diff --git a/.github/workflows/production.yml b/.github/workflows/production.yml
index a53a8b5..f10f7da 100644
--- a/.github/workflows/production.yml
+++ b/.github/workflows/production.yml
@@ -20,12 +20,13 @@ jobs:
ANALYSIS_API_URL: https://soilsrevealed.org/api/v1/analysis
GEE_KEY: ${{ secrets.GEE_KEY }}
GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY: UA-179817360-1
+ TILES_URL: https://soils-revealed.s3.amazonaws.com/tiles
with:
host: ${{ secrets.SSH_HOST }}
key: ${{ secrets.SSH_KEY }}
port: ${{ secrets.SSH_PORT }}
username: ${{ secrets.SSH_USER }}
- envs: NODE_PORT,MAPBOX_API_KEY,API_URL,ANALYSIS_API_URL,GEE_KEY,GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY
+ envs: NODE_PORT,MAPBOX_API_KEY,API_URL,ANALYSIS_API_URL,GEE_KEY,GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY,TILES_URL
script: |
echo '> Source nvm'
export NVM_DIR=~/.nvm
@@ -47,7 +48,7 @@ jobs:
echo '> Generate a deployment key'
DEPLOYMENT_KEY=`date +%s`
echo '> Create .env file'
- echo -e "PORT=$NODE_PORT\nMAPBOX_API_KEY=$MAPBOX_API_KEY\nAPI_URL=$API_URL\nANALYSIS_API_URL=$ANALYSIS_API_URL\nDEPLOYMENT_KEY=$DEPLOYMENT_KEY\nGOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY=$GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY" > .env
+ echo -e "PORT=$NODE_PORT\nMAPBOX_API_KEY=$MAPBOX_API_KEY\nAPI_URL=$API_URL\nANALYSIS_API_URL=$ANALYSIS_API_URL\nDEPLOYMENT_KEY=$DEPLOYMENT_KEY\nGOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY=$GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY\nTILES_URL=$TILES_URL" > .env
echo '> Create gee.key.json file'
echo $GEE_KEY > gee.key.json
echo '> Build the app'
diff --git a/.github/workflows/staging.yml b/.github/workflows/staging.yml
index 8d42a85..5b866d9 100644
--- a/.github/workflows/staging.yml
+++ b/.github/workflows/staging.yml
@@ -20,12 +20,13 @@ jobs:
ANALYSIS_API_URL: https://soilsrevealed.org/api/v1/analysis
GEE_KEY: ${{ secrets.GEE_KEY }}
GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY:
+ TILES_URL: https://soils-revealed.s3.amazonaws.com/tiles
with:
host: ${{ secrets.SSH_HOST }}
key: ${{ secrets.SSH_KEY }}
port: ${{ secrets.SSH_PORT }}
username: ${{ secrets.SSH_USER }}
- envs: NODE_PORT,MAPBOX_API_KEY,API_URL,ANALYSIS_API_URL,GEE_KEY,GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY
+ envs: NODE_PORT,MAPBOX_API_KEY,API_URL,ANALYSIS_API_URL,GEE_KEY,GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY,TILES_URL
script: |
echo '> Source nvm'
export NVM_DIR=~/.nvm
@@ -47,7 +48,7 @@ jobs:
echo '> Generate a deployment key'
DEPLOYMENT_KEY=`date +%s`
echo '> Create .env file'
- echo -e "PORT=$NODE_PORT\nMAPBOX_API_KEY=$MAPBOX_API_KEY\nAPI_URL=$API_URL\nANALYSIS_API_URL=$ANALYSIS_API_URL\nDEPLOYMENT_KEY=$DEPLOYMENT_KEY\nGOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY=$GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY" > .env
+ echo -e "PORT=$NODE_PORT\nMAPBOX_API_KEY=$MAPBOX_API_KEY\nAPI_URL=$API_URL\nANALYSIS_API_URL=$ANALYSIS_API_URL\nDEPLOYMENT_KEY=$DEPLOYMENT_KEY\nGOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY=$GOOGLE_ANALYTICS_KEY\nTILES_URL=$TILES_URL" > .env
echo '> Create gee.key.json file'
echo $GEE_KEY > gee.key.json
echo '> Build the app'
diff --git a/api/tiles/land-cover.js b/api/tiles/land-cover.js
index 99675a2..88cc4dd 100644
--- a/api/tiles/land-cover.js
+++ b/api/tiles/land-cover.js
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@
const ee = require('@google/earthengine');
const axios = require('axios').default;
+const getPregeneratedTile = require('./pregenerated-tile');
+
const RAMP = `
- The historic soil organic carbon changes in agricultural lands are derived from Sanderman et - al. (2017) who used a data-driven statistical model and the HYDE v3.2 historic land-use - dataset (Klein Goldewijk et al., 2017). Recent changes in soil organic carbon stocks are - assessed using a UNCCD modified IPCC Tier 1 approach (UNCCD, 2018). Future soil organic carbon - changes are predicted using a spatial implementation of IPCC (2019) improved management + The historic soil organic carbon changes in agricultural lands are derived using a data-driven + statistical model and the HYDE historic land-use dataset. Recent changes in soil organic + carbon stocks are assessed using a UNCCD modified IPCC approach, while future soil organic + carbon changes are predicted using a spatial implementation of IPCC improved management scenarios. In addition, a novel approach was used to model recent soil organic carbon change - in Argentina as a pilot region (Heuvelink et al., 2020). This modeling uses actual soil carbon - data from national archives, and a statistical space-time method for mapping SOC stocks. A - global implementation of this approach is on-going. + in Argentina as a pilot region. This modelling uses actual soil carbon data from national + archives, and a statistical space-time method for mapping SOC stocks. A global implementation + of this approach is on-going. More detailed information about the methods with references to + the scientific literature is provided in the info buttons for each method under 'Explore + Map'.
