GA, Catalano JG, Brown GEJr (2004) Structure and reactivity of thehydrated hematite (0001) surface. SurfaceScience 573: 204-224

Tucker MG, Squires MP, Dove MT, KeenDA (2001) Dynamic structural disorder incristobalite: Neutron total scatteringmeasurement and reverse Monte Carlomodelling. Journal of Physics: CondensedMatter 13: 403-423

Welch MD, Knight KS (1999) A neutronpowder diffraction study of cationordering in high-temperature syntheticamphiboles. European Journal ofMineralogy 11: 321–331

Wilde SA, Valley JW, Peck WH, GrahamCM (2001) Evidence from detrital zirconsfor the existence of continental crust andoceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago. Nature409: 175-178

Winkler B (1996) The dynamics of H2Oin minerals. Physics and Chemistry ofMinerals 23: 310-318

Winkler B (2002) Neutron sources andinstrumentation. European Journal ofMineralogy 14: 225-232

Zachara JM, Ainsworth CC, Brown GE Jr,Catalano JG, McKinley JP, Qafoku O,Smith SC, Szecsody JE, Traina SJ, WarnerJA (2004) Chromium speciation andmobility in a high level nuclear wastevadose zone plume. Geochimica etCosmochimica Acta 68: 13-30

Zhao YS, von Dreele RB, Morgan JG (1999)A high P-T cell assembly for neutrondiffraction up to 10 GPa and 1500 K.High Pressure Research 16: 161-177 .


INTRODUCTIONDiscoveries in most areas of science come from observa-tions at different spatial scales, ranging from astronomicalto subatomic, using instrumentation that ranges in com-plexity from a simple reflecting telescope to a particle accel-erator. In the Earth sciences, relevant spatial scales extendfrom atomic to global, and instrumentation can be as sim-ple as a hand lens and Brunton compass or as complex as asynchrotron light source. The repertoire of availableresearch instruments has expanded greatly during the past20 to 30 years because of the development of large-scalenational user facilities in many countries. These facilities,which include synchrotron light sources, neutron sources,particle accelerators, electron beam microcharacterizationfacilities, and nanoscale-science research centers, are havinga major impact on research on materials of all types. Suchfacilities are being used to determine the structures, com-positional variations, physical properties, and submicron-scale heterogeneities of Earth materials. Experiments arecarried out under conditions mimicking those in key geo-logical environments, such as in Earth’s deep interior or atthe interfaces between mineral particles and aqueous solu-tions in soils at Earth’s surface, where much of the chem-istry relevant to the environment occurs. Many of theseadvanced techniques and cutting-edge technologies are not

generally available in university orindividual investigator laborato-ries, but user facilities make themavailable to many scientific com-munities. User facilities also makepossible experimental studies thatwere impossible prior to their exis-tence. This article focuses on therole of national user facilities, par-ticularly synchrotron radiationand neutron sources, in Earth andenvironmental science researchand highlights some of the discov-eries such facilities have enabled inthese fields over the past decade.

At the atomic scale, 3-D observa-tions require the use of electro-magnetic radiation of wavelengths

similar to the bond distances between atoms (0.1–0.5nanometers) in the building blocks (unit cells) of crystals.Short-wavelength radiation, referred to as X-rays (with ener-gies ranging from about 100 eV to greater than 100 keV), wasfirst discovered in 1895 by Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen. Sincethat time, X-rays and X-ray diffraction (XRD) have revolu-tionized many areas of science, as demonstrated by the 18Nobel Prizes in physics, chemistry, and medicine awardedfrom 1901 through 2005 that are directly linked to theusage of X-rays. XRD has had a profound impact on miner-alogy, having been used over the past 90 years to determinethe atomic structures of the 4000+ known minerals.

XRD has also had a major impact on our knowledge of thematerials that comprise Earth’s interior through studies ofthe stability and phase transformations of minerals at pres-sures and temperatures representative of Earth’s mantle (~0to 136 GPa and 1200 to 3600K). The high pressures andtemperatures can be generated using diamond anvil cells(DAC) and laser heating, respectively, permitting XRD andspectroscopic studies of mineral phases under in situ condi-tions (Mao and Hemley 1998; Bass et al. 2004). Large vol-ume presses provide access to somewhat lower temperaturesand pressures, but the sample volume is larger than in aDAC. High-P–T studies using these devices have revealedphase transformations and changes in mineral densities atpressures and temperatures corresponding to the depths ofmajor discontinuities in seismic wave velocities within thedeep Earth.

XRD is not the only means of determining the atomic struc-ture of matter. The elastic scattering of neutrons also pro-vides this type of information, with some advantages anddisadvantages. Advantages include the ability to distinguishbetween atoms with similar atomic numbers or betweendifferent isotopes of the same element. Disadvantagesinclude the fact that larger samples are required in neutron

23E L E M E N T S , V O L . 2 , P P . 2 3 – 3 0 FEBRUARY 200623

Gordon E. Brown Jr.,1,2 Georges Calas,3 and Russell J. Hemley4

1 Department of Geological & Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2115, USAE-mail: [email protected]


3 Institut de Minéralogie et de Physique des Milieux Condensés, UMRCNRS 7590, Universités de Paris 6 et 7, IPGP, 140 rue de Lourmel, 75015 Paris, France E-mail: [email protected]

4 Geophysical Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington,5251 Broad Branch Rd NW, Washington, DC 20015, USAE-mail: [email protected]

National scientific user facilities are becoming increasingly available tomany different scientific communities in a number of countries. Thereis a growing use of these facilities by Earth and environmental scien-

tists to study a broad range of materials and processes under realistic P–Tand environmental conditions at unprecedented levels of energy and spatialresolution and elemental and isotopic sensitivity. The results of these studiesare providing new insights into biogeochemical processes operating at Earth’ssurface as well as petrological, geochemical, and geophysical processes inEarth’s interior. The availability of national user facilities is changing scien-tific approaches and is leading to multidisciplinary studies that were notpossible a decade ago.

KEYWORDS: national scientific user facilities, synchrotron radiation sources,

neutron sources, Earth science research.

Scientific Advances MadePossible by User Facilities


scattering than in X-ray scattering experiments because theneutron scattering cross-sections of atoms are smaller thanX-ray scattering interactions with atoms (see Sutton et al.2006 for additional details).

In addition to XRD, various types of X-ray spectroscopy arealso becoming important research tools of scientists frommany disciplines, including Earth and environmental sci-ences. X-ray absorption fine-structure (XAFS) spectroscopyin particular has become the technique of choice for stud-ies of heavy metal and radionuclide speciation at min-eral–water interfaces and for characterization of the chemi-cal forms of environmental pollutants in soils. The onlypractical way of conducting an XAFS study of environmen-tal pollutants at trace concentration levels (<1000 ppm) isto utilize a synchrotron radiation source—the most com-mon type of national user facility worldwide.

Since synchrotron light sources first became available togeneral users in 1974, they have had a growing impact onresearch in the Earth sciences. This research focuses onatomic to micron scales and includes trace element geo-chemistry, interface and surface geochemistry, mineralogy,mineral physics, and petrology. In addition, the new fieldof molecular environmental science (MES) has been a majorbeneficiary of synchrotron light sources because of the needto determine the molecular-level speciation, spatial distri-bution, and phase association of environmental pollutantsat very low concentration levels (low parts per million) andspatial scales of nanometers to microns in highly heteroge-neous Earth materials such as soils. Synchrotron lightsources have also contributed to the development of amechanistic understanding of the abiotic and bioticprocesses that can sequester or release pollutants or trans-form them into more (or less) toxic forms.

The techniques that synchrotron light sources make avail-able include wide-angle and small-angle elastic X-ray scat-tering (WAXS and SAXS), anomalous X-ray scattering(AWAXS and ASAXS), surface X-ray scattering, nuclear res-onant inelastic X-ray scattering (NRIXS), synchrotron X-rayRaman scattering (XRS), nuclear resonant forward scatter-ing (NRFS, a measure of the Mössbauer effect), synchrotronX-ray fluorescence (SXRF) spectroscopy, X-ray absorptionfine-structure (XAFS) spectroscopy, X-ray emission spec-troscopy (XES), X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), X-ray standing wave (XSW) spectroscopy, infrared (IR) spec-troscopy, transmission X-ray microscopy (TXM), scanningtransmission X-ray microscopy (STXM), X-ray photoelec-tron emission microscopy (XPEEM), X-ray tomography,and X-ray fluorescence tomography at both hard and softX-ray energies. Some of these methods are surface sensitive(e.g. XPS and XPEEM) or can be utilized in a surface-sensi-tive fashion (e.g. grazing-incidence XAFS or regular XAFSwhen the element of interest is present only at a surface;crystal truncation rod diffraction). Most of these methodscan also be made spatially sensitive by reducing the size ofthe X-ray beam using focusing mirrors (µSXRF, µXAFS,µXRD, µ−X-ray fluorescence tomography) or Fresnel zoneplates (TXM, STXM, XPEEM), resulting in spatial resolutiondown to 25 nm at low X-ray energies (e.g. the carbon K edge– 284 eV). Many of these X-ray methods and their scientificapplications, particularly those involving focused X-raybeams, would not be possible without the extreme bright-ness of synchrotron light sources.

Developments in high-energy synchrotron techniques cou-pled with new high-pressure techniques allow inelastic scat-tering and spectroscopic measurements under extreme pres-sures down to 4 keV, which covers the K edges of first-rowtransition elements and L edges of rare-earth elements,

both central to geochemistry. These measurements allowatomic coordination and electronic and magnetic proper-ties to be studied at extreme pressures.

The examples of scientific discoveries presented below arerepresentative of different subdisciplines within the Earthsciences. Most of the examples come from the applicationof synchrotron radiation and neutron scattering techniquesto Earth materials and processes. Additional examples ofapplications of neutron scattering and analytical methods,such as accelerator-based mass spectrometry, can be foundin the article by Sutton et al. (2006) in this issue.

EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCEAPPLICATIONS OF USER FACILITIES

Mineralogy, Petrology, and Trace Element GeochemistryMinerals are key components of rocks and provide uniqueinformation on their formation conditions. Their minorand trace element and isotope compositions provide impor-tant insights into the geochemical cycling of elements andcan give us the absolute ages of rocks and the Earth. In addi-tion, minerals are of great importance in modern societybecause of their many technological and industrial applica-tions. Synchrotron-based methods such as XAFS spec-troscopy provide unique information on the location oftrace elements in mineral structures, which is key to under-standing the controls that minerals exert on element parti-tioning (Blundy and Wood 2003). This information is alsoimportant for understanding charge-compensationprocesses in minerals and for deriving realistic activity–composition relations. Intersite trace element distributionsin minerals can be uniquely provided by XAFS. For exam-ple, Quartieri et al. (1999) used XAFS to demonstrate thatNd enters the VIIIX site in the X3Y2Si3O12 garnet structureand does not substitute for Al at the VIY site. Most recentXAFS determinations of trace element environments inminerals indicate a high degree of relaxation around substi-tuting elements of different sizes in minerals, such as thesubstitution of Cu2+ and Zn2+ for Ca in calcite (Elzinga andReeder 2002). The mismatch between the size of the relaxedsubstituted sites and the lattice site is accommodated byelastic strain. A similar XAFS investigation of substitutionalCr3+ and Fe3+ ions in corundum has also confirmed full siterelaxation during substitution (Gaudry et al. 2003). Thecoordination shell relaxes to an arrangement similar to thatfor Cr in α-Cr2O3 or for Fe in α-Fe2O3. This work shows thatthe red and green colors of ruby and α-Cr2O3, respectively,do not originate from different Cr sites but from a modifi-cation of the electronic structure.

Petrological applications of synchrotron radiation and neu-tron scattering methods include XAFS studies of the struc-tural environments of trace elements in silicate melts andglasses and neutron scattering studies of medium-rangeorder in silicate glasses. Silicate melts play a major role inelement and heat transfer within the Earth and are respon-sible for all igneous rocks. In addition, silicate glasses,which are produced by quenching of silicate melts, are usedwidely as industrial materials and as surrogates for silicatemelts in experimental studies. Synchrotron X-ray and neu-tron scattering methods are unique in their ability to pro-vide information on the structure of amorphous solids andliquids (oxidation states and coordination environments ofelements, polymerization of silicate tetrahedra). Oxidationstates may now be measured in µm-sized spots, as in glassyinclusions in volcanic minerals (Métrich et al. 2002). X-rayspectroscopic and scattering techniques have been used todetermine the local structural environments of trace andmajor elements as well as the medium-range order in sili-

24

cate glasses and melts (Brown et al. 1995). This work pro-vides unique insights into trace element partitioning andcrystal nucleation. For example, XAFS studies of silicateglasses provided the first direct evidence for 5- and 4-coor-dinated Ni2+ (Galoisy and Calas 1993) and Fe2+ (Jackson etal. 2005) and for two-dimensional cation-rich regionsextending over 15–20Å (Cormier et al. 2001). This inhomo-geneous distribution of cations in glasses, distinct from pre-cursors of mineral nuclei, may be related to the progressiveorganization of supercooled liquids as temperaturedecreases. The use of high-energy X-ray scattering, which isonly possible using synchrotron radiation, allows resolu-tion of Si–O and Al–O contributions in aluminosilicateglassy networks, giving an accurate description of Si/Al dis-order (Petkov et al. 2000). Structural changes in glasses andmelts may be investigated as a function of temperatureusing in situ X-ray and neutron diffraction and XAFS(Brown et al. 1995). Disordering and thermal expansion ofcationic sites occur without discontinuity through the glasstransition (Majérus et al. 2004a). Above the glass transition,a relaxation of the silicate network occurs on a medium-range scale (6–7 Å) as a result of a higher cation motionalrate relative to the network. Large user facilities have alsobeen used to study processes governing the modification ofglass and melt structures at high pressure (polyamorphism).Determination of the structure of high-density glassesrequires in situ studies since coordination changes arereversible (Majérus et al. 2004b).

Interface and Surface GeochemistryRecognition of the importance of surface chemical reac-tions in geochemical and environmental contexts (FIG. 2)can be traced back to the pioneering work by early soilchemists on soil–fluid interactions, particularly the paperby J. Thomas Way (1850). More than 150 years later, we

have a better understanding of the sorption and exchangephenomena that account for Way’s observation that the fil-tration of “liquid manure” through a loamy soil resulted inthe manure being “deprived of colour and smell.” Much ofthis molecular-level understanding has come from synchro-tron radiation studies, particularly XAFS studies of ion sorp-tion reactions at mineral–water interfaces (Brown and Parks2001). For example, Hayes et al. (1987) used XAFS under insitu conditions to show that aqueous selenate ions (SeO4

2-)form dominantly outer-sphere complexes on goethite (α-FeOOH) surfaces, whereas aqueous selenite ions (SeO3

2-)form dominantly bidentate-binuclear inner-sphere com-plexes on these surfaces. Since this study, hundreds of sim-ilar XAFS experiments on many different adsorbed cationsand anions have been performed, providing much-neededmolecular-level insights into ion sorption processes. Animportant question raised by these studies is how the struc-tures of mineral surfaces in contact with water differ fromsimple terminations of the bulk crystal structure, which aretypically assumed to accurately represent the structures ofwet mineral surfaces (Brown and Sturchio 2002). This ques-tion has recently been addressed for the hydrated α-Al2O3

(0001) (Eng et al. 2000) and α-Fe2O3 (0001) (Trainor et al.2004) surfaces using synchrotron-based surface scatteringknown as crystal truncation rod (CTR) diffraction. TheseCTR diffraction studies show that the structures of thehydrated α-Al2O3 and α-Fe2O3 (0001) surfaces are signifi-cantly different from each other, which helps explain theirdifferences in reactivity to water (Liu et al. 1998) and aque-ous metal ions such as Pb2+

aq (Bargar et al. 2004). They alsoshow that these hydrated surfaces are not well representedby simple terminations of the bulk corundum and hematitestructures along the (0001) plane. An excellent review ofsynchrotron-based X-ray scattering studies of these andother mineral surfaces is provided by Fenter and Sturchio(2004). This approach is providing the first detailed molec-ular-level views of mineral–water interface structures andinterfacial water under environmental conditions, andshows that surface hydration layers are a general character-istic of mineral–water and mineral–water vapor interfaces.

X-ray scattering and other synchrotron-based methods,such as scanning transmission X-ray microscopy, are alsobeing used to provide unique insights into the changes in


Differential incorporation of cation (DIC) images of as-grown (10–14) surfaces of Co2+-doped (A) and Zn2+-

doped (B) calcite crystals. The c-glide plane is vertical and the c-axispoints at 45° to the upper right. Polygonal shading patterns reveal twopairs of vicinal surfaces, labeled + and –. They represent regions on thesurface having growth steps oriented in different directions. Growthsteps in the + vicinals, parallel to [–441] and [48–1], are symmetricallyequivalent, but are not equivalent to those in the – vicinals. Individualgrowth steps are not resolved. (C and D) Synchrotron µXRF maps cor-responding to crystals in the DIC images. Raw counts are plotted, andlight shading indicates highest counts. Corresponding Ca maps are fea-tureless. Co2+ is preferentially incorporated at steps in the – vicinals,whereas Zn2+ is preferentially incorporated at steps in the + vicinals.FIGURE COURTESY OF RICH REEDER; AFTER ELZINGA AND REEDER 2002.

FIGURE 1

Example of a complex mineral–water interface, includingboth iron oxide and microbial biofilm coatings, illustrat-

ing some of the molecular-scale processes occurring at these interfaces,including interaction with water, sorption or surface complexation ofaqueous metal ions, and dissolution. Also shown is a model of the elec-trical double layer at the mineral–aqueous solution interface. FROM

BROWN 2001.

FIGURE 2

A B

C D

mineral surfaces resulting from abiotic and biotic reactions,which cause oxidation and dissolution of mineral surfaces.For example, the oxidation and dissolution of pyrite sur-faces by Acidothiobacillus sp. have been studied by oxygenK edge and iron L edge XAFS (pers. com., B.C. Bostick 2004),and the oxidation and dissolution of pyroxene surfaceshave been studied by STXM spectromicroscopy (Benzeraraet al. 2005). Another example of the unique informationprovided by synchrotron radiation studies is the use oflong-period X-ray standing wave fluorescence yield spec-troscopy to study the partitioning of heavy metals such asPb2+ between α-Al2O3 (and α-Fe2O3) single-crystal surfacesand Burkholderia cepacia biofilms grown on these surfaces(Templeton et al. 2001). In addition, XAFS and synchro-tron-based XRD methods are providing important insightsinto the formation and structure of nanominerals resulting

from bacteriogenic processes (e.g. Suzuki et al. 2002). Thestudy of mineral–bacteria interactions using synchrotronradiation methods is anticipated to grow significantly incoming years and to yield important new information onbiomineralization, bioweathering, and the biogeochemicalcycling of elements (Kemner et al. 2005).


(Top) Map (not to scale) of the Hanford Site, WashingtonState, showing contaminant plumes in the vadose zone

beneath various Hanford Tank Farms. (Lower left) 3-D nature of 137Cs,125Sb, and 238U plumes beneath Tank BX-102 in the 200-East Area,where 300,000 liters of waste containing 7–8 metric tons of uraniumwere spilled in 1951. (Lower right) Backscattered electron images ofvadose-zone plagioclase grains containing Na-boltwoodite in cracks,and U L3-XAFS spectra of Na-boltwoodite grains. TOP FIGURE FROM RILEY

AND ZACHARA 1992; LOWER LEFT FIGURE FROM PEARSONS 2000; LOWER RIGHT FIGURE

FROM JIM MCKINLEY, PERS. COM.; XAFS SPECTRA FROM CATALANO ET AL. 2004)

FIGURE 3

Environmental Mineralogy and Geochemistry(Molecular Environmental Science)Synchrotron radiation methods have played a major role instudies of the chemical forms, spatial distribution, andphase association of contaminant elements in environmen-tal samples. These materials range from mine wastes andsoils contaminated by various heavy metals, radionuclides,and xenobiotic organics to plants that hyperaccumulatespecific elements and fish that contain high concentrationsof methyl mercury. The new field of molecular environ-mental science has developed in response to the need forsuch information for understanding the transport behavior,toxicity, and potential bioavailability of contaminants(Brown et al. 1999). A great deal of attention in this newfield has focused on contaminant speciation in soils, whichare the products of chemical and biological reactions at theinterfaces among the solid Earth (lithosphere), atmosphere,hydrosphere, and biosphere. Soils host crops and supportmost human activities. Their high reactivity makes themsensitive to environmental modifications and contamina-tion by heavy elements and xenobiotic organics. The finelydivided texture of soils, the importance of surface reactions,and the need to determine the speciation of inorganic, bio-logical, and organic components explain the growing num-ber of soil-related studies at national user facilities such assynchrotron light sources.

Lead and other heavy metals are major contaminants insome soils, raising environmental concerns; however, thebioavailability and chemical lability of these contaminantsoften show little correlation with their bulk concentrations.The key to understanding this observation is the molecular-level speciation of contaminants (i.e. their chemical form).For example, mineralogical and X-ray spectroscopic studieshave shown that in smelter-contaminated soils from north-ern France, lead is sorbed to humic material as well as toboth manganese and iron oxides, oxyhydroxides, andhydroxides (Morin et al. 1999). In mine tailings from Col-orado, USA, carbonate-buffered tailings with near-neutralpH contain up to 50% of the total lead sorbed on iron-(oxy-hydr)oxides, whereas Pb-bearing jarosites [KFe3(SO4)2(OH)6]dominate in sulfide-rich low-pH samples (Ostergren et al.1999). In both cases, sorbed Pb may become potentiallybioavailable if the local Eh and pH conditions change.Another example is the speciation of uranium in the vadosezone beneath Tank BX-102 in the 200-East Area Tank Farmat Hanford, Washington. This problem has also beenaddressed with synchrotron radiation methods (Catalano etal. 2004) (FIG. 3). Using a combination of XAFS and µXRD,this study showed that U6+ occurs in fractures in plagioclasefeldspar grains dominantly as the uranophane group min-eral Na-boltwoodite [Na(UO2)(SiO3OH)•1.5H2O], which ismoderately soluble in the interparticle pore waters.

However, the location of this phase in feldspar grain frac-tures and the low moisture content in the Hanford vadosezone make it unlikely that commonly used remediationmethods will be successful in removing this phase or thatthis phase will release U6+. These types of studies of heavymetal and radionuclide contaminants are providing much-needed understanding of their phase association, potentialbioavailability, and environmental fate.

Although not strictly in the field of molecular environmen-tal science, recent studies of the structure of water usingsynchrotron radiation methods (O K-edge XAFS and X-rayRaman scattering) (Wernet et al. 2004) have led to therevolutionary suggestion that the 4-hydrogen bonded struc-ture of water that has heretofore been assumed is not cor-rect. Instead, compelling experimental and theoretical evi-dence has been found for about 80% of water molecules in

liquid water having an asymmetric 2-hydrogen bondedstructure. The implications of this discovery in aqueousgeochemistry have yet to be detailed, but it is likely thatthis new structure of water, if correct, will lead to revisionsin our thinking about its structure–property relationshipsand the hydration of ions in aqueous solutions.

Mineral PhysicsRecent years have witnessed many advances in the use ofsynchrotron techniques in high-pressure mineral physics,including XRD, spectroscopy, inelastic scattering, and radi-ography, as well as infrared spectroscopy using laser-heateddiamond anvil cells, which currently permit access to simul-taneous temperatures and pressures of 5000K and 225 GPa,respectively (FIG. 4). Polycrystalline XRD includes simulta-neous high P–T diffraction using double-sided laser heatingmethods, and newly designed cells allow determination ofstress–strain conditions and the measurement of second-order elastic tensors at ultrahigh P–T conditions. Single-crystal methods have been extended to above 100 GPausing high-brightness X-ray sources. These developmentshave also opened a window for studying local chemicalenvironments, including atomic coordination, structures,and bonding character with a diversity of X-ray spectro-scopies and scattering techniques. Other experimentsinvolve the use of X-ray radiography over a range of pres-sures. The enormous flux advantage of infrared synchro-tron radiation relative to conventional thermal IR sourcesprovides a significant improvement in spectroscopic studiesof microscopic samples at very high pressures. The follow-ing examples illustrate the application of multiple tech-niques to Earth and planetary materials under extreme con-ditions. Specifically, a growing number of studies utilize thecomplementary roles of synchrotron X-ray and neutronscattering methods.

One of the major developments in mineral physics of thelast several decades has been the discovery of the post-per-ovskite phase of MgSiO3 above 100 GPa with synchrotronradiation and laser-heated diamond cell techniques(Murakami et al. 2004). The post-perovskite phase can take


Temperature and pressure range accessible using laser-heated diamond anvil cells (DAC) (light tan area), resist-

ance-heated DAC (reddish brown area), and DAC at ambient (dark bluearea) and cryogenic temperatures (light blue area). Also shown is theP–T range accessible using large volume presses (LVP) (area outlined byreddish brown boundary). Earth’s geotherm is shown as the light brownarea. Also shown are a schematic diagram of a large volume press(upper left) and a photograph of a diamond anvil cell (upper right).FROM BASS 2004. PICTURE AND DIAGRAM AT THE TOP OF THIS FIGURE ARE FROM THE

GEOPHYSICAL LABORATORY, CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON

FIGURE 4

up to 80% iron in the Mg site and exists in the low-spin (i.e.magnetic spin-paired) state at conditions of the D” regionat the base of the Earth’s mantle, as shown by subsequentsynchrotron X-ray and emission experiments (Mao et al.2004). Such high P–T diffraction measurements have beencomplemented by an array of high-pressure X-ray spectro-scopic techniques that have now come on line. Mostrecently, the X-ray emission technique has been applied tomore chemically complex deep-Earth minerals such as(Mg,Fe)O and (Mg,Fe,Al)SiO3 perovskite to identify high-spin/low-spin transitions of iron, which are expected tohave profound implications for compositional layering inthe lower mantle (Badro et al. 2004; Lin et al. 2005a).

Studies of the high P–T behavior of iron represent an excel-lent example of the use of multiple synchrotron radiationtechniques (Hemley and Mao 2001). In situ high P–T syn-chrotron XRD studies demonstrate that the hexagonal clos-est-packed phase (ε-Fe) has a wide stability field extendingfrom deep mantle to core conditions. Seismological obser-vations of inner core anisotropy and structure present newquestions about the dynamics and magnetism of the core.The aggregate longitudinal velocity (VP) and shear velocity(VS) at high P and T are the primary data obtained from seis-mic observations. Radial diffraction measurements also pro-vide information on single-crystal elasticity, deformationmechanisms, preferred orientation, slip systems, plasticity,failure, and shear strength (Wenk et al. 2000). The nuclearresonant inelastic X-ray scattering (NRIXS) technique hasbeen developed for the measurement of phonon densitiesof states and elasticity of materials containing 57Fe. Theobserved compressional and shear wave velocities of ε-Fedecrease with increasing temperature at high pressures, anda strong temperature effect on the linear sound velocity–density relations (Birch’s law) was found (Lin et al. 2005b).High-pressure phonon dispersion measurements have beencarried out to megabar pressures (Fiquet et al. 2001). Thestructure of molten Fe has been determined over a range ofP–T conditions generated using both large volume and dia-mond cell methods (Sanloup et al. 2000; Shen et al. 2004).

Detailed information on crystal structures is an essentialstarting point for understanding the origin of the chemicaland physical properties of materials that comprise not onlythe Earth but also other planets. The single-crystal X-raydiffraction method first used for H2 (Mao et al. 1988) hasbeen extended to megabar pressures (Loubeyre et al. 1996).Integration of new synchrotron X-ray microdiffraction meth-ods is opening up new fields of micro- to nanomineralogy,as shown by the refinement of the crystal structures of newFe–Si phases identified in a lunar meteorite (Anand et al. 2004).

Continued advances in high-pressure synchrotron infraredspectroscopy have led to a series of studies of materials atultrahigh pressures, including the discovery of a number ofunexpected phenomena in dense hydrogen. Synchrotroninfrared reflectivity spectra of H2O to 210 GPa showed thatthe transition of ice to the long-sought, non-molecular,symmetric hydrogen-bonded structure occurs at 60 GPa(Goncharov et al. 1996). A particularly important newdevelopment has been the extension and improvement offar-IR measurements in ice (Klug et al. 2004) and biomole-cules (Klug et al. 2002). The inelastic K-edge scattering hasbeen used to probe bonding changes in materials, includingmost recently in ice, providing evidence for a new low P–Tphase (Cai et al. 2005).

Finally, it is useful to point out the complementarity betweenX-ray and neutron experiments. Recently, the evolution ofthe structure of amorphous GeO2 at high pressure wasdetermined by combining high-energy synchrotron

X-ray and neutron diffraction techniques (Guthrie et al.2004). Variable P–T neutron diffraction techniques revealnew findings concerning the magnetic properties of thehigh-pressure rhombohedral phase of Fe1-xO (wüstite) (Dinget al. 2005b), whereas zone-axis synchrotron XRD experi-ments on single crystals reveal that Fe1-xO has a long-rangedefect-cluster order–disorder transition (Ding et al. 2005a).Recent neutron and X-ray diffraction studies of hydrogenisotopes provide a direct probe of pressure-induced trans-formations in this important planetary material (Gon-charenko and Loubeyre 2005). Another example whereboth techniques have been exploited is H2O–H2 clathrate,which is important for diverse problems ranging from con-densation in solar nebulae to use as a hydrogen storagematerial for automobiles (Mao et al. 2002).

CONCLUDING REMARKSMolecular-level studies of the type discussed above providethe main intellectual interfaces between Earth sciences anddisciplines such as chemistry, materials science, microbiol-ogy, physics, and structural molecular biology. They arealso one of the main conduits for students from these otherdisciplines to enter the Earth sciences and make truly inter-disciplinary contributions. Moreover, the analytical instru-mentation and techniques developed in other disciplines,such as transmission electron microscopy, electron micro-probe analysis, mass spectrometry, X-ray absorption spec-troscopy, NMR spectroscopy, SQUID magnetometry, and X-ray and neutron diffraction, have had and will continueto have enormous impacts on Earth sciences research.Without this cross-fertilization of ideas and techniquesfrom other disciplines, vital Earth sciences research areassuch as isotope geochemistry, geomicrobiology, surface andinterface geochemistry, mineral physics, and paleomagnet-ism would have taken longer to develop. Breakthroughs inmost areas of science depend strongly on the developmentof new experimental methods and the new observationsand new theories they provide, which guide our thinkingand lead to new paradigms. National user facilities of thetype highlighted in this issue of Elements are providing newexperimental capabilities that are making new discoveriesabout Earth materials and processes possible. Such facilitiesalso play another important role in Earth sciences. They arefertile ground for new ideas because of the mix of scientistsfrom many different disciplines and different countriesthey attract and the many chances for young Earth scien-tists to interact with young scientists from other fields.They are well worth the investment because of the advancesin science and technology they enable as well as the cross-disciplinary collaborations they stimulate.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSWe thank Guest Editor Steve Sutton for the invitation toprepare this overview on the role of national scientific userfacilities in the Earth sciences. The research by Brown, Hemley,and co-workers reported in this article was generously sup-ported by the National Science Foundation and the Depart-ment of Energy; that of Calas was supported by the Frenchgovernment through the French Ministry of Research andthe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. The USsynchrotron light sources where the US-based researchreported was done are supported by the Department ofEnergy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences. We also thank BillBassett (Cornell University), Mike Hochella (Virginia Tech),Neil Sturchio (University of Illinois, Chicago Circle), and SteveSutton (University of Chicago) for careful reviews, whichimproved the clarity of this paper. .


REFERENCESAnand M, Taylor LA, Nazarov MA, Shu J,

Mao HK, Hemley RJ (2004) Spaceweathering on airless planetary bodies:Clues from the new lunar mineralhapkeite. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences 101: 6847-6851

Badro J, Rueff J-P, Vankó G, Monaco G,Fiquet G, Guyot F (2004) Electronictransitions in perovskite: Possiblenonconvecting layers in the lowermantle. Science 305: 383-386

Bargar JR, Trainor TP, Fitts JP, ChambersSA, Brown GE Jr (2004) In-situ grazingincidence EXAFS study of Pb(II)chemisorption on hematite (0001) and(1–102). Langmuir 20(5): 1667-1673

Bass J (ed) (2004) Current and futuredirections in high-pressure mineralphysics. 2004 Report of the Consortiumfor Materials Properties Research in EarthSciences (COMPRES), 28p, http://www.compres.stonybrook.edu/Publications/BassReport/Bass_Report_8_31_04.pdf

Benzerara K, Yoon TH, Menguy N,Tyliszczak T, Brown GE Jr (2005)Nanoscale environments associatedwith bioweathering of a Mg-Fe-pyroxene.Proceedings of the National Academy ofSciences 102: 979-982

Blundy J, Wood B (2003) Partitioning oftrace elements between crystals andmelts. Earth and Planetary Science Letters210: 383-397

Brown GE Jr (2001) How minerals reactwith water. Science 294: 67-69

Brown GE Jr, Farges F, Calas G (1995) X-rayscattering and X-ray spectroscopy studiesof silicate melts. In: Stebbins JF,McMillan PF, Dingwell DB (eds)Structure, Dynamics and Properties ofSilicate Melts. Reviews in Mineralogy 32:317-410

Brown GE Jr, Foster AL, Ostergren JD(1999) Mineral surfaces and bioavailabil-ity of heavy metals: a molecular-scaleperspective. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences 96: 3388-3395

Brown GE Jr, Parks GA (2001) Sorptionof trace elements on mineral surfaces:Modern perspectives from spectroscopicstudies, and comments on adsorption inthe marine environment. InternationalGeology Reviews 43: 963-1073

Brown GE Jr, Sturchio NC (2002) Anoverview of synchrotron radiationapplications to low temperaturegeochemistry and environmental science.In: Fenter PA, Rivers ML, Sturchio NL,Sutton SR (eds) Applications of Synchro-tron Radiation in Low-TemperatureGeochemistry and EnvironmentalScience. Reviews in Mineralogy &Geochemistry 49: 1-115

Cai YQ, Mao HK, Chow PC, Tse JS, Ma Y,Patchkovskii S, Shu JF, Struzhkin V,Hemley RJ, Ishii H, Chen CC, Chen CT,Kao CC (2005) Ordering of hydrogenbonds in high-pressure low-temperatureH2O. Physical Review Letters 94: 025502

Catalano JG, Heald SM, Zachara JM, BrownGE Jr (2004) Spectroscopic and diffrac-tion study of uranium speciation incontaminated vadose zone sedimentsfrom the Hanford Site, Washington State.Environmental Science & Technology 38:2822-2828

Cormier L, Calas G, Gaskell PH (2001)Cationic environment in silicate glassesstudied by neutron diffraction withisotopic substitution. Chemical Geology174: 349-363

Ding Y, Liu H, Xu J, Prewitt CT, Hemley RJ,Mao HK (2005a) Zone-axis diffractionstudy of pressure-induced inhomogeneityin single-crystal Fe1-xO. Applied PhysicsLetters 87: 041912

Ding Y, Xu J, Prewitt CT, Hemley RJ, MaoHK, Cowan JA, Zhang J, Qian J, Vogel SC,Lokshin KA, Zhao Y (2005b) Variablepressure-temperature neutron diffractionof wüstite (Fe1-xO): absence of long-rangemagnetic order to 20 GPa. AppliedPhysics Letters 86: 052505, doi:10.1063/1.1852075

Elzinga EJ, Reeder RJ (2002) X-rayabsorption spectroscopy study of Cu2+

and Zn2+ adsorption complexes at thecalcite surface: Implications for site-specific metal incorporation preferencesduring calcite crystal growth. Geochimicaet Cosmochimica Acta 66: 3943-3954

Eng PJ, Trainor TP, Brown GE Jr, Waychu-nas GA, Newville M, Sutton SR, RiversML (2000) Structure of the hydrated α-Al2O3 (0001) surface. Science 288: 1029-1033

Fenter P, Sturchio NC (2004) Mineral–waterinterfacial structures revealed bysynchrotron x-ray scattering. Progressin Surface Science 77: 171-258

Fiquet G, Badro J, Guyot F, Requardt H,Krisch M (2001) Sound velocities in ironto 110 gigapascals. Science 291: 468-471

Galoisy L, Calas G (1993) Structuralenvironment of nickel in silicateglass/melt systems. Part I. Spectroscopicdetermination of coordination states.Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 57:3613-3626

Gaudry E, Kiratisin A, Sainctavit P, BrouderC, Mauri F, Ramos A, Rogalev A, GoulonJ (2003) Structural and electronicrelaxations around substitutional Cr3+

and Fe3+ ions in corundum. PhysicalReview B67: 094108

Goncharov AF, Struzhkin VV, SomayazuluMS, Hemley RJ, Mao HK (1996)Compression of ice to 210 GPa: Infraredevidence for a symmetric hydrogen-bonded phase. Science 273: 218-220

Goncharenko IN, Loubeyre P (2005)Neutron and X-ray diffraction study ofthe broken symmetry phase transition insolid deuterium. Nature 435: 1206-1209

Guthrie M, Tulk CA, Benmore CJ, Xu J,Yarger JL, Klug DD, Tse JS, Mao HK,Hemley RJ (2004) Formation andstructure of a dense octahedral glass.Physical Review Letters 93: 115502

Hayes KF, Roe AL, Brown GE Jr, HodgsonKO, Leckie JO, Parks GA (1987) In-situX-ray absorption study of surfacecomplexes at oxide/water interfaces:selenium oxyanions on α-FeOOH.Science 238: 783-786

Hemley RJ, Mao HK (2001) In situ studiesof iron under pressure: new windows onthe Earth’s core. International GeologyReviews 43: 1-30

Jackson WE, Farges F, Yeager M, MabroukPA, Rossano S, Waychunas GA, SolomonEI, Brown GE Jr (2005) Multi-spectro-scopic study of Fe(II) in silicate glasses:

Implications for the coordinationenvironment of Fe(II) in silicate melts.Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 69:4315-4332

Kemner KM, O’Loughlin EJ, Kelly SD,Boyanov MI (2005) Synchrotron X-rayinvestigations of mineral–microbe–metalinteractions. Elements 1: 217-221

Klug DD, Zgierski MZ, Tse JS, Liu Z, KincaidJR, Czarnecki K, Hemley RJ (2002)Doming modes and dynamics of modelheme compounds. Proceedings of theNational Academy of Sciences 99: 12526-12530

Klug DD, Tse JS, Liu Z, Gonze X, Hemley RJ(2004) Anomalous transformations in iceVIII. Physical Review B 70: 144113

Lin JF, Struzhkin VV, Jacobsen SD, Hu MY,Chow P, Kung J, Liu H, Mao HK, HemleyRJ (2005a) Spin transition of iron inmagnesiowüstite in the Earth’s lowermantle. Nature 436: 377-380

Lin JF, Sturhahn W, Zhao J, Shen G, MaoHK, Hemley RJ (2005b) Sound velocitiesof hot dense iron: Birch’s law revisited.Science 308: 1892-1894

Liu P, Kendelewicz T, Brown GE Jr, NelsonEJ, Chambers SA (1998) Reaction of watervapor with α-Al2O3 (0001) and α-Fe2O3(0001) surfaces: synchrotron x-rayphotoemission studies and thermody-namic calculations. Surface Science 417:53-65

Loubeyre P, LeToullec R, Hausermann D,Hanfland M, Hemley RJ, Mao HK, FingerLW (1996) X-ray diffraction and equationof state of hydrogen at megabarpressures. Nature 383: 702-704

Majérus O, Cormier L, Calas G, Beuneu B(2004a) A neutron diffraction study oftemperature-induced structural changesin potassium disilicate glass and melt.Chemical Geology 213: 89-102

Majérus O, Cormier L, Itié JP, Galoisy L,Neuville DR, Calas G (2004b) Pressure-induced Ge coordination change andpolyamorphism in SiO2–GeO2 glasses.Journal of Non-Crystalline Solids345&346: 34-38

Mao HK, Hemley RJ (1998) New windowson the Earth’s deep interior. In HemleyRJ, Mao HK (eds) Ultrahigh-PressureMineralogy, Reviews in Mineralogy 37: 1-32

Mao HK, Jephcoat AP, Hemley RJ, FingerLW, Zha CS, Hazen RM, Cox DE (1988)Synchrotron x-ray diffraction measure-ments of single-crystal hydrogen to 26.5GPa. Science 239: 1131-1134

Mao WL, Mao HK, Goncharov AF,Struzhkin VV, Guo Q, Hu J, Shu J,Hemley RJ, Somayazulu M, Zhao Y (2002)Hydrogen clusters in clathrate hydrate.Science 297: 2247-2249

Mao WL, Shen G, Prakapenka VB, Meng Y,Campbell AJ, Heinz DL, Shu J, HemleyRJ, Mao HK (2004) Ferromagnesianpostperovskite silicates in the D” layerof the Earth. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences 101: 15867-15869

Métrich N, Bonin-Mosbah M, Susini J,Menez B, Galoisy L (2002) Presence ofsulfite (S4+) in arc magmas: Implicationsfor volcanic sulfur emissions. Geophysi-cal Research Letters 29: 014607

Morin G, Ostergren JD, Juillot F, IldefonseP, Calas G, Brown GE Jr (1999) XAFSdetermination of the chemical form of


lead in smelter-contaminatedsoils and mine tailings:Importance of adsorptionprocesses. AmericanMineralogist 84: 420-434

Murakami M, Hirose K,Kawamura K, Sata N, OhishiY (2004) Post-perovskitephase transition in MgSiO3.Science 304: 855-858

Ostergren JD, Brown GE Jr,Parks GA, Tingle TN (1999)Quantitative speciation oflead in selected mine tailingsfrom Leadville, CO.Environmental Science &Technology 33: 1627-1636

Pearsons AW (2000) HanfordTank Farms Vadose ZoneMonitoring Project, BX TankFarm Addendum. USDepartment of Energy GJO-98-40-TARA, GJO-HAN-19

Petkov V, Billinge SJL, Sashtri S,Himmel B (2000) Polyhedralunits and network connectiv-ity in calcium aluminosilicateglasses from high-energy x-ray diffraction. PhysicalReview Letters 85: 3436-3469

Quartieri S, Antonioli G, GeigerCA, Artioli G, Lottici PP(1999) XAFS characterizationof the structural site of Ybin synthetic pyrope andgrossular garnets. Physics andChemistry of Minerals 26:251-256

Riley RG, Zachara JM (1992)Chemical Contaminants onDOE Lands and Selection ofContaminant Mixtures forSubsurface Science Research.Report DE92 014826, U.S.Department of Energy, Officeof Energy Research,Washington, DC

Sanloup C, Guyot F, Gillet P,Fiquet G, Hemley RJ,Mezouar M, Martinez I (2000)Structural changes in liquidFe at high pressures and hightemperatures from synchro-tron x-ray diffraction. Euro-physical Letters 52: 151-157

Shen G, Prakapenka VB,Rivers ML, Sutton SR (2004)Structure of liquid iron atpressures up to 58 GPa.Physical Review Letters92: 185701

Sutton SR, Caffee MW, DoveMT (2006) Synchrotronradiation, neutron, and massspectrometry techniques atuser facilities. Elements 2: 15-21

Suzuki Y, Kelly SD, KemnerKM, Banfield JF (2002)Radionuclide contaminationNanometre–size products ofuranium bioreduction.Nature 419: 134

Templeton AS, Trainor TP,Traina SJ, Spormann AM,Brown GE Jr (2001) Pb(II)distribution at biofilm-metaloxide interfaces. Proceedingsof the National Academy ofSciences 98: 11897-11902

Trainor TP, Chaka AM, Eng PJ,Newville M, Waychunas GA,Catalano JG, Brown GE Jr(2004) Structure andreactivity of the hydratedhematite (0001) surface.Surface Science 573(2): 204-224

Way JT (1850) On the power ofsoils to absorb manure. RoyalAgricultural Society ofEngland Journal 11: 313-321

Wenk H-R, Matthies S, HemleyRJ, Mao HK, Shu J (2000) Theplastic deformation of iron atpressures of the Earth’s innercore. Nature 405: 1044-1047

Wernet P, Nordlund D,Bergmann U, Cavalleri M,Odelius M, Ogasawara H,Näslund LA, Hirsch TK,Ojamäe L, Glatzel P,Pettersson LGM, Nilsson A(2004) The structure of thefirst coordination shell inliquid water. Science 304:995–999 .


INTRODUCTIONA research facility is most valuable if it is available when wewish to use it and if it provides a level of user support thatmaximizes the likelihood of experimental success. The nec-essary support must include adequate user training, but itshould also ensure that the instrumentation is runningoptimally and accommodates individual experimentalneeds. Let’s not overlook safety,which may be as important to thecontinuing operation of the facilityas it is to the success and well-beingof the user. Meeting these goals isquite a challenge, one that requireseffective organization, management,and resources. Today, most success-ful research facilities are heavily sub-scribed by users and operate withlimited, hard-earned funding. Conse-quently, access generally requiresprior approval and justification,often involving merit-based review.Although some users are able to com-plete their experimental project after one visit to a facility,many find it necessary to make return visits, with somebecoming regular users. In this article, we describe accessstyles, management models, and aspects of user support atresearch facilities. We focus mainly on large, heavily sub-scribed user facilities, such as synchrotrons and neutronsources, which offer a wide variety of experimental tech-niques and have large user communities. Our goal is to offer

potential new users in the Earthscience community a better under-standing of the path to usingresearch facilities and the resourcesthey provide. Because the specificpolicies of each facility may differ,the description we provide shouldbe considered as a starting pointonly, and users should investigatefacilities of interest further.

In preceding articles, differentclasses of user facilities weredescribed, including large multi-instrument laboratories, such asthe Environmental Molecular Sci-ence Laboratory (EMSL) at PacificNorthwest National Laboratory

and the several planned US nanocenters; synchrotron radi-ation and neutron sources, such as the National Synchro-tron Light Source (NSLS) at Brookhaven National Labora-tory and the neutron facility ISIS at the RutherfordAppleton Laboratory (UK); and individual instruments typ-ically located at universities. Some large facilities have aparticular scientific focus and support multiple types of

instrumentation, examples beingthe EMSL and the BayerischesGeoinstitut in Bayreuth (Germany).In contrast, synchrotron, neutron,and electron beam facilities offertechniques specific to their sourcecharacteristics but support usersfrom diverse scientific disciplines.The infrastructure and managementof larger facilities are generally dic-tated by the size of the facility anduser community, as well as by thefunding source. Individual instru-ments or small collections of instru-ments that are made available to

external users are typically housed in university depart-ments and overseen by the department or sometimes anindividual investigator.

Large user facilities are generally government funded andprovide instrumentation and experimental capabilitieswhose costs for construction and operation are beyond themeans of individual research groups or even universities.Good examples are the user facilities funded and managedby the US Department of Energy’s Office of Science. Thesestate-of-the-art facilities are available to the science com-munity worldwide and offer some technologies and instru-mentation not available elsewhere. They include particleand nuclear physics accelerators, synchrotron light sources,neutron scattering facilities, electron beam facilities, super-computers, and high-speed computer networks. Access is


Richard J. Reeder1 and Antonio Lanzirotti2

1 Department of Geosciences Stony Brook University Stony Brook, NY 11794-2100, USAE-mail: [email protected]

2 Consortium for Advanced Radiation SourcesUniversity of ChicagoChicago, IL 60637, USA

Access to many of the world’s leading user facilities is easier than everbefore, with web-based tutorials providing everything from instru-mental overviews and example applications to online safety training.

Submission of proposals for experiment time at large, heavily subscribedfacilities, including synchrotron and neutron sources, has been streamlinedwith web-based submission. Support, which is commonly the key to successfulexperiments, is provided by facility staff and experienced users, allowing newusers to begin experiments with minimal experience. Increasingly Earthscientists are taking advantage of the wide range of unique instrumentationat user facilities. Here, we explain how you can, too.

KEYWORDS: user facilities, synchrotron, neutron source,

electron microscopy, user access, safety training

New users at theAdvanced Photon

Source receive facilityorientation and safety

training before startingtheir experiments. PHOTO COURTESY OF

GEOSOILENVIROCARS,UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO

Accessing User Facilitiesand Making Your ResearchExperience Successful

So, you’d like to use an ion microprobe todetermine the oxygen isotopic differencebetween a microscopic inclusion and its

host mineral, or you need to use asynchrotron facility beamline to character-ize the chemical speciation of chromium ina contaminated soil. Just hop on a plane,

show up at the front door, and before youfinish your first cup of coffee a cheerful staff

scientist is already mounting yoursample on the stage!

Wake up… were you dreaming?


typically determined by merit-based review of proposals,the necessary training and experimental oversight are pro-vided by the facility itself, and no user fees apply to accessthe facility and conduct the experiment (although ancillarycosts are covered by the user).

WOULD MY RESEARCH BENEFIT FROMACCESS TO A USER FACILITY?For many Earth scientists, a significant hurdle is recogniz-ing the availability of techniques that could benefit theirresearch project. Technique development has traditionallynot been as strongly promoted in the Earth sciences as inother fields, such as physics. Consequently we often learnabout emerging techniques only after they have been devel-oped and applied in other fields. Peer-reviewed publicationsare an important avenue for disseminating informationabout emerging technologies and techniques available toEarth scientists at user facilities. Also valuable are shortcourses and workshops, such as those sponsored by theMineralogical Society of America, the Geochemical Society,and the European Mineralogical Union. For example,upcoming or recent short courses have highlighted neutronscattering in the Earth sciences (2006) and the applicationsof synchrotron radiation in geochemistry (2002).

Nearly all user facilities provide informative web pagesdescribing aspects of their operation. Many facilities evenoffer online tutorials that serve as introductions to scientificapproaches or applications of methods to different prob-lems. Facility web pages should be the first point of informationfor any new user. In addition, new “first point of contact”websites are emerging, such as www.envirosync.org, whichprovide information on facilities specializing in particularareas of science.

ARRANGING EXPERIMENT TIME AT A RESEARCH FACILITYAccess to most facilities generally requires submitting a pro-posal beforehand. This applies for all synchrotron and neu-tron facilities and most electron beam characterizationfacilities. Exceptions may include smaller facilities or singleinstruments, where access may commonly be arrangedinformally. Here we describe some general aspects of accesspolicies and the proposal process, focusing primarily onsynchrotron and neutron facilities, which have large,diverse user communities representing nearly all science,engineering, and health disciplines and spanning aca-demic, industrial, and private foundation sectors.

Access for outside users is primarily based on scientificmerit, usually as determined by peer-review of proposals.The process begins with identifying the appropriate facilityfor your experiment (FIG. 1; STEP 1). Importantly, the facilityweb pages usually provide contact information so thatpotential users can discuss their research needs with experi-enced scientists and support personnel to determine if amethod is suitable for providing the information desired. Ininstances where scientific staff are unfamiliar with the par-ticular nature of your Earth science problem, furtherinquiry may be required, perhaps with Earth scientists withprior experience.

An access proposal is then developed. It is normally brief(1–4 pages) and includes a description of the scientific ques-tion to be addressed and its significance, justification for arequested instrument or experiment station, and a requestfor a specific amount of experiment time. Most synchrotronand neutron facilities have gone to great lengths to stream-line the proposal process, with submissions made onlinethrough easy-to-follow web pages. After submission (STEP 2),a proposal is either reviewed by a panel of scientists or sent

out for external review (STEP 3). Owing to the range of tech-niques available at synchrotron facilities, multiple reviewpanels are used to evaluate proposals. For example, at theNational Synchrotron Light Source (Brookhaven NationalLaboratory), the review process uses as many as 12 separatesubpanels to evaluate proposals (TABLE 1). Each facility hasdeveloped its own procedures, which are explained on theirweb pages.

Proposals are reviewed for scientific merit and technical fea-sibility and assigned a numerical rating. Depending on thescope of each facility’s panels, proposals from Earth scien-tists may be rated along with those from other fields, basedon the technique to be employed. New users should beaware that some review panels may not have Earth scien-tists as members. If such proposals are not sent out forexternal reviews, they may be reviewed by scientists withexpertise in the chosen method but with limited knowledgeof Earth science issues. Therefore, Earth scientists may wantto include sufficient explanation and justification in theirproposals to allow experts from other disciplines to make afair evaluation. The scientific question to be addressed, therelevant hypothesis, and the significance of the researchshould all be emphasized. It is also important to justify theuse of the requested instrument or experimental beamline,since the total time requested by all users may exceed whatis available. As more Earth scientists become regular users ofsynchrotron, neutron, and electron beam facilities, it isencouraging to see our representation on review panelsincreasing. In some instances factors other than scientificmerit alone may influence ratings; these might include fea-sibility, time or resources requested, and prior results.Review panels nearly always provide users with commentson their proposals.