); diff --git a/components/map/constants.js b/components/map/constants.js index b0f063e..cb259d4 100644 --- a/components/map/constants.js +++ b/components/map/constants.js @@ -826,11 +826,11 @@ exports.LAYERS = { label: 'Soil organic carbon stock', description: { historic: - 'At a global scale, you can see how much soil organic carbon was lost or gained as a result of humans’ influence on soils in the last 12,000 years. This data layer shows the amount of soil organic carbon that may have been on the landscape in the absence of agricultural land uses based on the analysis of Sanderman et al. (2017). Selecting change displays the difference between this historic map and current soil organic carbon levels. Three depth increments can be selected: 0-30, 0-100 and 0-200 cm.', + 'At a global scale, you can see how much soil organic carbon was lost or gained as a result of humans’ influence on soils in the last 12,000 years. This data layer shows the amount of soil organic carbon that may have been on the landscape in the absence of agricultural land uses based on the analysis of Sanderman et al. (2017). Selecting change displays the difference between this historic map and current soil organic carbon levels. Three depth increments can be selected: 0-30, 0-100 and 0-200 cm.\n\nPlease note that the maps are shown in Mercator projection which exaggerates and distorts areas at greater latitudes.', recent: - 'At a global scale, you can look at soil organic carbon changes for the years between 2000 and 2018. We used a method based on the IPCC Tier 1 accounting approach to map the global soil organic carbon stock between the years 2000 and 2018. The maps are at 250 m spatial resolution and show the soil organic carbon stock in the first 30 cm of the soil. You can also view maps of the change in soil organic carbon stock during a given period. These change maps show areas that experienced a soil organic carbon gain and loss.', + 'At a global scale, you can look at soil organic carbon changes for the years between 2000 and 2018. We used a method based on the IPCC Tier 1 accounting approach to map the global soil organic carbon stock between the years 2000 and 2018. The maps are at 250 m spatial resolution and show the soil organic carbon stock in the first 30 cm of the soil. You can also view maps of the change in soil organic carbon stock during a given period. These change maps show areas that experienced a soil organic carbon gain and loss.\n\nPlease note that the maps are shown in Mercator projection which exaggerates and distorts areas at greater latitudes.', future: - 'At a global scale, you can explore how our decisions about land management may affect soil organic carbon in the next 20 years. Using IPCC Tier 1 accounting approach, we developed a number of scenarios of how soil organic carbon may change over the next 20 years. You can select nine different scenarios that include restoration, improved management of croplands and grasslands, and further land degradation. For each scenario, you can view the estimated soil organic carbon stock (t C/ha) for a given year in the future or the total change (t C/ha) from 2018 to the selected future year.', + 'At a global scale, you can explore how our decisions about land management may affect soil organic carbon in the next 20 years. Using IPCC Tier 1 accounting approach, we developed a number of scenarios of how soil organic carbon may change over the next 20 years. You can select nine different scenarios that include restoration, improved management of croplands and grasslands, and further land degradation. For each scenario, you can view the estimated soil organic carbon stock (t C/ha) for a given year in the future or the total change (t C/ha) from 2018 to the selected future year.\n\nPlease note that the maps are shown in Mercator projection which exaggerates and distorts areas at greater latitudes.', }, group: 'soc', attributions: [], @@ -1068,11 +1068,13 @@ exports.LAYERS = { spatialResolution: '250 m', contentDate: '2018-2038', description: - 'These data are a spatial implementation of the IPCC (2019) Tier I bookkeeping approach to soil organic carbon stock change for a series of scenarios:\n\n### Cropland management: high organic inputs and minimum disturbance\nRepresents the combined impact of a shift from current management to cover crop, green manures or other higher residue return practices and shifting to no-till on all cropland areas.\n### Cropland management: high organic inputs\nRepresents a shift from current management to cover crop, green manures or other higher residue return practices on all cropland areas.\n### Cropland management: minimum disturbance\nRepresents a shift to no-till cropping on all cropland areas.\n### Grassland management: sustainable pastures and adaptive grazing\nOn managed pastures, this scenario represents a shift to sustainable management with light to moderate grazing together with at least one improvement to vegetative growth. On rangelands, this scenario represents a shift from current management defined by land degradation to high intensity grazing.