After the review process, allocations are made, with avail-able beamtime generally being assigned first to the proposalshaving the best ratings (STEP 4). Users are then informed oftheir allocation, specific dates are assigned for the experi-ment through interactions with the facility staff, and theexperiment is conducted (STEP 5). At heavily subscribedfacilities or beamlines, requests often exceed available time.Unfortunately, this means that some proposals may not beallocated experiment time for the requested period or cycle.In our experience, allocation panels usually go to greatlengths to achieve a fair and optimal balance in assigning

32

Generalized process for obtaining access to large userfacilities, such as synchrotron and neutron centers.

FIGURE 1

beamtime. For example, it is common for even the best-rated proposals to be restricted in the amount of beamtime,in order to accommodate additional users. First-time usersoften do not have a good sense of how much time they canreasonably request. Contacting the experimental staff before-hand can be invaluable in assuring that your request fortime is not deemed excessive. In cases where first-choicebeamlines or instruments are oversubscribed, a user may beallocated time at other beamlines or instruments with com-parable capabilities.

Most synchrotron and neutron facilities have two or threecycles of submission, review, and allocation per year. Thisprovides several target deadlines for submission of propos-als. At many facilities, a user may choose to submit a pro-posal that remains active for up to two years rather thanbeing applicable to a single cycle; however, separaterequests for experiment time must be made for each cycle.The total process—from submission to actual experiment—may range from three to eight months, depending on theoperating schedule of the facility. Using the Advanced Pho-ton Source (APS) at Argonne National Laboratory (USA) asan example, a user would submit a proposal by the mid-Julydeadline to be considered for experimental beamtime in theOctober through December cycle. These access modelsrequire awareness of the proposal process and advance plan-ning. The web page lightsources.org provides informationabout proposal deadlines for all the world’s synchrotrons.

If a user has a particular project that simply cannot wait fora typical submission and review process, some facilitiesoffer a rapid access option, which may provide experimenttime in as little as days to weeks. However, this rapid accessis reserved for circumstances where timeliness is crucial toan experiment and must be well justified.

New users should be aware that most of the large researchfacilities require approval and notification prior to arrival,and issue identification badges on site. At all research facil-ities in US national laboratories, non-US citizens are subjectto further security and clearance scrutiny. In short, it isessential to consult facility web pages or representatives todetermine access requirements well before experiments areactually scheduled. Although facilities strive to improve thespeed of this process, it may still require months for scien-

tists from certain countries to receive clearance. Even thoughthe US Department of State continues to re-assess thetimely issuance of visas to visiting scientists (Flatten 2005),further reforms may require a stronger voice from US scien-tists who seek more effective international collaborations.

HOW MUCH TIME IS AVAILABLE AT A USER FACILITY?Having forewarned readers that they should not expectunlimited experimental time at large user facilities, it is use-ful to consider some of the additional constraints thatdetermine how much time is actually made available toexternal users. Facilities such as synchrotrons and neutronsources routinely set aside time for maintenance, upgrades,and studies of source characteristics. The fraction of timeavailable to outside users not only varies among facilitiesbut also among the experiment stations within a facility,depending on the technique(s) implemented, their devel-opment and maintenance needs, and management style.Many of the large scientific facilities “work concurrently intwo modes—operating the overall facility and operating theexperimental stations within the facility” (Kelly et al. 2003).The facility itself assumes responsibility for overall opera-tions, stability, maintenance, and upgrades. For most users,however, their experience at the experimental stations iscritical for the success of their experiment. In many casesthese end-stations and their instruments are operated bythe facilities themselves, encompassing design, develop-ment, and maintenance, as well as providing experimenttime to outside users. Typically the fraction of user time atfacility-operated stations is 50–85% of the total available.This mode of operation maximizes the time available tousers and allows the facility to pool its technical expertiseamong various beamlines.

At some user facilities, however, a consortium of scientistsor an external organization may use independent fundingto design and operate an experimental station, therebyassuming responsibility for design, development, andmaintenance. Because the member scientists secured fund-ing and undertook this responsibility in order to conducttheir own research projects, they have generally negotiatedwith the facility for a certain allocation of experiment timeto accommodate their own needs and still provide time forexternal users. Consortia may also receive funding to sup-port a specific scientific community, making all of the beam-time available to external users. Hybrid models combiningcomponents of both styles also exist. Although less overalltime may be available to external users in these cases, theseconsortium-operated experimental stations offer more spe-cialized user support and innovation in instrument devel-opment. Because funding for such groups often comes fromprograms with a particular research focus, these experimen-tal stations can be optimized for particular research needsor modified to accommodate specialized instrumentationsuited to the focus area. For example, synchrotron experi-mental stations that are partly supported by the USNational Science Foundation’s Earth Sciences Program andthe US Department of Energy’s Geosciences Research Pro-gram have Earth scientists as full-time staff and houseunique instrumentation, one example being large pressesfor in situ studies of mineral samples at high pressure andhigh temperature. This level of specialization specificallyserves the Earth science community. Facility- and consor-tium-operated experimental initiatives each have their ownmerits and both should be encouraged.

At electron beam characterization facilities supported bythe US Department of Energy’s Office of Science, there areno instrument cycles, and proposals are welcome at anytime. However, they should generally be submitted two


PROPOSAL REVIEW PANELS AND SUBPANELS AT THE NSLS

p Imaging and Microprobes• Biological and Medical • Chemical and Material Sciences• Environmental and Geosciences

p IR/UV/Soft X-ray Spectroscopy• Chemical Sciences/Soft Matter/Biophysics • Magnetism/Strongly Correlated

Electrons/Surface • Methods and Instrumentation • Macromolecular Crystallography • Powder/Single Crystal Crystallography

p X-Ray Scattering• Magnetism/Strongly Correlated

Electrons/Surface • Soft Matter and Biophysics

p X-Ray Spectroscopy• Biological, Environmental and Geosciences• Chemical and Material Sciences.

TABLE 1

months prior to requested experiment time. Some electronbeam characterization facilities give priority usage to in-house staff, with experiment time available to externalusers on request. The majority of instrument time at theCenter for High Resolution Electron Microscopy at ArizonaState University is used by in-house scientists, but this facil-ity also has many external users. The Instrument Nationalde Microscopie Electronique en Sciences de la Terre (FrenchNational TEM Facility in Earth Sciences), with locations inLille and Marseille (France), provides electron microscopeaccess primarily to scientists at supporting laboratories ofthe Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS),but access is also available to outside users.

Because the available experimental time at large facilities isso limited, careful planning of experiments and preparationof samples are essential. Assembling a small team oftenworks best, allowing researchers to work in shifts, which isparticularly useful for 24-hour, 7-days-a-week operations.Many experimental stations allow automated data collec-tion over extended periods of time, permitting users to takeextended breaks.

SO, WHAT DOES IT COST?The great news is that many facilities have no user charges.In other words, the actual experiments are free for approvedusers, except for proprietary work. This includes all of thesynchrotron and neutron facilities throughout the world,and any of the user facilities supported by the US Depart-ment of Energy, such as the Environmental Molecular Sci-ence Laboratory at Pacific Northwest National Laboratoryand the National Center for Electron Microscopy atLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The philosophyunderlying this free access is that the research ultimatelybenefits the taxpayers who have paid for it. Consequently,it is incumbent on the academic, industrial, and govern-ment scientists using these facilities to publish their find-ings in the open literature. Government-funded facilitiesalso make experiment time available for proprietaryresearch. Such users request confidentiality of proposal,data, and results for a certain period of time, and usually arerequired to pay for access.

Most facilities operating within universities and nearly allsingle-instrument labs have user charges, which is not sur-prising in view of their limited funding base. For example,access to electron microscopes at most facilities incurs usercharges (except at US DOE facilities), which vary in amount.Users at the Bayerisches Geoinstitut (University ofBayreuth, Germany) are expected to cover the basic cost oftheir research, although charges may be reduced when theresearch is conducted in collaboration with Geoinstitut sci-entists. In addition, users from European Union countries(except for Germany) may apply to the Geoinstitut for EUsupport to cover travel, subsistence, and experimental costs.Users pay a modest fee at the Northeast National Ion Micro-probe Facility, located at Woods Hole Oceanographic Insti-tute in Massachusetts (USA); however, discretionary fundsare sometimes made available. The Purdue Rare IsotopeMeasurement Laboratory (PRIME Lab), located in WestLafayette, Indiana (USA), provides accelerator mass spec-trometry analyses for a modest fee, but also accepts appli-cations for a limited number of initial analyses done free ofcharge.

USER SUPPORT AT RESEARCH FACILITIESNow that you’ve obtained access to a user facility, how doyou make sure your experiments will be successful? Newusers will find themselves working with instrumentationthat is unfamiliar (at least initially) and complex. The phys-

ical environment of synchrotron and neutron facilities mayappear daunting, with a seemingly endless maze of electri-cal wiring and cables, vaccuum systems, lead shielding, andinterlock systems. Work practices in a user facility can bequite different from those found in many university Earthscience departments. For example, at synchrotron facilities,experiments are conducted continuously when the beam isavailable (i.e. 24/7). Although many new users know theprinciples behind the instrumentation and the method,they usually lack the hands-on operational knowledgerequired to make the most effective use of experimental

time, to obtain the highest quality data, and to interpret itproperly. This is when user support becomes crucial and isoften the key to a successful research experience.

Learning how to Operate the EquipmentDuring the first visit to a large facility, a significant amountof time is invested in familiarizing the users with the facil-ity and training them in the mechanics of conducting theexperiment. This may include aspects of instrument opera-tion, software usage, sample mounting and preparation,data quality optimization, and data collection and interpre-tation. While some general familiarization with the facilitycan be accomplished by group training or by computer-based tutorials, the training needed to operate instrumen-tation safely is provided on an individual basis by a facilityscientist or staff member who works specifically at thatexperimental station (FIG. 2). In some cases, users may begiven initial training and then allowed to take over the con-trols for their experiment time, with the support staff avail-able if problems arise. In other instances, a support staffmember may actively assist users during the entire durationof their experiments. As users become more expert andrequire less support, the level of involvement usuallydecreases. Most user facilities strive to provide an optimallevel of support for outside users; however, adequate fund-


Beamline scientists and technical staff provide supportallowing new users to maximize the effectiveness of their

experiment time. Here, NSLS scientist Lisa Miller (center) shows newusers how to operate software. PHOTO COURTESY OF BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL

LABORATORY

FIGURE 2

ing for support staff may be a limiting factor. For example,the number of support staff available to help outside usersat synchrotron beamlines may range from less than one (i.e.part-time) to more than four.

In our experience, users benefit greatly from collaborationwith facility staff, and we strongly encourage new users todevelop such collaborations. This can be particularly bene-ficial when the facility staff includes someone with an Earthsciences background. The quality of publications is oftengreatly enhanced by such collaborations.

Some facilities supplement hands-on training through theirwebsites. Thus, users may familiarize themselves withinstrumentation and operations prior to their arrival at thefacility. These websites are also valuable for answering ques-tions that arise during and after an experiment, particularlywith regard to data processing and interpretation once theuser has left the facility. At some facilities, web-based toolshave even made it possible to conduct experimentsremotely, with local staff mounting and removing samplesmailed by the user.

Safety TrainingNot only must users familiarize themselves with themechanics of the actual experiment, they must also complywith safety and training requirements of the facility. Pro-tection of personnel and the environment is the highestpriority at all user facilities, and great efforts have beenmade to ensure that work is conducted safely. Large facili-ties, including all synchrotrons, require users to take regu-lar safety training courses covering safety aspects relating tothe facility and to general radiological hazards. Much ofthis safety training is available online, allowing users to sat-isfy these requirements on arrival or even before arrival atthe facility. Additional training may be required if experi-ments involve specific hazards, such as use of radioactivesubstances or certain electrical equipment.

All activities are planned and conducted in accordance withstated safety policies. At synchrotron and neutron facilities,a user’s proposed experiment undergoes an experimentsafety review prior to receiving authorization. Thesemandatory reviews may be quite rigorous and are intendedto ensure that risks are minimized through proper designand operation of equipment and proper handling and dis-posal of materials. Safety staff members are highly experi-enced and can provide valuable assistance to users in thedesign of equipment or material handling. We can’t stressenough how important it is to have a dialog with safety staff inthe early stages of planning your experiment.

Safety and beamline staff can also make users aware of ship-ping, handling, and labeling requirements, to ensure thatsamples will be allowed into the facility and that they arehandled safely during the experiment. By following the cor-rect protocols, it can be relatively easy to work even withradioactive and toxic samples at most facilities.

Outreach and EducationRegular users of research facilities are some of the bestresources for information about specific techniques andapplications, and are also potential collaborators for newusers. Large facilities regularly host short courses andhands-on workshops, which serve to introduce new users todifferent methods and also permit experienced users toexchange ideas. Such workshops are very popular in thebiosciences and have proven to be a critical trainingresource. Typically held over a span of several days, theyallow for in-depth coverage of topics and an opportunityfor researchers to collect data. Relatively few workshopshave focused exclusively on applications to the Earth sci-ences. One recent example was a workshop sponsoredjointly by the Mineralogical Society of America and theGeochemical Society, resulting in a publication in theReviews in Mineralogy and Geochemistry series (Fenter et al.2002). The Mineralogical Association of Canada has alsopublished several short course volumes covering Earth sci-ence applications of facility-based techniques (e.g. Hender-son and Baker 2002). Two groups of synchrotron users inthe Earth and environmental sciences—GeoSync (millenia.cars.aps.anl.gov/geosync) and EnviroSync (envirosync.org)—serve as advocates for increased involvement and supportfor these valuable resources. The latter group has co-sponsored a series of workshops, entitled “SynchrotronEnvironmental Science,” highlighting new synchrotronapplications in environmental science, and has also heldworkshops for new users. National meetings of Earth sci-ence and sister societies also provide valuable opportunitiesto highlight research applications using the unique instru-mental capabilities at user facilities. We hope that profes-sional societies, government funding agencies, and user-based initiatives will continue to make Earth scientistsaware of opportunities for novel research opportunities atthe world’s user facilities. The small investments required tosponsor such workshops have enormous payoffs in laterresearch.

This overview has shown that gaining access to researchuser facilities is relatively simple. With the many interestingtechniques they have to offer, there is likely to be some-thing that can benefit your research. Moreover, by con-ducting high-quality research at government-supporteduser facilities, you will be contributing to their continuedsuccess.

ACKNOWLEGMENTSWe thank Robert Von Dreele, Satish Myneni, and JeremyFein, who provided valuable ideas prior to our writing thisarticle. We also thank Tetsu Tokunaga, Robert Von Dreele,and Steve Sutton for critical reviews, and Andrea Illauskyfor artwork. .


REFERENCESFenter PA, Rivers ML, Sturchio NC, Sutton

SR, editors (2002) Applications ofSynchrotron Radiation in Low-Temperature Geochemistry andEnvironmental Science. Reviews inMineralogy and Geochemistry 49,Mineralogical Society of America,Washington, DC, 579 pp

Flatten A (2005) US visa difficulties arelessening, but more must be done.Physics Today 58: 49-53

Henderson G, Baker D, editors (2002)Synchrotron Radiation: Earth, Environ-mental and Material Sciences Applica-tions. Mineralogical Association ofCanada, Ottawa, Canada, Short CourseVolume 30, 178 pp

Kelly TK, Kofner A, Norling PM, Bloom G,Adamson DM, Abbott M, Wang M (2003)RAND Science and Technology PolicyInstitute Report for the Office of Scienceand Technology Policy. A Review ofReports on Selected Large Federal ScienceFacilities: Management and Life-CycleIssues (http://www.rand.org/publica-tions/MR/MR1728/) .

INTRODUCTIONThe trend over the past two decades at national user facili-ties has been toward brighter sources and focusing opticswith higher energy resolution. This has led to majorimprovements in flux on smaller samples and sample areas.These developments have enabled elastic and inelastic scat-tering and spectroscopy studies of inorganic materials (bothcrystalline and amorphous), including those under extremeconditions of pressure and temperature, and biomolecules.They have also permitted more precise and spatiallyresolved imaging and fluorescence studies of nanoparticles,compositionally and structurally heterogeneous inorganicmaterials, natural organic matter, mineral–organic mattermixtures, biomaterials, bacterial cells, and microbialbiofilms. Often this science has changed our worldview, aswas recently demonstrated by the discovery of the post-per-ovskite transition at conditions of the Earth’s core–mantleboundary (Murakami et al. 2004). In this brief overview, wepresent a snapshot of current developments in user facilitiesof potential interest to mineralogists, geochemists, mineralphysicists, geomicrobiologists, and other Earth scientistsinterested in atomic-, molecular-, and meso-scale biological,chemical, and physical processes. Many of these develop-ments are ongoing, and the technologies underpinningthem are immature. We believe several will be mainstreamand this review will be obsolete within the next few years.

Up-to-date information on capa-bilities, guidelines for choosinginstruments, and research high-lights is provided at synchrotronX-ray (http://www.lightsources.org) and neutron (http://neutron.neutron-eu.net/) web portals.

X-RAY SCATTERING,ABSORPTION, ANDIMAGING – RECENTPROGRESS AND NEWOPPORTUNITIES X-ray scattering has become the“workhorse” technique of con-densed matter scientists and struc-tural biologists. In the Earthsciences, mineralogists, mineral

physicists, and inorganic geochemists have long utilized X-ray scattering methods to determine the atomic-levelstructure of minerals; to study the mechanisms of phasetransitions in minerals as a function of temperature andpressure; and to derive information on the short-rangestructures of cation coordination environments in silicateglasses and melts (at temperature and pressure), metamictminerals, and aqueous solutions under both ambient andhydrothermal conditions. Such studies were greatly facili-tated in terms of data quality, sample throughput, andreduced sample size by the introduction of synchrotronlight sources in the mid-1970s. Over the years, the flux andbrightness of X-ray sources have increased (FIG. 1), and


John B. Parise1 and Gordon E. Brown Jr.2,3

1 Center for Environmental Molecular Sciences and Department of Geosciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook,NY 11794-2100, USA E-mail: [email protected]

2 Department of Geological & Environmental Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305-2115, USA E-mail: [email protected]


Synchrotron X-ray sources and pulsed neutron sources are gettingbrighter. This permits new opportunities for scattering, spectroscopy,and imaging studies of Earth materials and processes that were not

possible a decade ago. The impact of these latest-generation facilities onEarth sciences research requiring nanometer- to micrometer-scale resolutionis growing and will continue to grow as next-generation X-ray and neutronsources become available over the next six years. These facilities will includethe world’s first X-ray free-electron lasers in the US (2009) and Europe (2012)and the Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA(2006). In addition, five nanoscale science research centers are under con-struction in the US and will impact the emerging field of nanogeoscience.

KEYWORDS: national user facilities, synchrotron X-ray, neutron scattering,

X-ray fluorescence, imaging

New Opportunitiesat Emerging Facilities

Comparison of the brightness or brilliance of various lightsources, including a candle, a 60-watt light bulb, a sealed

3 kW X-ray tube, the Sun, synchrotron light from a bending magnet,synchrotron light from an undulator magnet, and synchrotron lightfrom an X-ray free-electron laser (FEL) such as the Linac Coherent LightSource (LCLS) that is currently under construction at the Stanford LinearAccelerator Center (SLAC). Also shown for comparison is the rate ofgrowth of computer storage density over the past 40 years. FIGURE COUR-TESY OF PROF. JO STÖHR, STANFORD SYNCHROTRON RADIATION LABORATORY.

FIGURE 1


X-ray detectors and focusing optics have improved. Theseadvances have made feasible techniques such as X-rayabsorption fine-structure (XAFS) spectroscopy, micro-XAFSspectroscopy, micro-X-ray diffraction (XRD), micro-X-rayfluorescence imaging, and surface X-ray scattering. Suchtechniques are now routinely used to study matter in vari-ous forms at unprecedented levels of elemental sensitivity,energy resolution, Q-range (Q = 4π/λsinθ), reduced samplesize, and sample throughput. For example, third-generationsynchrotron light sources utilizing multipole undulator-magnet insertion devices offer an increase in source bright-ness of 1012–1014 relative to sealed X-ray tubes. This enor-mous gain in brightness has permitted new classes of elasticand inelastic scattering, absorption, emission, and imagingexperiments on Earth materials that were simply not possi-ble with sealed X-ray tubes or with first- or second-genera-tion synchrotron light sources.

Among the new classes of experiments made possible bythird-generation synchrotron light sources, we focus hereon several examples that illustrate emerging opportunitiesfor Earth and environmental scientists. The first exampleillustrates the ability to obtain element and phase distribu-tion and phase identification at the 5 µm level using a com-bination of micro-X-ray fluorescence (XRF) mapping andmicro-XRD. Manceau et al. (2002) carried out a detailedµXRF, µXAFS, and µXRD study of the distribution and spe-ciation of Ni in a soil ferromanganese nodule that con-tained a complex mixture of phases. Using 20 µm × 20 µmbeams on bend-magnet beamlines 7.3.3 (µXRF and µXRD)and 10.3.2 (µXAFS) at the Advanced Light Source (Berkeley,CA), they mapped out the distribution of Fe (FIG. 2A) as wellas Mn, Ni, and Zn (not shown) and measured the main dif-fraction lines of various Mn-, Fe-, Ni-, and Zn-bearing phases

as a function of location on the nodule. The intensitydistribution of the 4.19Å diffraction maximum is shown inFIGURE 2B, indicating that Fe is mainly in the form ofgoethite (FIG. 2C) in this nodule. Hexagonal birnessite, a Zn-phyllosilicate, and lithiophorite were found to account forthe Mn, Zn, and Ni, respectively, in the nodule. Phase iden-tification was consistent with the µXAFS results. This workrepresents the first use of µXRF and µXRD mapping of acomplex environmental sample and adds phase identifica-tion to the arsenal of tools available using microbeammethods at third-generation synchrotron radiation sources.

The second example comes from an X-ray fluorescencemicrotomography study of major and trace elements in theintact root of Phalaris arundinacea, a common grass (Hanselet al. 2001). This study used a 5 µm × 5 µm X-ray beam onbeamline 13-ID-C at the Advanced Photon Source to showthat lead (FIG. 2E) correlates spatially with the location ofiron plaque (FIG. 2D) on the outside of the grass root andthat As (FIG. 2F) and Zn (not shown) contaminants are notspatially associated with the iron plaque. Such informationis crucial for determining how effectively contaminants aresequestered by plants.

38

(A) µXRF image showing intensity distribution of Fe Kα,with orange indicating higher Fe concentration; (B)

µXRD image showing intensity distribution of 4.19Å diffraction maxi-mum, with blue indicating highest intensity and green lowest intensity,from a soil ferromanganese nodule with Fe in the form of goethite,whose crystal structure is illustrated in (C) (Manceau et al. 2002). XRFµ-tomography images of a plant root showing the distribution of Fe-plaque (D), Pb (E), and As (F) (Hansel et al. 2001); (G–I) TXM imagesof fulvic acid in water as a function of pH and ionic strength (Myneni etal. 1999).

FIGURE 2

A

D

G

B

E

H

C

F

I


The third example is a transmission X-ray microscopy(TXM) study of natural fulvic acid in aqueous solution as afunction of pH and electrolyte concentration at 25 nm spa-tial resolution using TXM beamline 6.1.2 at the AdvancedLight Source (Myneni et al. 1999). FIGURE 2G shows themacromolecular structure of fulvic acid at pH 4.0. When pHis increased to 9.0, the molecules uncoil and disperse (FIG. 2H), suggesting that the hydrogen bonding changesdramatically with increasing pH. FIGURE 2I shows thatmicromolar concentrations of iron also have a significanteffect on the conformation of fulvic acid. These first in situimages of fulvic acid show that the macromolecular con-formation is quite different than assumed in earlier studies.

A final example of the new types of experiments made pos-sible by high-brightness third-generation synchrotron lightsources is a recent nuclear resonant inelastic X-ray scatter-ing (NRIXS) study of iron up to a pressure of 73 GPa(720,000 atmospheres) and up to a temperature of 1700K(Lin et al. 2005). This experiment was carried out on Sector3 at the Advanced Photon Source, and these P–T conditionswere generated using a laser-heated diamond anvil pressurecell. The NRIXS technique allowed measurement of thephonon density of states of 57Fe, from which vibrational,elastic, and thermodynamic parameters were derived as afunction of temperature and pressure. Their finding—thatsound wave velocity decreases with increasing temperatureat the highest pressures—led these researchers to concludethat there is a greater abundance of light elements in Earth’siron core than previously inferred from linear extrapolationof velocity–density relations at room temperature (i.e.Birch’s Law).

The next revolution in X-ray science will be initiated withthe completion of the Linac Coherent Light Source (LCLS)at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) in Califor-nia, USA. When fully operational in early 2009, the LCLSwill provide the world’s first X-ray free-electron laser, withX-ray pulses one femtosecond (10-15 second) in length con-taining 1012 photons. As shown in FIGURE 1, the LCLS willhave a peak brightness 1010 times greater than any existingX-ray source on Earth, including all existing third-genera-tion synchrotron X-ray sources. This extreme brightnesswill be produced using a 150 m long undulator (located inthe last third of the SLAC Linac) and electron bunch com-pression. Using a single X-ray pulse from the LCLS, it willbe possible to carry out X-ray scattering (speckle) studies onsingle biological macromolecules, such as proteins, withoutthe need to crystallize them. This advance is particularlyimportant for membrane-bound proteins, which are notori-ously difficult to crystallize. One potential application ofthe LCLS relevant to Earth sciences is the structural study ofnanominerals (mineral particles between 1 and 100 nm indiameter). Such particles are abundant in Earth’s atmos-phere and in soil and aquatic environments at Earth’s sur-face, where they interact with the atmosphere, aqueoussolutions, and environmental contaminants. The structuresof nanoparticles of all types, particularly their surface struc-tures, are currently poorly understood, and very few exper-imental methods can yield this type of information.Another exciting application of the LCLS is in the emergingfield of femtochemistry (i.e. the study of chemical reactionsat the femtosecond time scale, which is the time scale onwhich chemical bonds break and reform). Molecular vibra-tions occur on somewhat longer time scales, and thus theextremely short pulses from the LCLS can be used toobserve, in “snap-shot” fashion, these ultrafast transforma-tions and their dynamics. Using “pump-probe” techniques,which involve excitation of a molecule using an appropri-ate femtosecond optical laser followed by measurement ofan X-ray spectral feature of the molecule sensitive to struc-

tural change, it will be possible to follow the pathways ofchemical reactions, including reaction intermediates, in away that has heretofore not been possible. Detailed descrip-tions of these and other types of unique experimentsplanned for the LCLS can be found at the following URL:http://www-ssrl.slac.stanford.edu/lcls/ science.html.