\n### Grassland management: sustainable pastures and low or medium intensity grazing\nOn managed pastures, this scenario represents a shift to sustainable management with light to moderate grazing together with at least one improvement to vegetative growth. On rangelands, this scenario represents a shift from current management to low or medium intensity grazing, without significant management improvements.\n### Cropland and grassland restoration\nReversion of all crop and grazing land to non-degraded land under native vegetation.\n### Land degradation with no forest conversion\nAll grasslands shift from current condition to highly degraded state. All croplands shift to conventional tillage and low residue inputs.\n### Land degradation (including forest conversion to cropland)\nIn addition to further degradation of grasslands and cropland, forests are converted to conventionally managed low residue input cropping systems.\n### Land degradation (including forest conversion to pasture)\nIn addition to further degradation of grasslands and cropland, forests are converted to degraded grasslands.', + 'These data are a spatial implementation of the IPCC (2019) Tier I bookkeeping approach to soil organic carbon stock change for a series of scenarios:\n\n### Cropland management: high organic inputs and minimum disturbance\nRepresents the combined impact of a shift from current management to cover crop, green manures or other higher residue return practices and shifting to no-till on all cropland areas.\n### Cropland management: high organic inputs\nRepresents a shift from current management to cover crop, green manures or other higher residue return practices on all cropland areas.\n### Cropland management: minimum disturbance\nRepresents a shift to no-till cropping on all cropland areas.\n### Grassland management: sustainable pastures and adaptive grazing\nOn managed pastures, this scenario represents a shift to sustainable management with light to moderate grazing together with at least one improvement to vegetative growth. On rangelands, this scenario represents a shift from current management defined by land degradation to high intensity grazing.\n### Grassland management: sustainable pastures and low or medium intensity grazing\nOn managed pastures, this scenario represents a shift to sustainable management with light to moderate grazing together with at least one improvement to vegetative growth. On rangelands, this scenario represents a shift from current management to low or medium intensity grazing, without significant management improvements.\n### Cropland and grassland restoration\nReversion of all crop and grazing land to non-degraded land under native vegetation.\n### Land degradation with no forest conversion\nAll grasslands shift from current condition to highly degraded state. All croplands shift to conventional tillage and low residue inputs.\n### Land degradation (including forest conversion to cropland)\nIn addition to further degradation of grasslands and cropland, forests are converted to conventionally managed low residue input cropping systems.\n### Land degradation (including forest conversion to pasture)\nIn addition to further degradation of grasslands and cropland, forests are converted to degraded grasslands.\n\nDetailed methods and all data can be found at [https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/HA17D3](https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/HA17D3).', cautions: 'The IPCC Tier I accounting approach uses regional mean response functions to estimate changes in soil organic carbon due to shifts in land use, management and inputs. As such, this approach does not capture finer scale variation in soil organic carbon change that will likely be encountered based upon local soil types, local climate and local implementations of particular management strategies.\n\nThere has been no consideration of local feasibility or current adoption rates in these scenarios. As such, these maps represent a completely unconstrained technical potential for all cropland and grasslands.\n\nThis analysis assumes instantaneous adoption on all land areas. In reality, change will happen gradually over time with more and more areas coming under improved management. Current technical capacity, education and technology transfer, market signals and government policy will all influence how rapidly and to what extent a new practice is adopted.', sources: 'IPCC 2019, 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Calvo Buendia, E., Tanabe, K., Kranjc, A., Baasansuren, J., Fukuda, M., Ngarize, S., Osako, A., Pyrozhenko, Y., Shermanau, P. and Federici, S. (eds). Published: IPCC, Switzerland.', + citation: + 'Sanderman, Jonathan; Woolf, Dominic; Lehmann, Johannes; Rivard, Charlotte; Poggio, Laura; Heuvelink, Gerard; Bossio, Deborah, 2020, "Soils Revealed soil carbon