A suite of instruments for exploiting the unique scientificcapabilities of the LCLS will result from the LUSI (LCLSUltrafast Science Instruments) project at SLAC, which isscheduled to start in 2007. Assuming success in funding,the LUSI project will initially build four instruments over afive-year period. Two will be optimized for hard X-ray stud-ies of ultrafast dynamics at the atomic level. A third will beoptimized for hard X-ray coherent imaging of nanoparticlesand large biomolecules, and a fourth will utilize soft X-raysfrom the LCLS to study magnetic structures and surfacechemistry. This suite of instruments will complement otherplanned instruments at the LCLS that will be directedtoward atomic and plasma physics.

A second X-ray free-electron laser (TESLA) is planned forconstruction at DESY in Hamburg, Germany (see TABLE 1 onpage 13), with commissioning scheduled for 2012. As shownin Figure 3 of Brown et al. (2006, this issue), TESLA will pro-duce an average spectral brightness comparable to that pro-duced by the LCLS. A description of some of the scienceplanned for the TESLA facility can be found at http://xfel.desy.de/science/stiroundtablemeetingjune2004/index_eng.html and http://www.desy.de/pr-info/desyhome/html/presse/fotos/xfel/index.en.html.

The challenge to the next generation of Earth scientists is toconceive and implement new classes of experiments at theLCLS and TESLA that will provide unique information onEarth materials and processes. Given the unique character-istics of these X-ray free-electron lasers, it is likely that atleast some of these experiments will focus on ultrafastdynamics of chemical reactions and physical transitions(such as phase transitions and melting) controlling Earth’sprocesses.

NEW CAPABILITIES FOR NEUTRON SCATTERINGNeutrons possess unique properties, which make them anindispensable and complementary structural and spectro-scopic probe. For example the neutron’s sensitivity tohydrogen is particularly important in the Earth sciences,since hydrous minerals are implicated in many importantsurficial and internal processes, such as water cycling in themantle (Jacobsen et al. 2004). Hydrogen-bonded networksare also responsible for the formation of ice and for build-ing polyhedral cages around guest molecules to form solidclathrate hydrates. Clathrates, stabilized at high pressuresand low temperatures, trap guest molecules such asmethane and hydrogen, which are important for energystorage and recovery (Lokshin et al. 2004). Neutron scatter-ing is the only structural probe sufficiently sensitive tohydrogen (and deuterium) to address questions of occu-pancy in the cages of the clathrates (FIG. 3). A recent exper-iment by Lokshin et al. (2004) used the deuterium isotoperather than hydrogen to avoid the undesirable contribu-tions from 1H incoherent scattering. The study revealedthat the 2H-guest occupancy can be reversibly changed byvariation of pressure and temperature and that the maxi-mum density of deuterium in the clathrates is higher thanthe value in most metal hydrides being considered ashydrogen-storage materials. Neutrons reveal not only thecomposition of the clathrates but also the interactionsimportant in stabilizing them.

Neutron experiments are “flux hungry,” requiring samplesof many mm3 to obtain data leading to the structure mod-els shown in FIGURE 3. The need to obtain data on smallersamples is driving the development of ever more powerfulneutron sources and continual instrument improvement tomake the most of every neutron. Developments includeimproved area detectors with wider coverage, neutronfocusing using monochromators, neutron guides, and mostrecently, adaptation of Kirkpatrick-Baez focusing optics uti-lized by the synchrotron radiation community. Many ofthe latest developments in instrumentation, and theirapplication to Earth science research, were summarized in aseries of presentations at the Second General Assembly ofthe European Union of Geosciences (EUG), Vienna, Austria,25–26 April 2005. NESE (Neutrons at the Frontier of EarthSciences and Environment) was one of a series of confer-ences organized jointly by European, American, and Japan-ese scientific institutions with a strong affiliation to neu-tron scattering (http://neutron.neutron-eu.net/n_nmi3/n_networking_activities/n_nese).

As with X-rays, focusing is a technique used to concentrateand direct a neutron beam onto a small area. The micro-capillary optics first developed for X-rays can be adapted tofocus neutrons but often lead to considerable divergence.An alternative method developed by the group of Gene Iceat ORNL uses Kirkpatrick-Baez neutron super mirrors, againadapted from earlier work with X-rays (http://www.ornl.gov/info/awards/cf/cfcitations/cfbios/ice.shtml). Neu-tron focusing is used to improve spatial resolution andlower detection limits in neutron-based analytical methods.Beams as small as 90 µm x 90 µm have recently been pro-duced in trials at the Chalk River reactor, Canada. With further optimization of the optics and the promise of atleast an order of magnitude increase in flux provided by theSpallation Neutron Source, we may be close to “routine”neutron crystallography on samples of a size comparable tothose now used with sealed-tube X-ray sources. This should

produce new scientific advances with small mineral sam-ples, including those held in environmental chambersunder high pressure.

The current state-of-the-art in studies of small crystals usingneutrons is represented by the VIVALDI diffractometer(Very-Intense Vertical-Axis Laue Diffractometer; Chung etal. 2004) (http://www.embl-grenoble.fr/groups/instr/instru-ments/finder.html) at Institut Laue-Langevin (ILL, Grenoble,France), which routinely collects data at ambient and lowtemperatures on crystals with edge dimensions of about 150µm (Cole et al. 2001). This facility is well suited to smallcrystals, rapid chemical crystallography, reciprocal-spacesurveys, and studies of structural and magnetic phase tran-sitions. In its first years of operation, VIVALDI producedgains in data collection rates of up to 100 fold over con-ventional diffractometers. The advantages of the large-solid-angle Laue technique can also be implemented inhigh-pressure crystallography (FIG. 4). Early results fromdiamond anvil cells (DAC) developed by the Carnegie Insti-tution of Washington, USA (Xu et al. 2002; Xu et al. 2004),and the Laboratoire Léon Brillouin, Saclay, France, (Gon-charenko et al. 1995) groups suggest that with some designparameter changes it will soon be possible to carry out neu-tron scattering studies on samples of a size (150 µm × 150 µm× 50 µm) close to that associated with DAC high-pressurestudies in individual investigator laboratories.

FIGURE 4 shows a neutron diffraction pattern taken from anatrolite crystal in a “panoramic” moissanite anvil cell fromthe Carnegie Institution of Washington (Xu et al. 2002). Onclose inspection we identify three diffraction patterns—onefrom the natrolite sample and two from the two tips of theconical moissanite anvils. Each pattern was indexed, andthe data were integrated for normal single-crystal dataanalysis. The structure of natrolite refined well, with allcoordinates agreeing within three estimated standard devi-ations with previously published neutron diffraction data(McIntyre et al. 2005); this result demonstrates that fullcrystallographic investigation in a pressure cell is quite fea-sible using the white-beam neutron Laue technique. Thissituation will improve dramatically when coupled withneutron focusing. The next generation of high-pressuredevices may have large CVD-grown diamond anvils. Thiswill complete the synergy between synchrotron-based high-pressure work and new capabilities being developed forneutron scattering (Yan et al. 2002).

VIVALDI is part of a wider program at the ILL dubbed the“Millennium Project,” instigated to upgrade the optics anddetection systems on several components of its “instrumentpark.” This has led in many cases to factors of two, or better,gains in overall performance. Of particular interest to the


Laue diffraction patterns from a 0.5 mm natrolite samplein a moissanite anvil cell: φ= 65°, exposure time 1 hour.

TAKEN FROM MCINTYRE ET AL. (2005)

FIGURE 4Structural views of the distribution of D2 guests (yellow)in the large (top) and small cages of solid clathrate

hydrates as a function of temperature determined using neutron scat-tering. Below 50K (left), four guest D2 molecules are localized in a tetra-hedral cluster in the large cage, while in the small cage one D2 mole-cule is statistically distributed over 20 positions. At higher temperature(right), the D2 molecules rotate more freely, yielding a nearly sphericaldensity distribution inside the cages. Larger red spheres represent oxy-gen atoms and the smaller dark green ones represent hydrogen atoms.REPRODUCED FROM LOKSHIN ET AL. (2004).

FIGURE 3

powder and single-crystal scattering community is thehigh-resolution powder diffractometer, Super D2B, inwhich powder samples of only several hundred milligramsare sufficient to provide high-resolution diffractograms.The large unit cell diffractometer D19 will be fitted withlarge area detectors, which will allow routine data collec-tion on small crystals.

Exemplary of the new generation of neutron diffractome-ters optimized for small samples will be DRACULA at ILL,which will be the world’s fastest Diffractometer for RapidACquisition over Ultra Large Angles (http://www.ill.fr/dif/AlanHewat/). Large solid-angle detectors will providethe increased sensitivity required for the study of small sin-gle-crystal or powder samples. As detector technologyadvances, CCD-based detectors coupled to white neutronbeams promise even larger gains (http://www.ill.fr/dif/AlanHewat/BCA-April-2005.pdf).

Currently the world’s most intense pulsed neutron source,ISIS, at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in the UK, contin-ues to add capabilities for more rapid data collection andwork on smaller samples. A new target station nearing com-pletion (http://www.ts-2.isis.rl.ac.uk) is designed to comple-ment the existing suite of instruments on target station 1,with the new instruments designed to take advantage of thehigher resolution and high intensity, colder (longer wave-length) neutron beams. The long wavelength (2–20 Å) neu-tron instruments tend to employ longer flight paths(20–100 m) and are optimized for higher resolutions. ForEarth and environmental scientists, the new instrumentsuite will probably include capabilities for ultrasmall-angleneutron scattering to bridge the nanometer–micrometerregime in studies of inorganic–organic interactions, com-plex inorganic–organic assemblies, surfaces and interfaces,and nucleation behavior.

Structural complexity—in the form of very large unit cells,phase coexistence, subtle superlattices and distortions, orexpanded length scales—is important in Earth scienceresearch. Increasingly this complexity is being observed atnon-ambient conditions. Especially when light elementssuch as hydrogen are involved, the highest possible resolu-tion is required for ambient and non-ambient in situ stud-ies. Existing synchrotron X-ray diffractometers offer excel-lent resolution (∆d/d ~10-4), and neutron diffractometerswith comparable or better resolution and good data ratesare being proposed. While resolution was not consideredimportant at the time of construction of high-pressure neu-tron diffraction capabilities at the PEARL beamline at ISIS,technical developments have made resolution an impor-tant consideration in these studies, and a high-pressurebeamline is being proposed in the next round of instrumentconstruction for the ISIS Second Target Station. Magneticinvestigations, including studies of systems with smallmoments, requiring high flux, will also be highlighted.

The Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) being built in OakRidge, Tennessee, by the US Department of Energy isdesigned to operate initially at 1.4 MW and to provide themost intense pulsed neutron beams in the world (FIG. 5).Construction began in 1999 and will be completed in 2006with a suite of instruments covering the range of interestsfor condensed matter scientists (http://www.sns.gov/users/instrument_systems/index.shtml). A similar facility is beingconstructed at the JAERI/Tokai site, about 130 km northeastof Tokyo, Japan, with an anticipated first beam in April 2008.

The capabilities of the instrument suite at SNS will mirrorthose available in Europe, with an initial emphasis on neu-tron scattering for research related to the Earth sciences.The increased flux will be used for high-resolution powderdiffraction and time-resolved studies. Construction of new

facilities allows for progress on a “green field site,” alongwith continued improvement and optimization based onaccumulated experience with existing instruments. For thehigh-pressure community, several decades of steadyimprovement in pressure capability, detector sensitivity,and accumulated community experience is being utilized inthe construction of the world’s first dedicated high-pressureinstrument, the Spallation Neutron and Pressure (SNAP)beamline. This instrument, and others being proposed atISIS, will allow the study of the structural and dynamicproperties of materials under extreme conditions, such asthose found in the deep Earth and other planetary interiors.A suite of high-pressure devices will cover the range of pres-sures (0.1–100 GPa) of interest to members of the Earth andmaterials science communities who are engaged in solvingproblems ranging from the formation and stability of gasclathrates at the low end of the pressure scale, to core–man-tle interactions and planetary interiors at the more extremeconditions. The outer planets in our solar system are com-posed mostly of ice at very high pressures. Very-high-pres-sure phases of ice are currently poorly understood, and theSNAP diffractometer may enable new understanding of themineralogy and petrology of non-terrestrial planets.

The SNAP beamline is inspired, in part, by the success ofhigh-pressure programs at X-ray sources, where flexibleoptics have led to versatile instruments adaptable to userneeds as scientific opportunities arise. The SNAP instru-ment is designed to integrate recent progress in the designof high-pressure cells with flexible optics, includingrecently developed focusing methodologies. It is also opti-mized for the collection of single-crystal data while main-taining capabilities for powder diffraction.

Other SNS instruments available at the time of commis-sioning in 2007 will include a high-resolution powderinstrument capable of stroboscopic diffraction studies witha time resolution of 0.5 milliseconds or better. This instru-ment will allow detailed, time-resolved investigations of awide range of metal-oxide displacive phase transitions.Time-resolved experiments will also be possible on thesmall-angle instrument, with applications for contrast vari-ation studies of colloidal particles, including their precipi-tation and ripening (Duits et al. 1991; Janβen et al. 1997;Vrij 2003). The SNS engineering materials diffractometer, aswell as those already in operation at other neutron facilitiessuch as ILL, LANSCE (Los Alamos Neutron Science Center)


Artist’s rendition of the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS)at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA. Also shown is the

location of the Center for Nanophase Materials Science, one of five newnanoscale science research centers in the US.

FIGURE 5

REFERENCESBanfield JF, Navrotsky A (eds) (2001)

Nanoparticles and the Environment.Reviews in Mineralogy & Geochemistry44, Mineralogical Society of America,Washington, DC, 349 pp

Brown GE Jr, Calas G, Hemley RJ (2006)Scientific advances made possible by userfacilities. Elements 2: 23-30

Chung EML, Lees MR, McIntyre GJ,Wilkinson C, Balakrishnan G, Hague JP,Visser D, Paul DM (2004) Magneticproperties of tapiolite (FeTa206); a quasitwo-dimensional (2D) antiferromagnet.Journal of Physics-Condensed Matter16 (43): 7837-7852

Cole JM, McIntyre GJ, Lehmann MS, MylesDAA, Wilkinson C, Howard JAK (2001)Rapid neutron-diffraction data collectionfor hydrogen-bonding studies: applica-tion of the Laue diffractometer (LADI) tothe case study zinc (tris)thiourea sulfate.Acta Crystallographica Section A 57: 429-434

Duits MHG, May RP, Vrij A, DeKruif CG(1991) Partial structure factors incolloidal silica mixtures determined withsmall-angle neutron scattering contrastvariation. Journal of Chemical Physics94(6): 4521-4531

Goncharenko IN, Mignot J-M, Andre G,Lavrova OA, Mirebeau I, Somenkov VA(1995) Neutron diffraction studies ofmagnetic structure and phase transitionsat very high pressures. High PressureResearch 14: 41-53

Hansel CM, Fendorf S, Sutton S, NewvilleM (2001) Characterization of Fe plaqueand associated metals on the roots ofmine-waste impacted aquatic plants.Environmental Science & Technology35: 3863-3868

Hochella MF Jr (2002) Nanoscience andtechnology: the next revolution in theEarth sciences. Earth and PlanetarySciences Letters 203: 593-605

Jacobsen SD, Smyth JR, Spetzler H, HollCM, Frost DJ (2004) Sound velocities andelastic constants of iron-bearing hydrousringwoodite. Physics of the Earth andPlanetary Interiors 143: 47-56

Janβen S, Wagner J, Natter H, Prewo J,Rupp R, Löffler J, Eckerlebe H, May R,Meier G, Hempelmann R (1997) Smallangle neutron scattering experiments onnanostructured matter using contrastvariation. Nanostructured Materials9: 327-330

Lin J-F, Sturhahn W, Zhao J, Shen G, MaoHK, Hemley RJ (2005) Sound velocitiesof hot dense iron: Birch’s Law revisited.Science 308: 1892-1894

Lokshin KA, Zhao YS, He DW, Mao WL,Mao HK, Hemley RJ, Lobanov MV,Greenblatt M (2004) Structure anddynamics of hydrogen molecules in thenovel clathrate hydrate by high pressureneutron diffraction. Physical ReviewLetters 93: 125503

Manceau A, Tamura N, Marcus MA,MacDowell AA, Celestre RS, Sublett RE,Sposito G, Padmore HA (2002) Decipher-ing Ni sequestration in soil ferroman-ganese nodules by combining X-ray

fluorescence, absorption, and diffractionat micrometer scales of resolution.American Mineralogist 87: 1494-1499

McIntyre GJ, Mélési L, Guthrie M, Tulk CA,Xu J, Parise JB (2005) One picture says itall—high-pressure cells for neutron Lauediffraction on VIVALDI. Journal ofPhysics: Condensed Matter 17:S3017–S3024

Murakami M, Hirose K, Kawamura K, SataN, Ohishi Y (2004) Post-perovskite phasetransition in MgSiO3. Science 304: 855-858

Myneni SCB, Brown JT, Martinez GA,Meyer-Ilse W (1999) Imaging of humicsubstance macromolecular structures inwater and soils. Science 286: 1335-1337

Vrij A (2003) Neutron scattering ofcolloidal particle dispersions: contrastvariation with homogeneous andgranular solvents. Colloids and SurfacesA-Physicochemical and EngineeringAspects 213: 117-129

Xu JA, Mao HK, Hemley RJ, Hines E (2002)The moissanite anvil cell: a new tool forhigh-pressure research. Journal ofPhysics-Condensed Matter, 14: 11543-11548

Xu JA, Mao HK, Hemley RJ, Hines E (2004)Large volume high-pressure cell withsupported moissanite anvils. Review ofScientific Instruments 75: 1034-1038

Yan CS, Vohra YK, Mao HK, Hemley RJ(2002) Very high growth rate chemicalvapor deposition of single-crystaldiamond. Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences 99: 12523-12525 .


and ISIS, will incorporate greatly improved capabilities formapping localized stresses. In situ measurements to investi-gate how stresses change the behavior of real rocks will alsobe possible.

US NANOSCALE SCIENCE RESEARCH CENTERSEarth’s near-surface environment, including the tropo-sphere, contains enormous quantities of nanometer-scaleparticles (one to 100 nm in diameter), which are producedby both abiotic and biotic processes. These particles playmajor roles in chemical and biological processes affectingthe biogeochemical cycling of elements and the transportof environmental contaminants and plant nutrients; theyalso affect the quality of the air we breathe (Hochella 2002).Nanogeoscience, which focuses on the geochemistry andmineralogy of natural nanoparticles and nanometer-sizedfeatures on mineral surfaces, is an emerging field in theEarth sciences. Nanogeocience has developed over the pastfive years in response to the realization that naturalnanoparticles have properties, such as chemical reactivity,that can be quite different from those of bulk materials ofthe same compositions (Banfield and Navrotsky 2001). Themore general fields of nanoscience and nanotechnologyhave developed over the past decade in order to gain anunderstanding and take advantage of the unique propertiesof nanomaterials and their applications in modern technol-ogy and medicine. As a result of the growing interest innanoscience, the US Department of Energy, Office of BasicEnergy Sciences, provided funding in 2003 to establish fivenanoscale science research centers (see Table 1 in Brown etal. 2006, this issue, for a listing of these centers, their loca-tions, and the techniques they will make available). Thesecenters are currently under construction and will be avail-able to users beginning in 2006–2007. They will provide

research facilities for the synthesis, processing, and fabrica-tion of nanoscale materials and have been collocated withexisting user facilities such as the Advanced Light Sourceand National Center for Electron Microscopy at LBNL (Mol-ecular Foundry), the Advanced Photon Source at ArgonneNational Laboratory (Center for Nanoscale Materials), theNational Synchrotron Light Source (Center for FunctionalNanomaterials) and the Spallation Neutron Source at ORNL(Center for Nanophase Materials Sciences). This collocationwill provide state-of-the-art characterization facilities. Theseemergent nanoscience facilities should have a significantimpact on nanogeoscience research. Detailed descriptionsof each of these facilities can be found at www.sc.doe.gov/bes/NNI.htm.

CONCLUSIONSThe impact of the current generation of national user facil-ities on Earth science research has been dramatic. The nextgeneration of beam facilities will emphasize higher bright-ness, and consequently greater spatial and time resolution.Tighter integration of these beam facilities with samplepreparation and new environmental cells will allowunprecedented experiments under conditions characteristicof Earth and other bodies.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThe authors are grateful to the many colleagues in the syn-chrotron X-ray and neutron communities for their contri-butions to a number of the studies cited in this brief review.We are also grateful to the dedicated beamline scientists atthe facilities for their technical support. We also thank MikeHochella (Virginia Tech), Charlie Prewitt (University of Ari-zona), and Steve Sutton (University of Chicago) forthoughtful reviews of this paper. .


Mineral Matters

The newly described species putzite,(Cu4.7Ag3.3)Σ8GeS6, named after Hubert Putz,was found in old dumps near the Rosariovein, Capillitas mining district, CatamarcaProvince, Argentina. It can be considered thecopper-dominant analogue of argyrodite,Ag8GeS6. This dry account provides theessentials about the new discovery, but fallsshort of giving insight into what led to it.

Hubert was born on March 12, 1973, in BadIschl, Austria. By the age of 8, he had startedcollecting fossils near his home in thefoothills of the Calcareous Alps. Only later didhe develop a keen interest in minerals; he firstbegan to specialize in quartz in its manymanifestations. He acquired his first bookson mineralogy at age 16, and at age 18, heattended his first mineral fair. By that time,he had built up a respectable collection of 300or 400 specimens, with little representationfrom ore minerals, ironically enough.

In 1994, he began his studies at the Universityof Salzburg and obtained a MSc degree in2000. During this period, he took classes inmineralogy, ore microscopy, and economicgeology, given by Professor Werner H. Paar.By this stage, his mineralogical interests hadshifted to ore minerals. He became fascinatedin combining the traditional approach ofreflected-light microscopy with modernanalytical techniques. For his Diploma thesis,he studied gold mineralization in a long-abandoned mining district in the Province ofSalzburg. He studied the microparagenesis ofthe complex auriferous ores, evaluated theirconditions of formation using fluid inclu-sions, and published his results in Mineralogyand Petrology.

In 2000, he was asked by his thesis advisor,Professor Paar, whether he would consider a«risky» three-year project on ore districts in

Argentina, with the support of grants by theAustrian Science Foundation. He jumped atthe opportunity, a decision that was a turningpoint in his young career. He accompaniedhis advisor on many expeditions to remotemining locations in Argentina and laterBolivia. He became quite fluent in castellano.He thus started a PhD thesis on the FarallonNegro Complex of Catamarca in Argentina,with special emphasis on ore mineralogy andconditions of formation of low- and high-sulfidation epithermal mineralization atCapillitas. He anticipates finishing his thesisin 2005 or early 2006. He has participated inseveral national and international confer-ences, at which he presented the results of hisvarious discoveries on ore deposits.

Hubert’s collection now contains close to5000 specimens, which represent over 1000different species. With his knowledge andkeen sense of observation, he has discoveredat least three germanium-bearing species thatare new to science. The most abundant ofthese was named putzite in his honor by hisadvisor (Paar et al. 2004), in recognition of his

special accomplishments in the field of oremineralogy and his discovery of a Gemetallogenic province in this historicallyfamous mining district. A second mineral isnamed catamarcaite, Cu6GeWS8, and the thirdis possibly the Ge-dominant analogue ofstannoidite. Keep up the good work, Hubert!

I acknowledge the major contribution ofWerner H. Paar to this profile.

Robert F. Martin([email protected])

REFERENCEPaar WH, Roberts AC, Berlepsch P, Armbruster T,

Topa D, Zagler G (2004) Putzite, (Cu4.7Ag3.3)Σ8GeS6:a new mineral species from Capillitas, Catamarca,Argentina: description and crystal structure.Canadian Mineralogist 42: 1757-1769

Putzite is named after Hubert Putz, presently a doctoralcandidate in the Department of Geography, Geologyand Mineralogy of the University of Salzburg. Hubert dis-covered the mineral during the preparation of his PhDthesis on the Capillitas district, and was the first to docu-ment a significant Ge anomaly in the region.

Putzite (pu) rimmed by a fined-grained matrix ofchalcocite, sphalerite, chalcopyrite, and covellite.This matrix is associated with catamarcaite (ca).PHOTO COURTESY OF THE CANADIAN MINERALOGIST

PEOPLE BEHIND MINERAL NAMES:HUBERT PUTZ, A KEEN OBSERVER AND A STAR STUDENT

Olivier Jaoul (1944–2005) We are saddened to report thatOlivier Jaoul of the UniversitéPaul Sabatier in Toulouse, France,died on November 15. Born inNeuilly sur Seine in 1944 andtrained as a physicist in thelaboratory of Jacques Friedel,Jaoul was recruited into geo-physics by Claude Froidevaux atthe Laboratoire de Géophysiqueet Géodynamique Interne at theUniversité Paris Sud in Orsay. In1997, he moved his laboratory toToulouse and joined the Labora-toire d’Étude des Mécanismes etTransferts en Géologie. In bothOrsay and Toulouse, Jaoul’slaboratory pioneered newexperimental techniques to studyplastic deformation and atomicdiffusion in mantle minerals; thisresearch was always characterizedby care in the design andexecution of the experiments.The acquisition of new data foratomic diffusion led Jaoul and hiscolleagues to formulate a newmodel for creep in olivine viamulticomponent diffusion.Olivier was a master teacher, atboth the undergraduate andgraduate levels, with a refinedpedagogical style which wasdidactic and philosophical,typical of a person whose firstforeign language was Greek. Heenjoyed teaching young students,not only in the laboratory, butalso in the field. Lastly, Olivierwas a warm and generouscolleague who leaves a long list ofprotégés and collaborators in hisscientific and educational legacy.He is survived by his wife,Martine, and their two children,Nicolas and Delphine.

R.C. Liebermann, F. Béjina,and J. Ingrin

Alain Weisbrod(1936–2005) Professor Alain Weisbrod sadlydied on October 18, 2005 after along illness. He taught at theSchool of Geology (ENSG) andcarried out research at the Centrede Recherches Pétrographiques etGéochimiques (CNRS) in Nancy.

After defending a doctoral thesisin 1970 on metamorphism in theCévennes (France), he founded,together with Bernard Poty andJacques Touret, a research teamfocused on the equilibriumbetween fluids and minerals. Hespent one year at the GeophysicalLaboratory (Carnegie Institute ofWashington) to study theinfluence of water and man-ganese on the garnet–cordieriteequilibrium. He calibratedexperimentally the K/Na geother-mometer for fluids in equilibriumwith alkali feldspars. His scientificinterests also included fluidimmiscibility and fluid mixingduring the formation of oredeposits based on fluid inclusionstudies; alpine metamorphism;oceanic hydrothermal metamor-phism; boron geochemistry inhydrothermal fluids; and tin,tungsten and porphyry copperdeposits.

Alain Weisbrod combined fieldwork, the acquisition of analyticaland experimental data, andthermodynamic modelling. Hewas among the first to introducethermodynamics in the Earthsciences through his book BasicThermodynamics for Mineralogistsand Geologists, which was firstpublished in French in 1963 andsubsequently translated intoRussian in 1966 and English in1967. He introduced many Earthscientists to this approach, whichwas very new at the time.

Jean Dubessy

As the incoming president of the Société

Française de Minéralogie et de Cristallographie

(SFMC), I am delighted that we have joined

this new publishing initiative. The SFMC

brings together French scientists in the fields

of mineralogy and crystallography, but also

petrology and geochemistry. It is therefore

natural that we have become a partner in Ele-

ments. The first issues have been exciting, and

our members are going to benefit greatly from

this partnership.

The SFMC coordinates and promotes scientific activities in the field of

mineralogy (s.l.) in France. We organize meetings on focused scientific

topics and we sponsor symposia and special sessions at national and

international conferences. We also play an active role in training and in

organizing short courses, which gather large numbers of students every

year. We award annually the “prix Haüy-Lacroix” to the best PhDs in the

field. Of course, our activities are in French when they are addressed to

the national community. But we also hold joint meetings with other

societies at the European level. The last one, in November 2005, was co-

organized with the Sociedad Española de Mineralogía, and was held in

French, English, and Spanish!

The SFMC also shares the responsibility for publishing the European Jour-

nal of Mineralogy, a journal probably familiar to most of you, with three

other European societies, the Deutsche Mineralogische Gesellschaft, the

Società Italiana di Mineralogia et Petrologia, and now the Sociedad

Española de Mineralogía.

Our internal publication, the “Bulletin de Liaison”, is the link between

our members. Joining Elements will give us more visibility on the inter-

national scene and help us strengthen our links with other societies.

Catherine MévelPresident

FROM THE PRESIDENT

Société Française de Minéralogie et de Cristallographie

www.sfmc-fr.org


Society News

44

IN MEMORIAM


PRIX HAÜY-LACROIX TO ROSKOSZ

Each year the SFMC awards the“Prix Haüy-Lacroix” to a youngscientist for the quality of his PhDin the fields of mineralogy, geo-chemistry, petrology, or materialsscience. In 2005, it was awarded toMathieu Roskosz, who did his PhDat the Centre de Recherche Pétro-graphiques et Géochimiques inNancy, with M. Toplis and P.Richet as advisors. Dr Roskosz isnow a postdoctoral fellow at theGeophysical Laboratory, CarnegieInstitution of Washington, USA.The following is a summary of hisresearch on the nucleation andcrystallization of silicate melts.

The crystallization of silicate liquids is central to many processes of geo-logical and industrial interest. Nevertheless, crystal nucleation andgrowth rates in silicate melts are still poorly predicted, mainly becausemicroscopic factors that control them are not yet precisely understood.This study has concentrated on determining these factors at tempera-tures below the solidus, but above the glass transition (Tg). Syntheticglasses in the system CaO–Al2O3–SiO2 have been heat-treated at oneatmosphere, time and temperature being the two experimental vari-ables. Experimental charges have been characterized over a wide rangeof scales (SEM, TEM, electron microprobe, X-ray diffraction and Ramanspectroscopy) in order to determine textures, compositions, and unit-cell parameters of the crystalline phases.

The first phase to crystallize is generally one of the solidus phases. How-ever, some metastable minerals also precipitate. At the temperaturesstudied, crystals are never stoichiometric and are generally enriched inCa but have Si/Al approaching that of the parent liquid. With increasingtemperature, the transition to phase compositions expected near thesolidus takes place via a gradual change of Si/Al, this change being a sys-tematic function of (T-Tg). Thus, provided that Tg of the parent compo-sition is known, the compositions and the microstructures of devitrifiedmaterials may be predicted. These features may be explained by the rel-ative mobilities of the different cations, the mobility of the networkmodifier Ca becoming several orders of magnitude greater than that ofthe network formers Si and Al around Tg. Thus, during nucleation atlarge degrees of supercooling, the low mobility of Al and Si restricts thecompositional field explored during random fluctuations in composi-tion in the liquid, and thus restricts compositions of crystal nuclei. Fur-thermore, the enrichment of the nuclei in low-field-strength cationsdecreases the number of strong bonds (i.e. Si–O) that need to bereordered in order to reach a crystalline structure. These mechanismsmay explain why observed nucleation rates are systematically largerthan those predicted by the classical nucleation theory.

Previous considerations have empirically related crystal growth rate tothe viscosity of the liquid. With this in mind, we have observed two dif-ferent behaviors. When the Si/Al ratios of minerals and melt are thesame, the temperature dependence of crystal growth rate (i.e. the acti-vation energy) is identical to that of viscous flow. In the case of congru-ent crystallization, this may be explained because crystal growth and vis-cous flow have a common microscopic origin involving the breakingand formation of Si–O bonds. When the Ca content varies between meltand crystal, growth rate and viscous flow are still related because the Camobility is rapid relative to the characteristic life time of an Si–O bond.Conversely, when the Si/Al ratios of crystals and liquid are different, theactivation energy for crystal growth is significantly lower than that ofviscous flow of the parent melt. To explain this observation, it is pro-posed that coupled diffusion of Al and Ca lowers the frequency of Al–Obond breaking, which then becomes the rate-limiting process.

Society News

45

SFMC AND SEM MEET IN BIARRITZ

“HYDROTHERMALISM, AQUEOUS SOLUTIONSAND MINERALOGY”

The SFMC and SEM (SociedadEspañola de Mineralogia) jointlyorganised a scientific meetingentitled “Hydrothermalism,aqueous solutions and mineral-ogy” held on November 3 and 4,2005. The organizers were Prof.Fernando Rull (SEM) and JeanDubessy (SFMC). This meetingwas held in Biarritz, France, nearthe border between the twocountries. The first of the foursessions was mainly devoted tothe study of aqueous solutionswith different spectroscopictechniques (vibrational), andespecially those possible nowwith the light beam FAMEavailable at ESRF and dedicatedto Earth sciences. The secondsession was devoted to thermody-namic modelling in inorganicand organic systems. Solid solu-tions were especially considered.In addition, transport phenom-ena such as diffusion were alsoaddressed. Experimental workand numerical models werealways linked to natural casestudies. Several papers in the

third session were focused onsubmarine hydrothermal systemsand ore deposits. The interestingcase study of the Rio Tinto minewith its acidic sulfate fluids wasemphasized. Finally, the fourthsession dealt with acid gas storagefrom an experimental point ofview.

As is often the case for smallmeetings, discussions were alwayslively after each presentation. It isworth noting that speakers usedmostly their native language,with slides in English. Thisdemonstrates that several lan-guages can be used in scientificmeetings, especially thoseinvolving neighbouring countries.

Finally, SEM and SFMC havedecided to strengthen their linksand have proposed a scientificmeeting to be held jointly withthe Portuguese mineralogicalsociety in the spring of 2007.

SFMC information: www.sfmc-fr.org

Contact: [email protected]

HUBERT CURIEN, CRYSTALLOGRAPHER AND MINERALOGIST

A special meeting will be held on MAY 19,2006, at the Ministry of Research in Paris,Amphithéâtre Poincaré, in memory ofHubert Curien, who passed away suddenlyon February 6, 2005 at the age of 80.

He was professor of crystallography at theLaboratoire de Minéralogie-Cristallographieof Paris. Former president of the SociétéFrançaise de Minéralogie et de Cristallogra-phie, he had major responsibilities in Europeand in France, when he was Minister ofResearch. As a crystallographer and mineral-ogist, Hubert Curien had interests rangingwidely from solid-state physics to mineral-

ogy. This meeting will be dedicated to the major advances in which hewas involved in the 1950s and 1960s, in the fields of Compton scatter-ing, ionic conductibility, and the radiation effects on ionic crystals. Inmineralogy, his contributions included the determination of the struc-ture of several minerals, the early development of the electron micro-probe, and the significance of structural defects. A new mineral wasnamed after him—curienite, Pb(UO2)2V2O8,5H2O. Several colleagueswho worked with him, as well as younger researchers active in theseareas, will participate to this meeting, which will show how fascinatingit is to conduct research outside classical tracks.

For further information, contact: Georges Calas ([email protected])or Bernard Capelle ([email protected])


Society News

46

European Associationfor Geochemistry

EAG NEWS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS

Chemical Geology is the official journal of the European Association forGeochemistry. Members of the EAG can subscribe to Chemical Geology atdiscount member rates. Chemical Geology publishes top-rate manuscriptsin all areas of geochemistry as well as regular special issues on emergingor hot topics in our field. The two most recent special issues are:

New Results in Fluid and Silicate Melt Inclusion Research – XVIIEuropean Current Research on Fluid Inclusions (ECROFI XVII),edited by Csabo Szabó, Alfons M. van den Kerkhof and Robert J. Bodnar(volume 223, issues 1–3, pages 1–178). This special issue presents 15papers collected from the seventeenth biennial meeting of the EuropeanCurrent Research on Fluid Inclusions (ECROFI XVII), which was held onJune 5–9, 2003 at the Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary. Topics inthis special issue include (1) new analytical and experimental tech-niques, (2) application of silicate melt inclusions to the study of igneouspetrology, (3) the behavior of fluids during metamorphic processes, and(4) metal transport and deposition.

Shallow-water Hydrothermal Venting, edited by R.M. Prol-Ledesma,P.R. Dando and C.E.J. de Ronde (volume 224, issues 1–3, pages 1–182).This issue brings together contributions from several groups working onsubaqueous hydrothermal activity occurring at shallow depths and isbased on a thematic session at the 2003 annual meeting at the Geolog-ical Society of America. The focus of this volume is on vents in water lessthan 200 m deep, as deeper vents are dominated by vent-obligate fauna.Shallow-water vents provide accessible geological and chemical settingsfor studying the interaction of hydrothermal fluids with unconsolidatedsediments, seawater and basement rocks. For example, in contrast todeeper vent sites, the lower pressures and consequently lower water-boiling temperatures lead to subsurface deposition of metals. The 11papers published in this special issue present a survey of the currentresearch being performed to characterize and better understand theseunique geochemical systems.

www.eag.eu.com

UPCOMING EAG-SPONSORED SESSIONS

Session GMPV15: Precipitation and dissolu-tion of carbonates –mechanisms, kinetics, solidsolution formation andfractionation effectsCo-convenors: Martin Dietzeland Stephan Kohler

The precipitation and dissolutionbehavior of carbonates plays amajor role in hydrogeochemistryand the formation of sedimentsand sedimentary rocks. Mecha-nisms and kinetics are stronglyrelated to the physicochemicalconditions of the respectivesystems, specific reactions at thesolid–liquid interface and miner-alogy. Element and isotopesignatures of carbonates can beused to decipher, for example,formation conditions, sourcesof compounds, evolution of pastclimate and carbonate fluxes inanthropogenic environments.

Areas to be covered in this sessioninclude (1) carbonate crystalliza-tion and solid solution formation;(2) aspects and techniques forstudies of precipitation kinetics;(3) incorporation of trace ele-ments; (4) carbon, oxygen, andmetal isotopic fractionation andimplications for e.g. naturalaquatic systems; and (5) applica-tions for carbonate precipitationand dissolution studies.

Session CL036: Physical and chemicalweathering at diversetemporal and spatial scalesConvenor: K. Burton

Co-convenors: J. Gaillardet,S. Gislason, and F. von Blanckenburg

This symposium will focus onpast and present physical,chemical and biological processesof weathering, from nano- toglobal scale. In particular wewelcome field, experimental andmodelling studies of weatheringprocesses in soil, catchment areasand deltas and the coupling ofclimate, hydrology, vegetation,lithology, topography andweathering. New elemental andisotopic tracers of past andpresent weathering rates areespecially welcome as well asstudies of how chemical fluxeshave varied through time as afunction of tectonics and climate.

The EAG is co-sponsoring two sessions at the 2006 European Geosciences

Union (EGU) General Assembly, which will be held on April 2–7, in

Vienna, Austria. The meeting website is http://meetings.copernicus.

org/egu2006.

CALL FOR GEOSCIENTISTS INTERESTED IN INTERFACE MINERALOGY

Although crystal growth is a central theme in many areas of geosciences, it is surprising that there is relatively little interaction between the“crystal-growth community” and the “geosciences community”. The preoccupation for producing pure and large crystals for crystallographic

study and for industrial applications has gradually distanced the crystal growers from the mineralogists for whom solid solutions, impurities, andthe problems of crystal growth in experimentally difficult geological environments are the norm. However, there is much we can learn from thecrystal-growth community, considering the current geoscience interest in areas such as the mechanisms of crystal growth and dissolution at amolecular level, mineral replacement and reequilibration in a fluid phase, self-assembly of nanoparticles, crystallisation in extreme conditions suchas in space, etc. The development of high-resolution in situ observation systems has also contributed considerably to a better understanding ofcrystal growth mechanisms.

In an attempt to bring together experts in crystal growth and geoscientists interested in phenomena associated with mineral growth and disso-lution processes in nature, we have initiated a series of occasional workshops using the title “Interface Mineralogy”. The first of these was held inSendai, Japan, from 28 to 30 September 2005. The programme of the meeting can be downloaded from www.congre.co.jp/ima2006/index_e.html.

Further meetings are planned, and geoscientists interested in participating and in expanding on our embryonic project are welcome to contactKatsuo Tsukamoto and Andrew Putnis ([email protected] and [email protected]).

Weathering ScienceConsortiumThe WUN Weathering ScienceConsortium is a UK NaturalEnvironment Research Council(NERC) funded grouping of threeUK universities in partnershipwith government agencies andinternational institutions. Thisconsortium is led by StevenBanwart of the University ofSheffield and includes Dr. LianeBenning of the University ofLeeds and Vala Ragnarsdottirof the University of Bristol. Inpartnership with PennsylvaniaState University and otherassociates in the USA, theconsortium hopes to establisha global understanding of howweathering is affected by naturaland human activities.

Research carried out by theconsortium will develop newmethods adopted from nanotech-nology and molecular biology toimprove the management of thewhole life cycle of soil – from itsformation to its depletion. Thescientists will track how plantenergy captured from sunlight isdirected through roots and soilfungi to extract the elements thatnourish ecosystems.

The four university partners areall members of the WorldwideUniversities Network (WUN).The consortium seeks to integrateinternational weathering scienceand funding with a USA bid fora NSF-supported Critical ZoneExploration Network (CZEN).The CZEN will integrate field,laboratory and modellingresearch and many otheractivities from a wide range ofnatural environments on theEarth.

Additional information isavailable at /www.wun.ac.uk/wsc

Mineral Surface Science forNanotechnology (Mission)– Marie Curie Early StageTraining Network This Marie Curie Early StageTraining Network, based at theUniversity of Bristol (UK), aims tounderstand reaction mechanismsand structures of organic andbiogenic molecules on mineralsurfaces, and at the same timeprovide graduate students withspecific scientific and technolog-ical competencies in nanoscalesurface research. MISSION hasbeen conceived to underpin therevolution underway in scienceand technology, based on theability to measure, manipulateand organize matter on thenanoscale (0.1 to 100 billionthsof a meter). This project has beenfunded to provide up to eightthree-year PhD fellowships.

A crucial feature of MISSION isthat it will extend interdiscipli-nary collaborations in nanotech-nology beyond the more usualphysics/chemistry grouping toincorporate mineralogy and Earthsciences. Thus, the MISSIONproject as a whole will help tointegrate diverse techniques ininvestigating a single, but highlycomplex, theme of scientific andtechnological importance.MISSION is led by Vala Ragnars-dottir and includes contributionsfrom Terence McMaster, WaltherSchwartzacher, Geoffrey Allen,and Keith Hallam. It will bringtogether five scientists withcomplementary and overlappingexpertise in a contemporaryresearch field, which will requirethe best inter- and cross-disciplinary interactions.

Further information on thisnetwork can be found atwww.bris.ac.uk/mcest-mission

Mineral Surface Reactivity(MIR) – Marie Curie EarlyStage Training NetworkThe Mineral–fluid InterfaceReactivity (MIR) Early StageTraining Network (EST) bringstogether five research groupslocated in Germany, France,Spain, Denmark, and the UnitedKingdom and offers structuredtraining for students pursuingPhD and Master’s degrees. Fundshave been provided for a total of15 graduate fellowships. Thistraining program is intended toproduce young scientists to fillneeds in industry, consultingengineering firms, regulatoryagencies, and local governments,in addition to academic positions.

The core objective of the MIRnetwork is the training andprofessional development ofyoung scientists in the state-of-the-art field of mineral–fluidreactivity. Mineral–fluid reac-tions, including dissolution,adsorption, nucleation, precipita-tion, and solid-solution forma-tion, are key to solving suchpressing issues as the develop-ment of smart coatings on body

implants or drug-deliverysystems, minimizing risk ingroundwater extraction, saferpesticide application, optimizingCO2 sequestration, assuringdrinking water quality, safestorage of radioactive wasteproducts, and minimizing pollu-tant transport. The ability toaccurately predict reactions inthese systems is of utmostimportance for municipalitiesand for industry in Europe today,but it relies on a detaileddescription of mineral–fluidreactions.

The MIR network is led by EricOelkers (Toulouse) and includesSusan Stipp (Copenhagen),Andrew Putnis (Munster), ManoloPrieto (Oviedo) and LianeBenning (Leeds).


Society News

47

During the past several months, three different European networks

aimed at improving our understanding of various geochemical processes

have been organized and funded. These networks are described below.

EUROPEAN GEOCHEMICAL NEWS BRIEFS

Please send any potential itemsfor inclusion in future ’EURO-PEAN GEOCHEMICAL NEWSBRIEFS’ to Eric Oelkers([email protected])

Mineralogical Society ofGreat Britain and Ireland

Over the last 25 yearsthere has been anunprecedented expansionin analytical techniquesfor investigating mineralsand rocks. As a result newsubjects have been born,such as mineral physics,environmental mineral-ogy and modern geo-chemistry. The trend isfor investigations to gofrom micro- to nano-scales, which are provid-ing new understanding ofthe composition, behav-iour and structure of min-erals. This in turn is lead-ing to new uses for them.If you already have acareer in the mineral sci-ences or are just startingout on one, join the Soci-ety today and contribute

to the development of your science through active participation in theSociety’s meetings, special interest groups, training workshops and pub-lications. The Society has links with a number of national and interna-tional organizations, which are together pushing forward the frontiers ofthe mineral sciences. The Society’s three journals are of a very high stan-dard and are highly respected throughout the world. Member benefitshave never been greater, and yet in real terms we are offering the Soci-ety’s lowest subscription rate ever for ordinary membership at just £55per year.

Membership is open to everyone with a professional interest in the min-eral sciences. Members are generally qualified at least to degree level ina relevant science. The Society welcomes geologists, chemists, biologists,physicists and minerals industry professionals. The Society particularlyencourages student membership. Membership options are flexible, andthe choice of journals included in the membership package nowincludes an online-only option for Mineralogical Magazine and Clay Min-erals. All members receive free access to the essential research toolMINABS Online, which contains over 120,000 abstracts of papers in themineral sciences built up over the past two decades. The preferred mem-bership entry level is as an Ordinary or Student Member. If you, or a col-league, are interested in joining, send for a free information pack andapplication form to: The Executive Secretary, 41 Queen’s Gate, LondonSW7 5HR, United Kingdom or e-mail [email protected]

E L E M E N T S

Society News

48

Dave Lowry is Research Managerand founder of the Stable Isotopeand Atmospheric Laboratories atRoyal Holloway University of Lon-don. Here, as Chair of the Society’sApplied Mineralogy Group, he fol-lows the development of the groupfrom its beginnings in oremicroscopy to interests in a host ofapplications, from pollutant miner-als to forensic mineralogy.

The Applied Mineralogy Group(AMG) was formed in 1963 as a’Committee on Ore Mineralogy’to meet a rapid expansion ofinterest in the chemistry, crystalstructure and optical propertiesof ore minerals. In the early days,it focused on hosting summerschools in ore microscopy. Thegroup maintains close links withthe Commission on Ore Mineral-ogy (COM) and the MineralDeposits Studies Group (MDSG)of the Geological Society, but haswidely diversified its activities toinclude new and expanding areasof applied mineralogy.

The interests of the group nowinclude applications of miner-alogical techniques in the fields

of industrial mineralogy,archaeology, metallurgy,pollutant minerals and forensicmineralogy in addition to thetraditional field of ore mineral-ogy. The group is also involved inthe applications of techniquesspecific to analysis of minerals;for example, it has recently organ-ized conferences or symposia onthe uses of microbeam, laser andisotopic techniques for under-standing mineral formation andcomposition.

The group is involved in theorganisation of two forthcomingmajor three-day conferences. Thefirst is the Fermor Meeting onMinerals, Magmas and Megastruc-tures organised with MDSG andthe Volcanic and MagmaticStudies Group and to be held inLondon in September 2006. Nextyear is the Frontiers in MineralSciences 2007 meeting inCambridge organised jointly bythe Society, MSA and MAC. AMGhas put forward suggestions forscientific sessions related to thepetrogenesis of the North AtlanticIgneous Province and its PGEmineralization.

Each year we normally recruittwo new members to the com-mittee. If your interests fallwithin the broad field outlinedabove and you would like to bepart of this group promotingapplied mineralogy, then pleasecontact the group secretary, ChrisHayward ([email protected]),or David Lowry ([email protected]).

David Lowry

THE SOCIETY’S SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPSTHE APPLIED MINERALOGY GROUP

FEBRUARY 2006

www.minersoc.org

WHY JOIN THE MINSOC?

Mineralogical Society 2006 MedalsLast Call for Nominations

Nominations are being sought from members of the Mineralogical Soci-ety for the 2006 award of the Society’s Schlumberger Medal. This awardis given to recognize scientific excellence in mineralogy and its applica-tions by a key worker. Evidence of such excellence should be in the formof published work by a currently active scientist. Nominations are alsosought from members for the 2006 Max Hey Medal, awarded to recog-nize existing and ongoing research carried out by a young scientist (nor-mally under 35 years at the time of the award). Nominations with sup-porting evidence should be sent to the Mineralogical Society, 41 Queen’sGate, London SW7 5HR, UK, to arrive by 21 April 2006. Recipients of theawards need not be members of the Society. Full details on the awardsand requirements for nomination can be found on the websitewww.minersoc.org under the awards button.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Dr Mark Welch of the MineralogyDepartment of the UK NaturalHistory Museum is to succeedProf. Simon Redfern in June 2006as principal editor of thisrenowned international journalof the mineral sciences. TheSociety’s Council is delighted toendorse this appointment asMark has already played a veryactive role in the journal in recentyears, both as an associate editorand structures editor. In additionhe has acted as guest editor on

highly acclaimed collectionsof thematic papers for bothAmerican Mineralogist andMineralogical Magazine. He is alsoUK representative on the IMACommission on New MineralNames. Mark is a keen researcherand teacher and has authored48 peer-reviewed publications onmineralogy and crystallography.Since 1999 he has been anaffiliate lecturer in crystallogra-phy and mineral sciences atCambridge University. His mainarea of research concerns thestructural and chemical responsesof hydrous minerals at hightemperature and pressure,including cation ordering,hydrogen bonding and phase-transition behaviour. Mark is ascientist of international standingand brings a great breadth ofeditorial experience to this post.The Society wishes him well indeveloping the journal in theyears ahead.


Society News

49

MARK WELCH TO BECOME THE NEXT EDITOROF MINERALOGICAL MAGAZINE

The Clay Minerals Society

IN MEMORY OF JOE WHITEDr. Joe Lloyd White, Emeritus Professor of soilchemistry and mineralogy, Purdue University inWest Lafayette, Indiana, USA, died on October 5,2005, at age 83. He was born and raised in Okla-homa, the son of Claud and Alta (Denney) White.He received both his BS and MS in soil science at

Oklahoma State University, and was awarded his PhD in soil chemistryand mineralogy from the University of Wisconsin under the direction ofProf. M.L. Jackson. He joined the Department of Agronomy at Purdue in1947 and retired in 1988, after a distinguished 41-year career.

His career began in the post–World War II era when new techniques andequipment were emerging to advance scientific knowledge and discov-ery. He recognized the value of new advances in chemistry, such asinfrared spectroscopy, and was a pioneer in bringing them into agron-omy research and environmental molecular science. His research was atthe forefront of soil chemistry and mineralogy, which led to significantimprovements in environmental stewardship and improved crop pro-ductivity. Dr. White developed a highly successful collaboration withDr. Stan Hem in the Pharmacy Department where these ideas wereapplied to research in pharmacy, including studies on antacids, adju-vants for vaccines, antiperspirants, and lake dyes, all based on hydroxy-aluminum compounds.

He was active in dozens of profes-sional societies, including The ClayMinerals Society, the Soil ScienceSociety of America, the AmericanChemical Society, and the AmericanSociety of Agronomy. Throughout hisillustrious career, he received manyawards and honors both in theUnited States and in many othercountries. Among these, he wasappointed Distinguished Member ofThe Clay Mineralogy Society in 1990and he received the Pioneer in Clay

Science Award in 1994, honoring his lifetime scientific achievementsthrough interdisciplinary research.

Dr. White published over 190 papers on a wide range of topics. Eventhough he “officially” retired in 1988, he remained very active, attend-ing scientific meetings and participating in research group meetings. Heserved on the council of The Clay Minerals Society and was a Fellow ofthe Mineralogical Society of America, the American Society of Agron-omy, the Soil Science Society of America, the American Institute ofChemists, the Royal Society of Chemistry, and the American Associationfor the Advancement of Science.

Joe White was devoted to his family. On May 29, 1945 he marriedWanita Irene Robertson. They celebrated their 60th wedding anniversarylast May, with their five children and their families, including elevengrandchildren and one great-grandson. Joe White was a gentle intellec-tual and spiritual giant who was loved by all who knew him. His hum-ble and kind spirit will remain in our hearts forever.

ANNUAL MEETING REMINDER

Make your travel arrangements NOW! Plan to attend the

43rd ANNUAL MEETING of The Clay Minerals Society

to be held jointly with the French Clay Group

(Groupe Français des Argiles), June 3–7, 2006,Oléron Island, France

Located off the French coast in the Bay of Biscay, south ofLa Rochelle and north of the Gironde Estuary, Oléron is thesecond largest French island (after Corsica). Linked to themainland by a bridge, the island and its beaches are apopular destination offering many opportunities: sailing, beachactivities, local specialties, and delicious seafood.