futures", [https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/HA17D3](https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/HA17D3), Harvard Dataverse, V1', license: 'CC BY 4.0', }, }, diff --git a/public/android-icon-144x144.png b/public/android-icon-144x144.png index e49ae6f..0758a5d 100644 Binary files a/public/android-icon-144x144.png and b/public/android-icon-144x144.png differ diff --git a/public/android-icon-192x192.png b/public/android-icon-192x192.png index 0fb3a72..4d548ef 100644 Binary files a/public/android-icon-192x192.png and b/public/android-icon-192x192.png differ diff --git a/public/android-icon-36x36.png b/public/android-icon-36x36.png index a809b69..7c6439a 100644 Binary files a/public/android-icon-36x36.png and b/public/android-icon-36x36.png differ diff --git a/public/android-icon-48x48.png b/public/android-icon-48x48.png index 9900845..b1abb8a 100644 Binary files a/public/android-icon-48x48.png and b/public/android-icon-48x48.png differ diff --git a/public/android-icon-72x72.png b/public/android-icon-72x72.png index 142898f..30a6e40 100644 Binary files a/public/android-icon-72x72.png and b/public/android-icon-72x72.png differ diff --git a/public/android-icon-96x96.png b/public/android-icon-96x96.png index 6dcd141..d6c6117 100644 Binary files a/public/android-icon-96x96.png and b/public/android-icon-96x96.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-114x114.png b/public/apple-icon-114x114.png index 03f4bcc..e995b7e 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-114x114.png and b/public/apple-icon-114x114.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-120x120.png b/public/apple-icon-120x120.png index a1d2b21..cc66336 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-120x120.png and b/public/apple-icon-120x120.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-144x144.png b/public/apple-icon-144x144.png index f5afde9..0758a5d 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-144x144.png and b/public/apple-icon-144x144.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-152x152.png b/public/apple-icon-152x152.png index 04cd896..b8d4bf5 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-152x152.png and b/public/apple-icon-152x152.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-180x180.png b/public/apple-icon-180x180.png index db74406..81e3e39 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-180x180.png and b/public/apple-icon-180x180.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-57x57.png b/public/apple-icon-57x57.png index 1d0c482..16a7a18 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-57x57.png and b/public/apple-icon-57x57.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-60x60.png b/public/apple-icon-60x60.png index 785b866..fe33717 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-60x60.png and b/public/apple-icon-60x60.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-72x72.png b/public/apple-icon-72x72.png index d485a62..30a6e40 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-72x72.png and b/public/apple-icon-72x72.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-76x76.png b/public/apple-icon-76x76.png index 84c1c79..a5d9111 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-76x76.png and b/public/apple-icon-76x76.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon-precomposed.png b/public/apple-icon-precomposed.png index 70287ac..759d113 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon-precomposed.png and b/public/apple-icon-precomposed.png differ diff --git a/public/apple-icon.png b/public/apple-icon.png index 70287ac..759d113 100644 Binary files a/public/apple-icon.png and b/public/apple-icon.png differ diff --git a/public/favicon-16x16.png b/public/favicon-16x16.png index 600cd07..def38fd 100644 Binary files a/public/favicon-16x16.png and b/public/favicon-16x16.png differ diff --git a/public/favicon-32x32.png b/public/favicon-32x32.png index 09e1700..a18359c 100644 Binary files a/public/favicon-32x32.png and b/public/favicon-32x32.png differ diff --git a/public/favicon-96x96.png b/public/favicon-96x96.png index f6d30c9..d6c6117 100644 Binary files a/public/favicon-96x96.png and b/public/favicon-96x96.png differ diff --git a/public/favicon.ico b/public/favicon.ico index ef6a4ce..685fcc2 100644 Binary files a/public/favicon.ico and b/public/favicon.ico differ diff --git a/public/ms-icon-144x144.png b/public/ms-icon-144x144.png index f5afde9..0758a5d 100644 Binary files a/public/ms-icon-144x144.png and b/public/ms-icon-144x144.png differ diff --git a/public/ms-icon-150x150.png b/public/ms-icon-150x150.png index ae1e18d..742a922 100644 Binary files a/public/ms-icon-150x150.png and b/public/ms-icon-150x150.png differ diff --git a/public/ms-icon-310x310.png b/public/ms-icon-310x310.png index 63f5546..d278c8e 100644 Binary files a/public/ms-icon-310x310.png and b/public/ms-icon-310x310.png differ diff --git a/public/ms-icon-70x70.png b/public/ms-icon-70x70.png index 4afa9e7..2f9a153 100644 Binary files a/public/ms-icon-70x70.png and b/public/ms-icon-70x70.png differ