Convenor: Sabine Petit

Website: www.c2s-organisation.com/gfacms06 E-mail: [email protected]

Tel.: 33-(0)5-49-45-37-56

Workshop: Polymer–Clay Nanocomposites, by Faiza Bergayaand Kathleen A. Carrado

TRAVEL

By train

Several Paris–Poitiers direct connections per day by high-speed train (TGV):

• from/to Paris airport (Roissy, Charles de Gaulle – TGVrailway station), travel duration: 2h 30m

• from/to Paris downtown (Montparnasse railway station),travel duration: 1h 30m to 1h 50m

To check the TGV schedules and prices and to book a ticketonline, please consult the SNCF website: www.sncf.fr

By plane

A daily London (Stansted)–Poitiers connection

www.poitiers.cci.fr/aeroport/lignes/ryanair_londres.asp

This should be a fantastic opportunity to visit the famous claylocalities of France (Montmorillon and Nontron). Note that theisland is located just off the Bordeaux region of France, hometo beautiful 17th-century castles and full of history. Plan tobring your family and stay for an early summer vacation.

www.clays.org


Society News

50

Victor Dritsvisited the BobReynold’s Laboratory atDarmouth College, afterBob’s memorial servicein June, 2005.

Joe (left) and Prof. Jim Ahlrichsdemonstrating how an organicmolecule interacts with a clay surface(ca.1960).


Society News

51

Website UpdatePapers from the October 2001issue of Clays and Clay Minerals, aspecial issue on baseline studies ofthe Clay Minerals Society SourceClays, are now available free toall. The decision to make thesefreely available was made at theJune 2005 council meeting, andcurators of the Society’s SourceClays, which are housed atPurdue University, will now beable to direct purchasers ofsamples to the papers online.Go to www.clays.org/sourceclays/SourceClaysCCM.html

Journal HighlightsThe December 2005 issue of Claysand Clay Minerals includes thefollowing papers of interest froma session entitled “MicrobialImpacts on Clay Transformationand Reactivity,” held during the41st annual meeting of theSociety (2004).

Sarah E. Hepinstall, Benjamin F.Turner, and Patricia A. Maurice

Effects of siderophores on Pband Cd adsorption tokaolinite

Nidhi Khare, Carrick M. Eggleston,and David M. Lovelace

Sorption and direct electro-chemistry of mitochondrialcytochrome C on hematitesurfaces

Jin-wook Kim, Yoko Furukawa,Hailiang Dong, and Steven W.Newell

The role of microbial Fe(III)reduction on smectiteflocculation

Evgenya Shelobolina, Sam M.Pickering, and Derek R. Lovley

Iron cycle bacteria fromindustrial clays mined inGeorgia, USA

A full list of the contents in thisand other issues is available athttp://gsccm.highwire.org/ or athttp://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/cms/ccm.

Student Research andTravel Grant Applicationsdue March 20The Clay Minerals Societyannually awards several grants ofup to $2500 through its studentresearch grant program.

PurposeThe research grant program isdesigned to provide partialfinancial support to graduatestudents doing master’s anddoctoral research in clay scienceand technology.

Selection CriteriaApplications will be judged on acompetitive basis. The qualifica-tions of the applicant and theobjectives, design, and financialneed of the project are evaluated.Applicants selected will benominated by a five-memberCMS committee and approvedby the CMS Council. The grantawarded for the best proposaleach year is named the Robert C.Reynolds Jr. Research Award.Awards will be made bySeptember 1, 2006.

Travel grants can be requestedfor up to $500 per grant forintracontinental travel or $1000for intercontinental travel toattend the CMS meeting. Fundscan be used to pay for: (1)meeting registration at thestudent rate, (2) field trip(s) thatare part of the meeting, (3) CMSbanquet ticket, (4) premeetingworkshop, (5) travel, and (6)lodging.

www.clays.org/home/awards/HomeAwardsAndGrantsSRG.html

CMS NEWS AND REMINDERS3rd EUROPEAN WORKSHOP IN CLAY GEOSCIENCES

CHARACTERIZATION OF SOLID–WATER INTER-FACE REACTIONS OF METALS AND ACTINIDESON CLAYS AND CLAY MINERALS

March 14–15, 2006University of Jena (Germany), Geoscience Department

The 3rd European Workshop of Clay Geosciences (ACTINET work-shop) will focus on improving our understanding of solid–water

interactions and will be of particular interest to those dealing withremediation of contaminated sites. Water–solid reactions are of wide-spread interest because they are fundamental to a large number ofgeochemical processes. Our understanding of processes that occur atthe solid–water interface has dramatically increased over the past sev-eral years. This is largely due to the application of new or improvedexperimental techniques. Many of these techniques will be covered,including time-resolved laser fluorescence laser spectroscopy, whichallows the in situ measurement of the binding form of trivalentactinides, and use of synchrotron radiation sources, which enables insitu identification of the species at mineral surfaces in the presence ofreacting solutions.

ORGANIZED BY

Dr. Andreas BauerInstitut für Nukleare EntsorgungForschungszentrum KarlsruhePostfach 3640D-76021 Karlsruhee-mail: [email protected].: ++ 49 (0) 7247/82-6293Fax: ++ 49 (0) 7247/82-3927

The Clay Minerals Society offers areduced student membership rateof only $15 per year, entitlingstudents to:

p a subscription to Clays and ClayMinerals®, a leading journal inthe field of clay science

p online access to Clays and ClayMinerals®

p for North Americans, freemembership in AIPEA, theinternational clay organization

p awards for best student papersand posters presented at theannual meeting

p the Source Clays Project,which provides homogenousclay samples for researchpurposes

p member discounts on publi-cations of CMS and MSA

p discounts on selected books ofinterest to clay scientists fromother publishers

p the most up-to-date informa-tion on the society’s latestpublications and registrationmaterials for the annual CMSconference, includingworkshops and field trips

p free subscription to Elements

The Marilyn and Sturges W.Bailey Distinguished MemberAward is the highest honor ofThe Clay Minerals Society (CMS).It is awarded solely for scientificeminence in clay mineralogy (inits broadest sense) as evidencedprimarily by the publication ofoutstanding original scientificresearch and by the impact ofthis research on the clay sciences.This award is not restricted tomembers of CMS.

The Pioneer in Clay ScienceLecture recognizes researchcontributions that have led toimportant new directions in clayminerals science and technology.

The George W. Brindley Lecturerecognizes a clay scientist whowill infuse the society with newideas, someone who is both adynamic speaker and involved ininnovative research. Dr. Brindleyhimself approved the concept of

the lecture, and the speakershould deliver a lecture thatBrindley himself would applaud.

The Marion L. and Chrystie M.Jackson Mid-Career ClayScientist Award recognizes mid-career scientists for excellence inthe contribution of new knowl-edge to clay minerals sciencethrough original and scholarlyresearch. The awardee is to bewithin the ages of 39 and 60.

Nominations for all awardsconsist of a cover letter from thenominator, a curriculum vitae,and at least two supporting letters.Details for electronic submissionare at: www.clays.org/home/awards/HomeAwardsAndGrants.html

STUDENT MEMBERSHIP

Awards Nominations Solicited for the March 1 Deadline

FOR REGISTRATION SEE:www.igw.uni-jena.de/ahgeol/Workshops/actinet.html

The gathering of six council members and one working group chairmanat the Geological Society of America meeting in Salt Lake City allowedan informal meeting of IAGC officers on 17 October, 2005. Some high-lights of the meeting were:

• A report on the operation of the IAGC business office for the last 6months was tabled.

• Applied Geochemistry is healthy, receiving about 21 papers permonth and with a higher page count (~2500 for 2005).

• Two IAGC-sponsored sessions (on oil and gas exploration, and traceelements in the environment) were held at the GSA.

• An IAGC booth was set up and staffed by the business officemanager at the GSA; 35 new members were signed up.

• Future support for Goldschmidt 2006 was discussed.

• IAGC awards will be given at Goldschmidt 2006.

More details can be found in the next IAGC Newsletter (December 2005).

Russ HarmonVice President, IAGC


Society News

52

www.iagc.ca

International Associationof GeoChemistry

COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS AT GSA

Geochemical Training inDeveloping CountriesWorking Group On October 18, 2005, the UnitedStates and India signed a majorscience cooperation agreement.Under the terms of this agree-ment, a cooperative project isbeing planned whose objectivewill be to develop harmonious,ecologically sustainable, economi-cally viable and people-participa-tory strategies for the manage-ment of environments in thecoastal zones of India. This willinvolve not only designing

preparedness systems for environ-mental problems expected toarise, but also to roll back theexisting environmental degrada-tion. The cooperation is expectedto involve R&D and training inthe fields of data assimilation andtechnology transfer. The workinggroup will use remote sensing tomonitor riparian communities,stream flow, hyperspectral imag-ing of soils, biogeochemicalprocesses, ecosystem modelingand soil moisture.

U. AswathanarayanaWG Chairman

MEETINGS AND MORE MEETINGS!

The past year has seen IAGC take a prominent role in the organization

or funding of several meetings, including the Goldschmidt Conference

in Moscow, Idaho, USA; GES-7 (“Geochemistry of the Earth’s Surface”)

in Aix-en-Provence, France; AIG-6 (“Applied Isotope Geochemistry”) in

Prague; and the GSA (Geological Society of America) meeting, Salt Lake

City, Utah, USA.

The year 2006 promises to be more of the same, with ISEG-7 (“Interna-

tional Symposium on Environmental Geochemistry”) in Beijing (25–30

September), the Goldschmidt Conference in Melbourne, Australia (27

August–1 September) and GSA in Philadelphia. (22–25 October). The

IAGC hopes to be at all these meetings, so look out for our booth and

enter the free draws!

To contact IAGC, write to us at [email protected] or visit our website

www.iagc.ca. Alternatively, we still accept snail-mail at P.O. Box 501,

Pinawa, Manitoba R0E 1L0, Canada.

Mel GascoyneBusiness Office Manager and Newsletter Editor

WORKING GROUP ACTIVITIES

CALL FOR NOMINATIONS FOR AWARDS

The IAGC is pleased to invite nominations for the following awards,to be given in 2006:• The VERNADSKY MEDAL, for a distinguished record of scientific

accomplishment in geochemistry• The EBELMEN AWARD, to a geochemist of particular merit and

outstanding promise who is less than 35 years old at the timeof nomination

• CERTIFICATES OF RECOGNITION, for outstanding scientificaccomplishments in geochemistry, for excellence in geochem-istry-related teaching or public service, or for meritorious serviceto the IAGC or the international scientific community

Nominations can be made only by IAGC members in good standing.They should be submitted before 31 January 2006 to the IAGC Busi-ness Office (Box 501, Pinawa, Manitoba R0E 1L0, Canada). For theVernadsky Medal and the Ebelmen Award, a letter of nominationmust be accompanied by a curriculum vitae and list of the nominee’spublications. Four (Vernadsky) or three (Ebelmen) letters of supportshould be provided. Two of these letters must be from IAGC mem-bers in good standing, and not more than two may be from personsresiding in the same country as the nominee.

Jan KramersChairman, IAGC Awards Committee

IAGC provides funding supportfor meetings organized by itsworking groups and for otherrequests on a case-by-case basis.Recently, Council decided thatspecific requirements must bemet by those applying to IAGCfor funding support:

• The business office willprovide meeting organizerswith advertising material, andthe organizers will ensure thateach participant receives anIAGC information leaflet andmembership application form.

• The Executive Editor of theAssociation’s journal, AppliedGeochemistry, has ‘first right ofrefusal’ regarding the publica-tion of the conference

proceedings. The organizer ofeach meeting shall, uponreceipt of the notice ofmeeting support from IAGC,contact the Executive Editor ofApplied Geochemistry regardingpublication of the meetingproceedings or a subset ofconference papers beforeconsidering any otherpublication alternative. Failureto do so will result in with-drawal of IAGC financialsupport for the meeting.

Applications for support shouldbe sent to the appropriate work-ing group chairman (see websitefor topics and addresses).

Attila DeményIAGC Secretary

IAGC SUPPORT FOR MEETINGS

In the last 25 years, since thehypothesis that a bolide impactled to the demise of dinosaurswas first put forward, the studyof large biotic extinctions hasbecome an increasingly interdisci-plinary endeavour. A case inpoint is the flurry of research onthe end-Triassic, which marksone of the Big Five extinctions.IGCP 458, a five-year projectdevoted to the Triassic–Jurassicboundary events, held its 5th

Field Workshop in September2005 in Tata (Hungary) andHallein (Austria).

A full day of presentations andfour days of field excursions, splitbetween Hungary and Austria,were attended by 44 scientistsfrom 13 countries. Oral papersand posters reflected the diversityof approaches used to unravelcauses and effects of the environ-mental and biotic crises some 200million years ago. Geochemicalmethods play an increasinglyimportant role in this detectivework, as extinction studies are nolonger an arena for paleontolo-gists alone.

Among the geochemicallyoriented papers, Anthony Cohenreported on how short-termchanges in Sr and Os isotopicratios in seawater, preserved inthe sedimentary rock record, areused to monitor sudden changesin weathering rates. Thesechanges are attributed to theclimatic effect of coeval volcan-ism of the Central AtlanticMagmatic Province. Florian Böhmet al. also discussed the expectedeffect of CAMP volcanism, in thecontext of the demise of reefs andcarbonate producers. Increased

delivery of Cafrom weatheringcombined withprevailing low sealevel could lead toalteration of theoceanic Ca budgetand Ca isotopiccomposition.

One of the most intensivelyresearched topics is stable isotopeevolution across the Triassic–Jurassic boundary. Perturbationsof the global carbon cycle andtemperature maxima have beendocumented before on the basisof δ13C and δ18O anomalies. Newresults appear to confirm andrefine the isotopic patterns. Thestudied sections span the globefrom Hungary (Attila Demény),through Italy and England(Cristoph Korte et al.) to Canada,USA and New Zealand (KenWilliford). The negative carbonisotope anomaly at the boundarywas again demonstrated at highresolution from Hungary andusing low-Mg shell carbonatefrom England, whereas new datafrom Canada suggest that it wasfollowed by a large positiveanomaly in the earliest Jurassic.Biomarker studies from a NewZealand section may provide newconstraints for the extinctionscenarios.

Interpretation of the isotopicsignal is much debated. Methanerelease from gas hydrate dissocia-tion, driven by volcanicallyinduced climate warming, is oneof the more popular models thatneeds further testing. Unlike theCretaceous–Paleogene boundary,there is far less evidence for apossible impact at the

Triassic–Jurassic boundary,although the search continues.Larry Tanner reported a modestiridium enrichment at the T–Jboundary in eastern Canada,although he proposed that bothmantle-derived and extraterres-trial sources could be responsiblefor the PGE anomaly, and themultiple peaks may also bearevidence for diagenetic remobi-lization in mudrocks.

Discussions that started in theconference room were continuedat the outcrops. The field tripsvisited the Triassic–Jurassicboundary sections at Csovár(Hungary) and Kendlbachgrabenand Tiefengraben (Austria), siteswhere new stable isotope datahave been obtained recently.Literally, the high point wasclimbing to the top of Steinplatte(1869 m), arguably the world’smost spectacular Late Triassicreef, in the Alps. It proved to be aprime location to discuss the

crash of reef ecosystems, aprominant feature of the end-Triassic extinction.

A workshop of this size andformat effectively promotesinformal discussion among theparticipants. Credit for thesmooth organization and

insightful leadership on the fieldtrip goes to József Pálfy, PéterOzsvárt and János Haas inHungary and Leo Krystyn inAustria. The abstracts and fieldguide volume containing nearly100 pages is a valuable source ofinformation and can be down-loaded from the project websiteat www.paleo.cortland.edu/IGCP458. József Pálfy, co-organizer of IGCP Project 458 isalso thanked for contributing tothis report.

Attila DeményIAGC Secretary


Society News

53

Group of participants on the Steinplattesummit, an uppermost Triassic reefcomplex.

FEATURE ARTICLE: GEOCHEMISTRY AND END-TRIASSIC EXTINCTION

Aspecial session entitled “Isotopic and Chemical Approaches for Under-standing the Sources, Transport, and Biogeochemical Cycling of

Solutes in Aquatic Systems” will be held at the GAC-MAC 2006 annualmeeting in Montreal, May 14–17, 2006. The session will address recentadvances in the application of isotope ratios as biogeochemical and/orhydrological tracers in both freshwater and marine environments. Moredetails can be found at http://www.gacmac 2006.ca

Moritz Lehmannand Ian Clark

Close-up of a ~205 Ma-old coral reef.Corals were severely affected by the end-Triassic extinction.

The IAGC Secretary, Attila Demény, recently joined an

IGCP Field Workshop to find geochemical evidence for

the causes of the end-Triassic extinction in boundary

sections of Hungary and Austria. He describes some of

the workshop activities below.

UPCOMING MEETING OF INTEREST


Society News

54

Mineralogical Society of America FROM THE PRESIDENT

News from the Annual MeetingThe MSA presence at GSA was strong this year, as usual. In addition tothe well-attended technical sessions, we sponsored a short course enti-tled “Low-Temperature Thermochronology” (convened by Peter Reinersand Todd Ehlers), and gathered for the annual luncheon. The awardsand lectures were highlights of the meeting:

Ho-kwang (David) Maoreceived the 2005Roebling Medal andpresented the RoeblingLecture, “Four Decadesof High-PressureMineralogy.”

Robin P. Brett receivedthe 2005 DistinguishedPublic Service Medalin absentia for his“extraordinary servicesto national or interna-tional science societies,”which include theUSGS, NASA, NSF,NAS/NRC, IUGG,and IUGS.

Tiziana Boffa Ballaranreceived the 2005 MSAAward and presentedthe MSA Award Lecture,“Local Strain Hetero-geneity in Mineral SolidSolutions: The Relation-ship between LineBroadening in IRSpectra and ExcessEnthalpy.”

Robert Hazen gave theMSA President’s Lecture,“Minerals, MolecularSelection, and the Originof Life.”

The highly popular MSA Lecturer series has been expanded to includemore institutions worldwide. Next year, two of the lecturers will visit atotal of eight universities in Europe. We thank last year’s lecturers, JohnHanchar, Rod Ewing, and Bernie Wood, and look forward to the2005–2006 talks: “Volcanoes in the Lab” and “Salts on Mars” by PennyKing, “From Microscopic to Macroscopic” and “History Written inStone” by Patrick O’Brien, “Subduction through the Transition Zone”and “High-Pressure Minerals in Meteorites” by Thomas Sharp.

p The 2005 MSA elections wererun, for the first time, on theWeb. The 2006 president of theSociety is John W. Valley, our2006 vice president is BarbDutrow, and in his second termas secretary is George Harlow.John M. Hughes, treasurer,remains in office, and the newcouncilors are Roberta Rudnickand Simon Redfern. They join thecontinuing councilors DavidLondon, Mickey Gunter, RossJohn Angel, and Robert T. Downs.MSA thanks the outgoing coun-cilors Barb Dutrow and RebeccaLange for three years of dedicatedservice to the Society. A total of709 ballots were received (28.5%of those eligible) by the August 1deadline. This is the highestnumber of voters since 1995when 713 members voted. Thislevel of participation has beenconsistent for some time. Evenin the early years of the Society(1920s–1930s) the number ofvoting members seldom reached50%. Voting was more complexat that time because the fellowswere on the ballot as well.

p Accepting the recommenda-tions of the respective awardcommittees, the MSA Council hasselected W. Gary Ernst as the2006 Roebling Medalist, Daniel

Frost as the 2006 MSA Awardee,and Frank Spear as the 2007 DanaMedalist. The DistinguishedPublic Service Medal is biennialwith no awardee for 2006.

p The 2006 Kraus Crystallo-graphic Research Grant recipientis Jason Bryan Burt for the study“Theoretical and experimentaldetermination of potential sitesfor protonation in nominallyanhydrous minerals,” which willbe conducted at VirginiaPolytechnic Institute and StateUniversity. The 2006 Mineral-ogy/Petrology Research Grantrecipients are Angelo Antignanofor the proposal “Rutile, apatite,and zircon solubility in silicate-bearing fluids: Implications forHFSE and REE mobility insubduction zones,” which will becarried out at the University ofCalifornia, Los Angeles, andGregory Dumond for the study“What are we dating?: Linkingzircon growth to metamorphicreactions in high-pressure maficgranulites,” which will be carriedout at the University of Massa-chusetts–Amherst.

p All 2004 and 2005 MSAmembers have been contacted bymail, electronically, or both aboutrenewing their membership for

www.minsocam.org

2005 Roebling Medalist Ho-kwang (David) Mao withMSA president Robert Hazen (left) and citationistCharles T. Prewitt.

Left to right: 2005 MSA President Bob Hazen, 2005MSA Award Recipient Tiziana Boffa Ballaran, andcitationist Ross Angel.

Last fall, I had thepleasure of writing tomany of you inappreciation of yourdonations to MSA in2005 and I look forwardto writing more in thefuture. Our Societydepends on thegenerous and dedicatedmembers who give bothtime and money. Thissupport provides theextra margin to enablespecial programs likestudent awards, thewebsite, and the lectureprogram. Furthermore,in these uncertain times

when rapidly improving technology is reshaping the publicationenvironment, MSA may need to call on its members to ensure thestability of American Mineralogist and our other important publications.

John W. ValleyPresident

NOTES FROM CHANTILLY

Left to right: 2006 MSA President John Valleyreceiving the MSA presidential gavel from 2005 MSAPresident Bob Hazen.

The Society is pleased to announce and congratulate the following new Fellows:

Yong-Fei Zheng w Donna Whitney w Frederick J. Ryersonw Simona Quartieri w Clark M. Johnson w Reto Gierew John FitzGerald w Randall T. Cygan w Joel Brugger

w John Brodholt w Lynn Boatner

The slate of candidates for theMSA Council elections is:

PRESIDENT

Barb Dutrow

VICE PRESIDENT

(one to be selected)Jonathan Stebbins

Peter Heaney

TREASURER

John M. Hughes

COUNCILLORS

(two to be selected)Jay Bass

Klaus MezgerJean Morrison

John Parise

George E. Harlow continuesin office as secretary. Continu-ing councillors are Ross JohnAngel, Robert T. Downs,Roberta L. Rudnick, andSimon A.T. Redfern.Election materials will beavailable to MSA members inApril in time for the votingdeadline of August 1, 2006.

Up-to-date readers of AmericanMineralogist already know that2005 was a terrific year for thejournal, with many landmarkpapers, such as Cornelis Klein’spresidential address aboutPrecambrian banded iron-formations, Douglas Rumble’spresidential address aboutatmospheric photochemistry,and a review paper by Papike etal. on comparative planetarymineralogy. The journal also hada special section in April aboutmonazite geochronology andanother in May/June thathonored W.G. Ernst.

But even the most devoted readerprobably doesn’t know what abanner year this was for the

journal—in the midst of theupheaval of an office move, newsoftware, new staff, new editors,and the launch of GeoScience-World (http://ammin.geoscienceworld.org), we published a totalof 1972 pages, over a hundredmore than last year and one ofthe largest totals ever. We alsohad more color pages than ever,well over 60 pages. In fact colorin the journal in the last coupleof years has increased 1200%because the more authors thatwant color, the more they canband together and share thecosts.

Rachel RussellManaging Editor,

American Mineralogist


NEW MSA FELLOWS

MSA 2006 ELECTIONRECENTLY IN AMERICAN MINERALOGIST

Society News

55

2006. If you have not renewedyour MSA membership, please doso. If you have not received anotice by the time you read this,please contact the MSA businessoffice. You can also renew onlineat any time.

p As of September 30, 2005, thetotal membership in the societywas 2187, which represents adecrease of 87 from last year,mostly among regular members.70% of MSA members subscribedto the journal in some form in2005, which is up from 66% in2004. There were 764 institu-tional subscriptions, a decreaseof 27 from 2004, and part of acontinuing decline since 1983.

p With The Lattice, MSA wouldhave included in the first issueafter the annual meeting thesecretary and treasurer reportsthat were presented at the MSAannual business meeting detailingthe year’s past events for themembers. With the advent ofElements, it was decided that thesewould be posted online. Theymay be viewed on the MSAwebsite by selecting “OfficerReports” under “The Society.”

J. Alex SpeerMSA Executive Director

[email protected]

NOTES FROM ST. LOUIS

Geochemical Society

http://gs.wustl.edu

Changes to the Board of Directors in 2006Of the 17 positions on the Geochemical Society’s Board of Directors,

four members have rotated off in 2006. They are Judith McKenzie (ETH

Zentrum), Michael Whiticar (University of Victoria), Gilbert Hanson

(Stony Brook University), and Harry Elderfield (University of Cam-

bridge). Susan Brantley has stepped up as GS president, while Tim Drever

has replaced Judith as past president. The four incoming members of the

Board of Directors are:

Marty Goldhaber – Vice President(2006–2007)Martin Goldhaber received his BSc in chemistry(1968) and PhD in geochemistry (1973), both fromUCLA. After spending a year as a post doc at Yale,he joined the USGS in 1975. He is currently a sen-ior scientist at the USGS, where he received theDepartment of the Interior’s Meritorious ServiceAward and recently served a term as the chief sci-entist for geology. Marty has been a member of the

Geochemical Society since 1972 and has been involved in the Society ina number of roles, most recently as program chair. He is a fellow of theGeological Society of America and the Society of Economic Geologists.Marty has served on the editorial boards of Economic Geology, AmericanJournal of Science, and Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta (two terms) andhas served on advisory boards for the Geological Society of America, theOcean Drilling Program, NASA, and NSF. Marty’s research interests haveevolved during his career. His early work was on the biogeochemistry ofsulfur in modern marine sediments. After joining the USGS, he appliedthese perspectives towards understanding the origin of sediment-hostedore deposits. This interest in ore genesis led to a focus on large-scalecrustal fluid flow processes that not only lead to the formation of someore types, but also impact the modern environment by enriching shal-low crustal rocks with potentially toxic constituents. His research thenevolved into the study of the environmental impacts of these crustalflow processes. He is currently co-chief of a USGS project to map the inor-ganic and selected organic constituents in soils of the US, and togetherwith the Canadian and Mexican geological surveys, all of North America.

Mark McCaffrey – Organic GeochemistryDivision Chairman (2006–2007)Mark McCaffrey received his BA in geological sci-ences (1985) from Harvard University, magna cumlaude with highest honors, and his PhD in geo-chemistry (1990) in the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology and Woods Hole Oceanographic Insti-tution joint program. Before he co-founded Oil-Tracers LLC, Mark spent ten years at Chevron andArco solving a variety of oil exploration and

production problems. Mark holds the titles of Registered Geologist inCalifornia, Professional Geoscientist in Texas, and Certified Petroleum

Geologist from the AAPG. He is a senior or co-author of 30 articles onpetroleum exploration, reservoir management, oil biodegradation, haz-ardous waste remediation, paleoenvironmental reconstruction, andmarine chemistry. Mark was the 1995 recipient of the Pieter SchenckAward from the European Association of Organic Geochemists for “out-standing work on biomarkers in relation to paleoenvironmental studiesand petroleum exploration.” In 1998, with project team members, Markreceived the Arco Award of Excellence “for developing a new charge andmigration model for the Brookian petroleum system, allowing improvedcharge risk assessment for prospects on the Central North Slope ofAlaska.” Mark was a 2001–2002 Distinguished Lecturer for the Society ofPetroleum Engineers, and was the chairman of the 2002 Gordon Con-ference on organic geochemistry.

Yaoling Niu – Director (2006–2008) Yaoling Niu is a professor of Earth sciences atDurham University, UK. He obtained a BSc degreein geology in 1982 (Lanzhou University, China), anMS degree in economic geology in 1988 (Universityof Alabama, USA), and a PhD degree in marine geol-ogy and geophysics in 1992 (University of Hawai‘i,USA). Yaoling’s research uses petrology and geo-chemistry as a means to understanding how theEarth works on all scales today and how it did in the

past. He has published over 60 refereed papers in leading Earth sciencejournals. He has been honored with guest professorships by several Chi-nese universities (China University of Geosciences in Beijing, NorthwestUniversity in Xi’an, Nanjing University, and Peking University), andhonored as an Outstanding Overseas Chinese Scientist by the ChineseNational Science Foundation. He has recently taken the leadership as thechairman of the IUGS Commission on Solid Earth Composition andEvolution (SECE). Dr. Niu also serves as an executive editor of the Chi-nese Science Bulletin and is on the editorial board of Earth Science Frontiersand the Geological Journal of China Universities. (http://www.dur.ac.uk/yaoling.niu/index.htm)

Andreas Luttge – Director (2006–2008)Andreas Luttge’s research focuses on the processesthat govern fluid–mineral or fluid–rock interactionsfrom low-temperature conditions to the pressuresand temperatures of the deep crust. He is particu-larly interested in the participation of microorgan-isms in these processes. His work includes variousexperimental and modeling techniques, which heapplies to questions of mineral reactions in sedi-mentary basins, weathering, the fate of nanoparti-

cles in the environment, atmospheric and global change, environmen-tal pollution, hydrothermal systems, and the containment of radioactivewastes. Luttge received his PhD in 1990 from the University of Tübingen(Germany), spent three years as a Humboldt fellow and associateresearch scientist at Yale University, and currently holds a doubleappointment as associate professor of Earth science and chemistry atRice University.


Society News

GEOCHEMICAL SOCIETY–RELATED QUESTIONSOR COMMENTS?

Send them to the Geochemical Society Business Office:

Seth Davis, Business ManagerTel.: 314-935-4131

Fax: 314-935-4121

E-mail: [email protected]

Website: http://gs.wustl.edu

2006 GOLDSCHMIDT ABSTRACT DEADLINEFAST APPROACHING

April 13, 2006 is the deadline to submit abstracts for the 2006Melbourne Goldschmidt Conference.

For more information on abstract guidelines as well as programs,field trips, events, and exhibits, visit the conference website at:http://www.goldschmidt2006.org/

ARE YOU INTERESTED IN HOSTING A GOLDSCHMIDT?

The Board of Directors will be examining bids for the 2009 and2010 Goldschmidt Conferences during the 2006 annual boardmeeting on August 26, in Melbourne. If you, your university, oryour city are interested in submitting a bid, please contact the GSBusiness Office.

Susan L. Brantley, PRESIDENT

(Pennsylvania State University)Marty Goldhaber, VICE

PRESIDENT (USGS–Denver)James “Tim” Drever, PAST

PRESIDENT (University ofWyoming)Jeremy B. Fein, SECRETARY

(University of Notre Dame)Youxue Zhang, TREASURER

(University of Michigan)Malcolm McCulloch,INTERNATIONAL SECRETARY

(Australian National University)Mark McCaffrey, OGDCHAIRMAN (Oiltracers, LLC)Trudy Dickneider, OGDSECRETARY (University of Scranton)Scott A. Wood, SPECIAL

PUBLICATIONS EDITOR (Universityof Idaho)

Frank A. Podosek, GCAEXECUTIVE EDITOR (WashingtonUniversity)Johnson Haas, GEOCHEMICAL

NEWS CO-EDITOR (WesternMichigan University)Carla Koretsky, GEOCHEMICAL

NEWS CO-EDITOR (WesternMichigan University)Margaret “Peggy”Delaney, DIRECTOR (Universityof California–Santa Cruz)Patricia M. Dove, DIRECTOR

(Virginia Polytechnic Institute)Laurie Reisberg, DIRECTOR

(CRPG–Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy)Vincent J. Salters, DIRECTOR

(Florida State University)Yaoling Niu, DIRECTOR

(Durham University)Andreas Luttge, DIRECTOR

(Rice University)


Society News

57

THE 2006 GEOCHEMICAL SOCIETY BOARD OF DIRECTORS

GS01 Geochemical Society General ContributionsGS02 Depleted Uranium Aerosols in the Surface Environment:

Transport, Geochemical Speciation, and Implicationsfor Human Health

Sessions presented jointly with AGUU02 Thermodynamic Variables in Magmatic and Metamorphic

Processes in the Terrestrial Planets: Theoretical, Experimental,and Observational Constraints

U06 Atmospheric, Climatic, and Biological Evolution at both Endsof the Proterozoic Eon

U07 Evolution of the AndesU08 Fluids in the EarthU11 Microanalysis: Small Beams, Big Science (invited presentations only)

Sessions presented jointly with MSAM01 Mineralogy and the Nuclear Fuel Cycle—The 2006 Dana

SymposiumM03 Spectroscopy in Mineralogy: Theory and Experiment

Sessions presented jointly with Mineral and Rock PhysicsMR01 Mineral and Rock Physics General Contributions

Sessions presented jointly with the Microbeam Analysis SocietyMB01 General Contributions to Microanalysis in the Earth SciencesMB02 From Earth to Mars and Beyond

Sessions presented jointly with HydrologyH11 Water Quality of Hydrologic Systems (posters)H17 Chemical and Isotopic Tracing of Contaminated GroundwaterH24 Scale Issues of Catchment Hydrology and Biogeochemistry

Sessions presented jointly with Volcanology, Geochemistry, and Petrology

V02 Origin, Behavior, and the Role of Magmatic Sulfur in TerrestrialPlanets: Theoretical, Experimental, and Observational Constraints

V04 Evolution of the Early EarthV05 Tracing Deep-Earth Processes with Light Elements: Insights

into the Evolution of the Crust, the Mantle, and Magmas fromB, Li and Be Isotope and Abundance Systematics

V08 Sulfur in the Earth System: Insights into the Evolution ofSurface Environments and Secrets of the Deep Earth

V09 Biosignatures: Distinguishing Biology from Abiological Look-AlikesV10 Frontiers of Hydrothermal Geochemistry: Organic–Inorganic

Interactions from Deep Crust to Volcanic SystemsV11 Earth’s Carbon Cycle: Sources, Recycling Pathways, and

Geochemical Evolution

Biogeosciences.org is an innovative non-commercial websitebridging the Earth and life sciences. Developed by the the Geological Soci-ety of America (GSA) and its partnered professional societies, including theGeochemical Society, it provides a single resource for all things related tobiogeoscience. Released in June 2004, the site has continued to grow andexpand, becoming a natural home for biogeoscience discussion,resources, and promotion. Biogeosciences.org is supported by a grantfrom the biogeosciences program of the National Science Foundation.

The site offers biogeoscience links and program resources for children, stu-dents, undergraduates, and teachers; information on job openings, fund-ing opportunities, and degree programs; interviews with people working

in the biogeosciences and links to useful publications and articles; a calendarof biogeoscience-related meetings, field trips, workshops, and symposiafrom around the world.

Biogeosciences.org also offers an interactive component. People are ableto submit material of interest to the biogeosciences community, or addtheir names and research interests to a growing list of biogeoscientists. Adiscussion forum allows for sharing of ideas and opinions, as well as anopportunity to ask questions. Pictures are exchanged freely for educationalpurposes in the image gallery.

Any inquiries (including submission of material for posting) should bedirected to Sarah Leibson ([email protected]), Website Coordinator,Biogeosciences.org.

GEOCHEMICAL SOCIETY–SPONSORED SPECIALSESSIONS AT THE SPRING AGU MEETING

BALTIMORE, MD, MAY 23–26

DO YOU DIG ROCKS AND LOVE LIFE?

MAC is sponsoring three specialsessions and one symposium atits upcoming annual meetingMontreal 2006.

Alkaline Igneous Systems:Dissecting Magmatic toHydrothermal MineralizingProcessesThis symposium will explore theentire range of processes involvedin the generation, evolution,association, and mineralizationof alkaline rocks of both plutonicand volcanic association. Theconvenors, David Lentz (Univer-sity of New Brunswick), AndréLalonde (University of Ottawa),Stefano Salvi (LMTG, Toulouse),and Jeanne Paquette (McGillUniversity), have invited severalkeynote speakers, includingNelson Eby (University ofMassachusetts), Anthony Mariano(consultant), Dima Kamenetsky(University of Tasmania), Ilya V.Veksler (GeoForschungsZentrumPotsdam, Germany), AlexanderM. Dorfman and Donald B.Dingwell (Ludwig-MaximillianUniversity, Munich, Germany).

Advances in Micro- andNanoscale Characterizationand Analysis of EarthMaterialsThis session will highlight recentadvances in micro- and nanoscaletechniques and their applicationto the study of selected regionsin amorphous and crystallinematerials. Presentations will focuson the analysis and imaging of(1) inclusions (glass, devitrifiedglass, and fluid) in minerals, (2)experimental run products, and(3) zones and intergrowths inaccessory minerals. ConvenorsAlan Anderson (St. Francis XavierUniversity) and Penny King(University of Western Ontario)have invited two plenarylecturers: Richard Wirth (GFZPotsdam, Germany) will talk onhis recent work on nanoscalecharacterization of inclusions indiamonds using the focused ionbeam and TEM, and RobertMayanovic (Missouri StateUniversity) will present on XAFSanalysis of high-field-strengthelements in hydrous silicate meltsand aqueous fluids.

The Earth’s Mantle:New Insights fromDiamonds and MantleXenoliths Convened by Maya Kopylova(University of British Columbia)and Don Francis (McGillUniversity), this special sessionwill feature Dr. Larry Barron(Geological Survey of New SouthWales, Australia) as plenaryspeaker. His talk will bear onidentifying the parentage ofalluvial diamonds using newtechniques that are able todiscriminate between ultrahighpressure, mobile zone, cratonic,and transition zone diamonds.

Metamorphism, CrustalFluids, and ExperimentalPetrology: A Tribute toGeorge SkippenThis special session, convenedby Dan Marshall (Simon FraserUniversity), Fred Ford (Inco), andJo-Anne Goodwin Bell (CarletonUniversity), will honor GeorgeSkippen, one of Canada’sforemost metamorphic petrolo-gists. Guest speaker Greg Dipplefrom the University of BritishColumbia will talk aboutcarbonate phase diagrams andtheir application to CO2 (green-house gas) remediation. AsSkippen published early on aboutcarbonates, especially thermome-try and the application of phasediagrams in the metamorphismof calc-silicate rocks, it will be anice transition from the earlyexperimental work of Skippen tothe modern-day applications ofpetrology.

MAC will also sponsor two specialsessions on weathering in thesolar system at the 2006 Gold-schmidt Conference: “Aqueousand Space Weathering ofAsteroids, the Moon and Mars”and “Spectroscopic Analyses ofAqueous Weathering Products inthe Solar System.” Both sessionsare convened by Penny King,University of Western Ontario,and Tom Sharp, Arizona StateUniversity.

MAC will also be a sponsor of theGeofluids V Conference (www.geofluids5.org), to be held inWindsor next May, immediatelyafter the GAC–MAC conference .


Society News

58

www.mineralogicalassociation.ca

The Mineralogical Association of Canada awarded its 2005–2006 Foun-dation Scholarship to Jason Mackenzie from the University of Victoria.This scholarship is awarded annually to a student in the second year ofan MSc program or the second or third year of a PhD program.

Jason Mackenzie comes from southwest-ern Nova Scotia, and his interest in geol-ogy began when he became the inaugu-ral president of the James HuttonGeology Club at age 14. Jason com-pleted his BSc (geology) at Acadia Uni-versity in 1996. Later that year, hestarted working on his MSc thesis withDr. Dante Canil at the University of Vic-toria, where he studied kimberlite-hosted mantle xenoliths from the SlaveProvince. Jason worked in diamond

exploration in the Canadian Arctic and Finland from 1997 to 2001.Seeking a new challenge, he has since been working on developing acrystal growth process with Redlen Technologies in Victoria, BC. Exper-imenting with semiconductor crystal growth prompted him to pursue aPhD in experimental petrology under Dante Canil.

Jason’s research seeksto answer questionsregarding how, and atwhat rate, volatile ele-ments (especially rhe-nium) are released frommagma during ascentand emplacement. Thiswork will help con-strain the contributionof Re volatility to esti-mates of Re flux fromthe mantle to the crust.Jason conducts experiments to quantify Re volatility and mobility in sil-icate liquids and establish the roles of melt composition, temperature,fO2, and speciation on degassing behavior.

Jason’s research also aims to establish a robust experimental and analyt-ical procedure that captures the behavior of Re and several importantheavy metals (Hg, Pb, As, Se). Volcanic emission of Re and other heavymetals may contribute a significant load to the hydrosphere and atmos-phere. For example, it has been suggested that volcanic emissions of thevolatile element Hg may represent as much as 40% of natural emissionsof Hg to the atmosphere. A quantitative understanding of rates andprocesses related to volatile release of heavy metals will provide impor-tant constraints on the geochemical behavior of these elements andtheir flux across geochemical reservoirs.

Mineralogical Associationof Canada

Jason Mackenzie

MAC-SPONSORED SESSIONS AT MONTREAL 2006AND OTHER MEETINGS

MAC FOUNDATION SCHOLARSHIP TO JASON MACKENZIE

www.gacmac2006.ca

MAC awarded 17 travel andresearch grants to students in2005. Amounts awarded rangedfrom $400 to the maximum$1200. We would like to recog-nize these deserving students.

Anetta Banas(Universityof Calgary)presented theresults of herMSc thesis ontrace elementanalyses ofgarnetinclusions in

diamonds from the DeBeers Pool,South Africa, at the symposium“From Cratons to Carats: a Sym-posium to Honour the Career ofHerwart Helmstaedt” at Halifax2005. The two-day symposiumfeatured presentations on thestructure and tectonics of Archeancratons and the geotectoniccontrols on diamond exploration.It provided Anetta with anopportunity to interact withsome of the most renownedresearchers in this field.

ElspethBarnes(Universityof BritishColumbia) isdoing a PhDproject onthe LittleNahanniPegmatite

Group, Yukon. She received somefunding to carry out a halogenstudy of fluid inclusions fromthese LCT-type highly evolvedpegmatites. She hopes that thiswill shed light on the evolutionof the pegmatite-forming silicatefluid during the development ofthe dike system. Glacial erosionof the ridge has produced a seriesof immense cirque walls thatexpose vertical cross sections ofnumerous pegmatites.

TashiaDzikowski(Universityof BritishColumbia)receivedfunding toassist withfield work inFlorida,

where she collected naturalcarbonate mud samples. Thisgave her the opportunity to see

carbonate mud environmentsfirst hand and is now provingvery beneficial to her MScproject, which is aimed atunderstanding how whitingsform under controlled laboratoryconditions and how theyoriginate in nature. Whitings areproduced in lakes or seas whenfine-grained calcium carbonateprecipitates in the open watercolumn, giving the water a milkyor white appearance. The originof whitings is controversial, butrecent work has shown that theyare coincident with blooms ofcyanobacteria in parts of theocean, such as the Great BahamaBank, and in some freshwaterlakes.

DianaLoomer(Universityof NewBrunswick)presented apaper on thecharacteriza-tion of Mn-oxide

minerals and microbially medi-ated reductive dissolution ofoxide at the GoldschmidtConference and participated in afield trip to Yellowstone NationalPark with the aid of a MAC travelgrant. She reports the following:“What a spectacular, living,breathing laboratory! Along withthe hot springs, geysers, andfumaroles, what Yellowstoneshows you is the dramatic impactthat microscopic creatures have.”

John Moreau(University ofCalifornia–Berkeley) isstudyingmicrobialsulfur cyclingand the fateof metals inmining-

impacted sediments, under Dr. JillBanfield. Hoping to pursue thetopic of biogeochemical mercurytransformations in his postdoc-toral research, he applied for atravel grant to attend the mercuryshort course in Halifax. Of hisexperience, he concludes: “Allin all, the course served well tointroduce and update newcomersand experts alike to the state ofthe science in mercury biogeo-chemistry.”

Ian Power(Universityof WesternOntario)presented atalk at theGoldschmidtConferenceon the resultsof his

undergraduate honours thesis.The topic: carbon dioxidesequestration through enhancedweathering of chrysotile minetailings and subsequent microbialprecipitation of magnesiumcarbonates.

GregoryShellnut(University ofHong Kong)presented theinitial resultsof his PhDresearchproject onthe petrologi-

cal association of peralkalinequartz syenites and layered Fe-Ti-V oxide-bearing gabbroicintrusions in southwest China ina special session on rift-relatedmagmatism and associatedmineralization at Halifax 2005.The feedback he received fromhis presentation was positive andinsightful, and helped himdevelop and test new ideas.

Kim Tait isnow workingon her PhDat theUniversityof Arizona(advisorRobertDowns).However,

she spends most of her timeat the Los Alamos NationalLaboratory, as a graduate researchassistant, where she is studyinggas hydrates with neutrondiffraction. Thanks to a MACtravel grant, she was able topresent some of her ongoingwork on the alluaudite-groupminerals (with co-author FrankHawthorne) and also attend theMAC 50th anniversary specialsession.

Coby Wongis a PhDcandidate atthe Univer-sity of HongKong. She iscurrentlystudyingenviron-mental

mercury contamination in avillage in Guangdong Province,China, where primitive process-ing of electronic waste has beenconducted for nearly a decade.Her research project focuses onmercury contamination in thevillage and its potential environ-mental and health consequences.In order to build a solid founda-tion of understanding of thesubject, she applied to theMineralogical Association ofCanada for a travel grant toattend the two-day short course“Mercury: Sources, Measure-ments, Cycles, and Effects” heldjust prior to Halifax 2005. Shegave a presentation entitled“Environmental MercuryContamination Arising fromMercury-containing ElectronicComponents in Southeast Asia”at the special session “Mercuryin the Environment.” She says,“I presented my study with thehope to raise public awarenessof the ever-growing volume of e-waste and its potential environ-mental effects. I think I achievedthat!”

The following students alsoreceived travel grants:

Allison Brand (University ofBritish Columbia), FernandoColombo (University of Cordoba,Argentina), Heather Kaminsky(University of Alberta), PaulKenward (University of Windsor),Guangrong Ning (University ofWestern Ontario), Dustin K.Rainey (University of Alberta),Michael Schultz (University ofAlberta), and Jingshi Wu(University of Western Ontario).Congratulations to them all.

Please check our websitewww.mineralogicalassociation.cafor more detailed reports.


Society News

59

2005 TRAVEL AND RESEARCH GRANT WINNERS

We welcome as our new treasurerRobert T. Downs of the Univer-sity of Arizona in Tucson, wherehe is associate professor of miner-alogy and crystallography. Bob isCanadian and obtained his firstdegree (in mathematics) at theUniversity of British Columbiabefore undertaking postgraduatework in mineralogy at VirginiaTech and completing a post-docat the Geophysical Laboratory inWashington. IMA has tax-exemptstatus in the United States, so itis logical to pass the position oftreasurer to someone based there.

For a person with Bob’s back-ground, balancing the booksshould be a piece of cake, butonly if we can overcome theproblem of non-payment of dues.Should you be the responsibleperson in one of the severalcountries that has still not paidits dues for 2005, please sendyour money now to:

Dr. Robert T. Downs1040 E 4th St., Dept of Geo-sciences, University of Arizona,Tucson Arizona 85721-0077, USAE-mail: downs@geo. arizona.edu

Modernizing IMAIMA is living in a new world. Itis no longer largely invisiblebetween its four-yearly GeneralMeetings. Now, through Elements,every two months, it can reachevery mineralogist on Earth whohas access to the Internet. If yourcountry’s mineralogical organiza-tion is not one of those support-ing Elements directly, you (or yourinstitutional library) may wellreceive a hard copy because yousubscribe to one of the journalsof the supporting societies. Evenif you have no such access,anybody, two months after publi-cation, can download a pdf fromwww.elementsmagazine.org. Ithink that this is remarkable, andit is an opportunity the wholeinternational mineralogical com-munity must embrace. In thenext paragraphs, I am going toreview some of IMA’s financialdifficulties and make somepersonal suggestions (the bulletpoints) for their solution.

Our difficulty with getting somenational groups to pay theirannual dues is, I think, a symp-tom of a number of structuralproblems within IMA. You mightimagine, since IMA exists topromote the interests of itssupporting organizations, thatcollecting dues would be acomparatively routine activity.But in 2005 about a quarter ofthe 37 affiliated organizationshad not paid by early December,making them at least one yearlate. Three organizations weremore than two years behind inpayment, and one was six yearsbehind. Some of the defaultersare small communities in the less-developed world, and we shouldbe sympathetic with theirproblems. But two defaultingorganizations are located incountries that are among thosewith the biggest per capitaincomes.

• At present IMA makes contactwith societies through theirNational Representatives.Although many do an excellentjob, some do not, and in futurewe shall also deal directly withsociety presidents and execu-tive secretaries.

• At Kobe the Business Meetingshould follow the rules of theIMA Constitution firmly.Countries in default for two

years or more will not beallowed to vote. Council willthen consider whether anydefaulting country should bedeleted from the list of IMAmembers. This would, ofcourse, be a matter of lastresort, and we will alwayswelcome letters of explanationfrom organizations who havegenuine difficulties in paying.

A related problem concerns theformula used to calculate thesubscription of each country. Theamount (in US dollars) is calcu-lated as 60 × D, where D is anumber between 10 and 1 thatdepends upon the membershipnumbers of the supportingsociety. Thus the big societies ofGermany, Russia and the USA,each with over 1000 membersand D = 10, all pay $600. At theother extreme, 16 societies have25 members or less, D = 1, andthey pay $60. It isn’t rocketscience to figure out that anindividual MSA member, forexample, contributes a maximumof $0.60, and a member of one ofthe little societies pays a minimumof $2.40. This seems to me to becompletely opposite to what isdesirable.

• Societies should pay a percapita sum based on their exactpaid-up membership. It wouldbe up to each national societyto decide how the money iscollected, but it could formpart of their own annualsubscription and be identifiedas the IMA contribution. Ofcourse, some individuals aremembers of more than onenational society, but they haveanyway been paying twice(sometimes more) under thepresent system.

• The exact sum will need carefulconsideration, but it will benot more than $2 per member.Members of big societies willpay a little more than they donow, those in small organiza-tions less.

This brings me to a final financialproblem. Even if we do not changeour funding formula, so that our16 small societies continue to pay$60, such is the avarice (defined,in my Oxford dictionary, as‘extreme greed’) of the world’sbanks that the costs of interna-tional money transfer are almostas great as the amounts being

International Mineralogical AssociationFROM THE PRESIDENT

MONEY MATTERSFirst of all, some important news about a change in the executive com-mittee of IMA. Cornelis Klein, of the University of New Mexico, who hasworked extremely hard as treasurer of IMA since 1995, has decided thatthe time has come to pass this task to someone else. As well as dispens-ing the sums of money needed to keep IMA running, for items such asmaintenance of the website (www.ima-mineralogy.org), the operatingcosts of groups such as the Commission on New Minerals and MineralNames, and support for meetings, Kase has worked tirelessly to collectthe annual dues of member societies. What should be a routine activityis frustrating and time consuming because many supporting organiza-tions seem to be unable or unwilling to transfer the relatively small sumsinvolved. Based on Kase’s experience I put forward below some ideas onhow the situation might be improved by changes in the laws of IMA. Weall have to be extremely grateful for the amount of work that he has putinto this task over the last decade.

www.ima-mineralogy.org


Society News

60

Cornelis Klein, outgoing treasurer Robert T. Downs, incoming treasurer

EMU AND THE EUROPEAN GEOSCIENCES UNION

www.univie.ac.at/Mineralogie/EMU


Society News

61

Contributions to the EGU meetingcover a broad spectrum of topicsrelated to the geosciences,including space and planetarysciences. The mineralogicalsciences were strongly repre-sented in the 2005 programme.The programme section ‘Vol-canology, Geochemistry,Petrology and Mineralogy’(VGPM) included 22 sessions.In particular the EMU wasinvolved in convening thefollowing symposia:

• High-pressure and High-temperature Mineral Physics:Contributions towards theUnderstanding of PlanetaryInteriors

• Spectroscopy of Earth’sMaterial: Experiments andNumerical Modelling

During the first of these sym-posia, the EMU medal ceremonytook place. The EMU annuallyawards a silver medal to a youngscientist who makes significantcontributions to research andwho is active in strengtheningEuropean scientific links. TheEMU Medal for 2005 was awardedto David Dobson (UniversityCollege London, UK; see thecitation in volume 1, number 5,page 312 of Elements).

In addition, Eugen Libowitzky(University of Vienna, Austria),the 2003 EMU medallist,belatedly gave his medallistlecture entitled ‘Dynamic disorderin crystal structures: results fromdiffraction and vibrationalspectroscopy.’ In this lecture, henoted that hydrogen can be amajor, minor or trace constituentof a broad variety of minerals inthe Earth’s lithosphere. Hydrogen

European Mineralogical Union

atoms in crystal structures can becharacterised by both diffractionand spectroscopic methods.Whereas the former are suitablefor the investigation of stoichio-metric phases exhibiting long-range order with atomic sites atleast predominantly occupied byhydrogen atoms, IR spectroscopyis an excellent method for thecharacterisation of traces ofhydrogen atoms in a crystal. Theadvantage of spectroscopy is thehigh time-resolution as comparedto diffraction methods. Further-more, the interaction betweenmatter and radiation takes placeon one site only. Spectroscopyusing polarized radiation allowsdetermination of the orientationof a vibrating molecule. Asexamples of phase transitionsinvolving hydrogen, the mineralslawsonite and hemimorphitewere discussed in detail. Bothexhibit dynamic disorder–orderprocesses involving hydrogen-bonded H2O molecules and OHgroups at low temperatures.Furthermore, it has become clearthat even anhydrous mineralsmay contain hydrogen atoms atstructural defects in relativelylarge amounts. Such mineralspersist to great depths in subduc-tion zones and may be responsi-ble for recycling water. Becauseof the enormous volume of theEarth’s mantle, nominallyanhydrous minerals under highP–T conditions, and whichcontain hydrogen only as aminor or trace constituent, mayplay an important role in thewater budget of the Earth.Nevertheless, there is stillcontroversy as to whether themantle is enriched or depleted inhydrogen through the processesassociated with subduction zones.

The next EGU General Assemblywill be held in Vienna from April2 to 7, 2006. We would like todraw your attention to thefollowing sessions planned forthe VGPM section of the EGUmeeting:

• Nanoscale Analytical and High-resolution (S)TEM Techniquesfor the Characterisation ofEnvironmental and GeologicalProcesses

• Accessory Minerals in Meta-morphic and Igneous Rocks:Petrogenetic Indicators ofChemical and PhysicalProcesses

• Urban Mineralogy• Experiments under HP–HT

Conditions: Applications in theGeosciences

We encourage you to participatein this conference. Further infor-mation is available at http://meetings.copernicus.org/egu2006.

Suggestions for sessions inmineral physics, mineralogy, andcrystallography at the 2007 EGUGeneral Assembly would be verywelcome and should be addressedto Professor Peter Ulmer of ETHZurich ([email protected]) before September 1, 2006.

Peter Ulmer, PresidentDavid Vaughan, Past President

Herta Effenberger, Secretary

collected, particularly if electronic transfer isused; thus the originating society might pay$45 and IMA a further $10–$15 on receipt.Banker’s drafts sent by post are somewhatcheaper, but most of our members prefer notto use them. I can see two possible solutions:

• Recognize that the dues paid by societieswith less than 25 members are almosttrivial and allow them free membership.This does rely on high standards ofhonesty, but then, we are all scientists.

• Agree that payments by smaller societiescan be made in cash at IMA businessmeetings, which now take place everytwo years.

One thing that the president of IMA rapidlylearns is that the societies that support IMAvary enormously in their size and strength.On the one hand are large organizations likethe Mineralogical Society of America, whichhave permanent staff and offices and aresubstantial publishing businesses. On theother hand there are small groups, sometimeswithin a national geological society, full ofenthusiasm but lacking any formal structure.To members from richer countries $2 mayseem trivial (a litre of gasoline costs $1.60 inthe UK), but to less-well-off countries it maybe substantial. Council appreciates all theseissues. But making IMA work well is in

everyone’s interest. International scientificcollaboration should be a major force in theworld, and we can all play our part in this.

Wherever you work I welcome your views andfresh ideas as to how we can achieve our aims.Please e-mail: [email protected], BobDowns, or any member of the IMA Council(addresses at www.ima-mineralogy.org). Anychanges will be discussed fully by Council andby delegates at our business meetings in Kobein July 2006 (www.congre.co.jp/ima2006).

Ian ParsonsPresident

One of the largest geoscience events in Europe is the annual General

Assembly of the European Geosciences Union (EGU). In 2005, this took

place in Vienna (Austria) from April 24 to 29. Traditionally, the Euro-

pean Mineralogical Union meets in conjunction with the EGU (includ-

ing holding its business meetings).

FORTHCOMING GENERALASSEMBLIES OF EGU

cont’d from p. 60

2006

April 2–7 European GeosciencesUnion (EGU) General Assembly,Vienna, Austria. Details: EGU Office,Max-Planck-Str. 13, 37191 Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany. Tel.: +49-5556-1440;fax: +49-5556-4709; e-mail: [email protected]; web page: www.coper-nicus.org/EGU/egu_info/prevga.html)

April 3–7 Backbone of the Americas–Patagonia to Alaska, Mendoza,Argentina. Details: Suzanne M. Kayor Victor Ramos, e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]; web page:www.geosociety.org/meetings/06boa/index.htm

April 9–12 American Association ofPetroleum Geologists and Society forSedimentary Geology (SEPM) JointAnnual Meeting, Houston, Texas, USA.Details: AAPG Conventions Department,PO Box 979, 1444 S. Boulder Avenue,Tulsa, OK 74101-0979, USA. Tel.: 918-560-2679; fax: 918-560-2684; e-mail:[email protected]; web page: http://www.aapg.org/houston/index.cfm

April 10–11 Workshop: “SurfaceReactivity in Minerals,” Gargnano,Brescia, Italy. Details: G. Artioli or M.Moret, e-mail: [email protected] [email protected].

April 17–21 Materials ResearchSociety 2006 Spring Meeting, SanFrancisco, CA, USA. Tel.: 724-779-3003;fax: 724-779-8313; e-mail: [email protected]; web page: www.mrs.org/meetings/future_meetings.html

April 30–May 4 2006 InternationalHigh Level Radioactive WasteManagement Conference, Las Vegas,NV, USA. Details: Daniel Bullen, GeneralChair, web page: www.ans.org/meetings/index.cgi?c=t

May 3–5, 2006 InternationalWorkshop on the Isotopic Effectsin Evaporation: Revisiting the Craig-Gordon Model Four Decades Afterits Formulation, Pisa, Italy. Information:Roberto Gonfiantini, Istituto diGeoscienze e Georisorse del CNR, ViaG. Moruzzi 1, 56124 Pisa, Italy; e-mail:[email protected]; web page: www.geo.unifi.it/evaporationworkshop

May 13–14 Melt Inclusions inPlutonic Systems: MineralogicalAssociation of Canada Short Course,Montreal, Canada. Details: Jim Webster;e-mail: [email protected]; web page:www.mineralogicalassociation.ca/index.php?p=120

May 14–16 Society of EconomicGeologists 2006 Conference, Keystone,Colorado, USA. Details: Society ofEconomic Geologists, 7811 ShafferParkway, Littleton, CO, USA 80127-3732. Tel.: 720-981-7882; fax: 720-981-7874; e-mail: [email protected];website: www.seg2006.org

May 14–17 Planet Earth in Montreal:Geological Association of Canada andMineralogical Association of CanadaJoint Annual Meeting, Montreal,Canada. E-mail: [email protected];web page: www.gacmac2006.ca

May 14–18 IAVCEI 2006: ContinentalBasalt Volcanism, Guangzhou, China.Details: Dr. Yigang Xu, GuangzhouInstitute of Geochemistry, ChineseAcademy of Sciences, P.O. Box 1131,

510640 Wushan Guangzhou, PR China;e-mail: [email protected]; website:www.iavcei2006.org

May 16–20 Geofluids V, the FifthInternational Conference on FluidEvolution, Migration and Interactionin Sedimentary Basins and OrogenicBelts, Windsor, Ontario, Canada. E-mail:[email protected]; website:www.geofluids5.org

May 23–26 2006 AGU JointAssembly, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.Details: AGU Meetings Department,2000 Florida Avenue NW, Washington,DC 20009, USA. Tel.: 800-966-2481,ext. 333 or 202-777-7330; fax: 202-328-0566; e-mail: [email protected] (subject:2006 Joint Assembly); web page:www.agu.org/meetings/ja06

May 28–31 GERM (GeochemicalEarth Reference Model) workshop,Columbia University, NY, USA. E-mail:[email protected]; web page:http://earthref.org/

June 3–7 Joint 43rd Annual Meetingof The Clay Minerals Society andAnnual Meeting of the GroupeFrançais des Argiles (French ClayGroup), Oléron Island, France. Details:Sabine Petit, Université de Poitiers, CNRSHydr’ASA, 40 Av. du Recteur Pineau,86022 Poitiers Cedex, France. Tel.: 33-(0)5-49-45-37-56; e-mail: [email protected]; web page:www.clays.org or www.c2s-organisation.com/gfacms06

June 7–9 Sediment 2006: 4th AnnualConference of the Central EuropeanSection of SEPM, Gottingen, Germany.E-mail: [email protected]; webpage: www.sediment.uni-goettingen.de/sediment2006/index.html

June 12–17 Walker MemorialMeeting: Advances in Volcanology,Volcanic and Magmatic StudiesGroup, Mineralogical Society, Reykholt,Iceland. Details: [email protected]; web page: www2.norvol.hi.is/page/nordvulk_walker

June 18–21 Chinese InternationalConference on Continental Dynamicsand Environmental Change of theTibetan Plateau, Xining, QinghaiProvince, PRC. Web page: www.geosociety.org/meetings/index.htm

June 25–29 First InternationalCongress on Ceramics, Toronto,Canada. Details: Dr. Stephen Freiman,tel.: 301-975-5658, or Mark Mecklen-borg, ACerS Staff Director, TechnicalPublications and Meetings, tel.: 614-794-5829. E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]; web page: www.ceramics.org/?target=/meetings/icc/home.asp

July 2–6 Australian Earth SciencesConvention, Melbourne, Australia.Details: Australian Earth SciencesConvention, c/o The Meeting Planners,91-97 Islington Street, Collingwood,Victoria, Australia 3066; tel: +61 3 94170888; fax: +61 3 9417 0899; e-mail:[email protected];website: www.earth2006.org.au

July 10–12 Granulite and Granulites2006, University of Brasilia, Brazil.Details: Michael Brown, e-mail:[email protected]; web page:www.geol.umd.edu/pages/meetings/granulites2006.htm

July 16–23 Zeolite ‘06, 7th Meetingof the International Natural ZeoliteAssociation, Socorro, New Mexico, USA.Details: Dr. Robert Bowman, e-mail:[email protected]; web page:http://cms.lanl.gov/zeo2006.html

July 22–27 American CrystallographicAssociation (ACA) Annual Meeting,Honolulu, HI, USA. Details: Judith Kelly,113 Uncle Sam Rd., Phippsburg ME04562. Tel.: 207-389-9058; fax: 860-486-4331; e-mail: [email protected]; web page: www.hwi.buffalo.edu/ACA/meetingspg_list/futuremeetings.html

July 23–28 19th InternationalMineralogical Association (IMA)Meeting, Kobe, Japan. Details: Dr.Kiyoshi Fujino, e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected];web page: www.congre.co.jp/ima2006

July 30–Aug 2 International Sympo-sium on Zeolites and MicroporousCrystals (ZMPC2006), Yonago, TottoriPrefecture, Japan. E-mail: [email protected]; web page:www.chem.tottori-u.ac.jp/~zmpc2006

July 30–August 4 Gordon ResearchConference: Biomineralization, Colby-Sawyer College, New London, NH, USA.Web page: www.grc.uri.edu/programs/2006/biomin.htm

August 6–11 69th Annual Meeting ofthe Meteoritical Society, ETH, Zurich,Switzerland. Details: Rainer Wieler, ETHZürich, Isotope Geology, CH-8092Zurich, Switzerland. Tel.: +41 44 632 3732; fax: +41 44 632 11 79; e-mail:[email protected]; website: www.metsoc2006.ethz.ch

August 6–11 23rd EuropeanCrystallographic Meeting (ECM23),Leuven, Belgium. Details: OrganizingSecretariat, Momentum, Grensstraat 6,B-3010 Leuven, Belgium. Tel.: +32 16 4045 55; fax: +32 16 40 35 51; e-mail:[email protected]; website:www.ecm23.be

August 21–24 IAGOD Symposium:12th Quadrennial InternationalAssociation on the Genesis of OreDeposits, Moscow, Russia. Details: Dr.Sergei Cherkasov, Executive Secretary12th IAGOD, Vernadsky SGM RAS, 11-2Mokhovaya str., Moscow, 125009Russia. Tel.: +7-(095)-203-4667; fax:+7-(095)-203-5287; e-mail: [email protected];web page: http://www.rags.ru/about.shtm (in Russian); or http://nts2.cgu.cz/servlet/page?_pageid=540,542,544&_dad=portal30&_schema=PORTAL30

August 26–27 GIA GemologicalResearch Conference, San Diego,California USA. Details: Dr. James E.Shigley, tel.: 760-603-4019; e-mail:[email protected]; web page:www.gia.edu/gemsandgemology/30609/2006_gia_gemological_research_confer-ence.cfm

August 27–29 InternationalGemological Symposium (IGS), SanDiego, CA, USA. Details: GemologicalInstitute of America, The RobertMouawad Campus, 5345 Armada Drive,Carlsbad, CA 92008. E-mail: [email protected]; website: www.symposium.gia.edu

August 27–September 1 16th AnnualV.M. Goldschmidt Conference,Melbourne, Australia. Details: Gold-schmidt 2006 Conference Managers,GPO Box 128, Sydney NSW 2001,

Australia. E-mail: [email protected]; website: www.goldschmidt2006.org

August 27–September 1 17th

International Mass SpectrometryConference (IMSC), Prague, CzechRepublic. Details: CZECH-IN, spol. s r.o.,17th IMSC Conference Secretariat,Prague Congress Centre, 5. kvetna 65,CZ-140 21 Prague, Czech Republic. Tel.:+420 261 174 305; fax: +420 261 174307; e-mail: [email protected]:website: www.imsc2006.org

September 3–8 Gordon ResearchConference: Rock Deformation, Big SkyResort, Big Sky, MT, USA. Details: MarkJessell, UMR 5563, Laboratoire desMécanismes et Transferts en Géologie,Université Paul Sabatier, 31400Toulouse, France. E-mail: [email protected]; web page: www.grc.uri.edu/programs/2006/rockdef.htm

September 4–10 Volcano Interna-tional Gathering, “Volcano: Life,Prosperity, and Harmony,” Yogyakarta,Indonesia. Details: Secretariat, Facultyof Mineral Technologi, UPN “Veteran”Yogyakarta, Jl. SWK 104 (Lingkar Utara)Condongcatur, Yogyakarta 55282,Indonesia. Tel.: +62-274-486733, ext.309; fax: +62-274-487814; e-mail:[email protected]; website: http://vig2006.recent.or.id

September 6–10 EngineeringGeology for Tomorrow’s Cities:The 10th IAEG Congress, Nottingham,United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected]; web page: www. iaeg2006.com

September 10–13 InternationalSymposium on ExperimentalMineralogy, Petrology and Geochem-istry (EMPG XI), Bristol, UK. Details:Bernard Wood, University of Bristol,Department of Earth Sciences; webpage: www.univie.ac.at/Mineralogie/EMU/events.htm

September 10–14 American ChemicalSociety 232nd National Meeting,Atlanta, GA, USA. Details: ACS Meetings,1155, 16th Street NW, Washington, DC20036-4899. Tel.: 202-872-4396; fax:202-872-6128; e-mail: [email protected]

September 18–22 Third Mid-European Clay Conference (MECC’06),Opatija, Croatia. Details: Darko Tibljas,Institute for Mineralogy and Petrology,Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb,Horvatovac bb, HR-10000 Zagreb,Croatia; e-mail: [email protected]

September 24–28 Crystallization2006: Eighth International Symposiumon Crystallization in Glasses andLiquids, Jackson Hole, WY, USA. Details:Dr. Mark J. Davis, e-mail: [email protected]; web page: www.acers.org/meetings/crystallization/home.asp

September 25–30 7th InternationalSymposium on EnvironmentalGeochemistry (7th ISEG), Beijing,China. Details: Dr. Cong-Qiang Liu,State Key Laboratory of EnvironmentalGeochemistry, Institute of Geochemistry,Chinese Academy of Sciences, 46Guanshui Road, Guiyang, GuizhouProvince, 550002, P. R. China. E-mail: [email protected] orliucongqiang@ vip.skleg.cn; website:www.iseg2006.com

October 1–4 Water in NominallyAnhydrous Minerals, MSA/GS ShortCourse, Verbania, Italy. Details: Hans


Calendar

62


Keppler, Bayerisches Geoinstitut,Bayreuth, Germany and Joseph Smyth,University of Colorado, Boulder, CO,USA; web page: http://www.minsocam.org/MSA/SC

October 1–6 Society of ExplorationGeophysicists 76th Annual Meetingand International Exposition, NewOrleans, Louisiana, USA. Details: PO Box702740, Tulsa, OK 74170-2740, USA.Tel.: 918-497-5500; fax 918-497-5557;e-mail: [email protected]; web page:http://seg.org/meetings

October 14–17 Materials Science& Technology 2006 (MS&T ’06),Cincinnati, OH, USA. Contact: TMSMeetings Services, 184 Thorn Hill Road,Warrendale, PA 15086, USA. Tel.: 724-776-9000, ext. 243; e-mail: [email protected]

October 22–25 Geological Society ofAmerica Annual Meeting, Philadelphia,Pennsylvania, USA. Details: GSAMeetings Dept., PO Box 9140, Boulder,CO 80301-9140, USA. Tel.: 303-447-2020; fax: 303-447-1133; e-mail:[email protected]; web page:www.geosociety.org/meetings/index.htm

November 5–8 AAPG 2006 Interna-tional Conference and Exhibition,Perth, Australia. Details: AAPGConventions Department, PO Box 979,Tulsa, OK 74101-0979, USA. Tel.: 918-560-2679; e-mail convene2@aapg. org;web page: www.aapg.org/perth/index.cfm

November 27–December 1 MaterialsResearch Society Fall Meeting, Boston,MA, USA. Details: Materials ResearchSociety, 506 Keystone Drive, WarrendalePA 15086-7573, USA. Tel.: 724-779-3003; e-mail: [email protected]; web page:www.mrs.org/meetings/future_meetings.html#f06

December 2006 7th EuropeanMeeting on Environmental Chemistry,Brno, Czech Republic. Details: Dr. JosefCaslavsky, Institute of AnalyticalChemistry, Czech Academy of Science,Veveri 97, 61142 Brno, Czech Republic.E-mail: [email protected].

December 11–15 American Geophys-ical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco,California, USA. Details: E. Terry, AGUMeetings Department, 2000 FloridaAvenue NW, Washington, DC 20009,USA. E-mail: [email protected]; web page:www.agu.org/meetings

2007

February 25–March 1 2007 TMSAnnual Meeting & Exhibition, Orlando,FL, USA. Details: TMS Meetings Services,184 Thorn Hill Road, Warrendale, PA15086. Tel.: 724-776-9000, ext. 243; e-mail: [email protected]

March 25–29 American ChemicalSociety 233rd National Meeting,Chicago, IL, USA. Details: ACS Meetings,1155-16th St NW, Washington, DC20036-489. Tel.: 202-872-4396; fax:202-872-612; e-mail: [email protected];web page: www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1/acsdisplay.html?DOC=meetings%5cfuture.html

April 1–4 American Association ofPetroleum Geologists and Society forSedimentary Geology (SEPM) JointAnnual Meeting, Long Beach, California,USA. Details: AAPG ConventionsDepartment, PO Box 979, 1444 S.

Boulder Ave., Tulsa, OK 74101-0979,USA. Tel.: 918-560-2679; fax: 918-560-2684; e-mail: [email protected]

April 9–12 Materials Research SocietySpring Meeting, San Francisco CA, USA.Web page: www.mrs.org/meetings/future_meetings.html#beyond

May 23–25 Geological Association ofCanada and Mineralogical Associationof Canada Joint Meeting (GAC–MAC):Yellowknife 2007 – For a Change inClimate, Yellowknife, Canada. Webpage: www.nwtgeoscience.ca/gac_mac

June 17–20 10th InternationalConference and Exhibition of theEuropean Ceramic Society, Berlin,Germany. Website: http://www.ecers2007berlin.de

June 25–30 Combined Societies’Meeting – MinSoc, MSA and MS,Cambridge UK. Details: M.A. Carpenter,e-mail: [email protected]; web page:www.minersoc.org/pages/meetings/frontiers/index.html

July 2–13 International Union ofGeodesy and Geophysics (IUGG) 2007General Assembly, Perugia, Italy. E-mail: [email protected];website: www.iugg2007perugia.it

July 9–13 11th Congress of theInternational Society of RockMechanics, Lisbon, Portugal. Contact:Sociedade Portuguesa de Geotecnia,LNEC, Av. do Brasil, 101, 1700-066Lisboa, Portugal. Tel.: +351 218443321;fax: +351 218443021; e-mail: [email protected]; website: www.isrm2007.org

July 22–27 Euroclay 2007, Aveiro,Portugal. Details: Prof. Fernando Rochaor Prof. Celso Gomes; e-mail: [email protected]; web page: www.ing.pan.pl/ecga_js/confer1.htm

August 12–17 15th InternationalZeolite Conference (15th IZC), Beijing,China. Contact: Prof. Shilum Qiu,Organizing Secretary, 15th IZC, StateKey Laboratory of Inorganic Synthesisand Preparative Chemistry, JilinUniversity, Linyuan Road 1788,Changchun 130012, China. Tel.: +86-431-5168590; fax: +86-431-5168614; e-mail: [email protected]; website: www.15izc.org.cn

August 13–17 Meteoritical SocietyAnnual Meeting, Tucson, AZ, USA.Details: Dr. Tim Jull; e-mail: [email protected]; web page: http://metsoc2007.org

August 13–18 Twelfth InternationalSymposium on Water–Rock Interaction(WRI-12), Kunming, China. Details:Secretary General,Yanxin Wang, Schoolof Environmental Studies, ChinaUniversity of Geosciences, 430074Wuhan, P. R. China. Tel.: +86-027-67885040; fax: +86-027-87481365; e-mail: [email protected]; website:www.wri12.org

Parting ShotCalendar

63

The meetings convened by theparticipating societies are highlightedin yellow. This meeting calendar was

compiled by Andrea Koziol.To get meeting information listed,

please [email protected]

When Art Meets ElementsThe Color of IronThe Color of Iron exhibition, presented at the Chazen Museum of Art,Madison, Wisconsin, USA, from January 14 through March 19, 2006,explores the relationship between art and science and showcases ironand the range of colors it can produce by fusing an understanding ofchemical techniques with applications in art. The exhibition features thework of four artists who use the chemical effects of iron-based materialsto produce color in their art.

These parting shots were submitted by Joe Skulan, a scientist at theUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison Geology Museum, who curated thisexhibition.

Û The exhibit alsoincludes a collaborativeinstallation titled TheAlchemist’s Workbench,featuring devices andmaterials that demonstratethe full spectrum of iron-based color. PHOTO

BOB RASHID

Ý Ceramic artist John Britt’s workshows the effects of iron in glazesfired at high temperatures,including the creation of stunningreds and jewel-like blacks. PHOTO

SCOTT SHAPIRO

Ý The centerpiece of the exhibit is asculpture by Scott Shapiro called

“Alchemy in Flight,” made of kryptonplasma in tubes of iron-tinted glass.

PHOTO SCOTT SHAPIRO

Û Saundra McPherson’s paintingsshowcase the varieties of ochrepigments produced from iron.PHOTO BOB RASHID

Ü Artist and scientist Mike Wareexhibits his cyanotypes, photographs

rendered in Prussian blue (ironhexacyanoferrate or ferric ferro-

cyanide). PHOTO BOB RASHID


DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF EARTH SCIENCESNational Science Foundation, Arlington, VA

NSF’s Directorate for Geosciences seeks candidates for theposition of Director, Division of Earth Sciences (EAR). The

Division supports proposals for research geared toward improving

the understanding of the structure, composition, and evolution of

the Earth and the processes that govern the formation and behav-

ior of the Earth’s materials. Information about the Division’s activities

may be found at website: <http://www.nsf.gov/geo/ear/about.jsp>.

Appointment to this Senior Executive Service position may be on a career

basis, on a one to three year limited term basis, or by assignment under

the Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) provisions.

Announcement S20060036-C, with position requirements and application

procedures are posted on NSF’s Home Page at website:

<http://www.nsf.gov/about/career_opps/>.

Applicants may also obtain the announcements by contacting Executive

Personnel Staff at 703-292-8755 (Hearing impaired individuals may call

TDD 703-292-8044).

Applications must be received by March 20, 2006.

NSF IS AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER.

ADVERTISERS IN THIS ISSUE

Bayerisches Geoinstitut 22, 47Canadian Light Source 30CrystalMaker 64Excalibur Mineral Corporation 36Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 64Meiji Techno America 36National Science Foundation 64PANanalytical Inside back coverRigaku Inside front coverRockware Back cover

WANTED

The Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a not-for-profitorganization chartered by the Board of Regents of

the State University of New York is seeking used analyticalequipment, thin sections and mineral specimens for itsdescriptive mineralogical laboratory and educational pro-grams. We are dedicated to classical mineralogicalresearch, preservation of mineral specimens, and educa-tional outreach to primary and secondary school teachersand students. If your institution is upgrading its analyticalequipment, we want your used, working devices. Further,if you are disposing of minerals, thin sections or similargeological artifacts, let us put them to good use; æstheticsare unimportant, labels are! Please contact:

The Hudson Institute of MineralogyPO Box 2012 • Peekskill, NY 10566-2012

www.hudsonmineralogy.org

Since 1983Earth Science Software, GIS Software,Training & Consulting

www.RockWare.com

2221 East St, Ste 101 • Golden CO, USA 80401 • 303.278.3534 • F: 303.278.4099

What’s in your water?

GWB Essentials• Speciation/saturation indices• Activity (including Eh-pH) diagrams• Aqueous diagrams (Piper, Stiff etc.)• Debye-Hückel or Pitzer models• Sorption and surface complexation

$799

GWB StandardIncludes GWB Essentials plus:

• Reaction path modeling• Polythermal models• Mineral dissolution/precipitation and redox kinetics• Microbial metabolism and growth• Custom rate laws

$2,999

GWB ProfessionalIncludes GWB Standard plus:

• 1D/2D reactive transport modeling • Transport by advection, diffusion, dispersion • Saturated or unsaturated flow • Constant or varying permeability • Variably spaced grids • Heterogeneous domains and initial conditions • Flexible boundary conditions

$7,999

The Geochemist’s Workbench®

The Geochemist’s Workbench® is a registered trademark of the University of Illinois

Elements Feb06eD.indd 1 1/24/2006 10:54:46 AM

ELEM_Cover_V2n12 24/01/06 18:48 Page 2

User Research Facilities in the Earth Sciences

Documents

Transcript of User Research Facilities in the Earth Sciences