I think Environmental Science is something partially related to above ground part of earth plus underground part, Environmental Science is Wider than Geology which is dealing with earth surface and everything underneath earth. On the other hand, Geography is relating to above ground resources. So, Environment is dealing with both geological and geographical resources.

"Earth science" is discussed as a different line of science, studying rocks, minerals, some physics, Chemistry and etc. While "Environmental science" is focused on life. However "Earth science" globally can include "Enviromnetal science" in itself. So my opinion is that these two terms are not correctly segregated.

I also agree with George. Although they seem to be a bit similar, the focus of both of them are different.

In the UK "Earth Sciences" is a broad term encompassing disciplines with a focus on the Earth and it's dynamics (surface, oceanic, sub-surface or atmospheric). Geology, Geophysics, Climate Science, Environmental Science, Oceanography, Hydrology are all considered Earth Sciences - and are all taught in the Earth Sciences department I attended. In my opinion it is important to remember that the Earth is essentially one big, complex, interconnected system, which should be studied as such. Renaming a Geology and Geophysics department to give it a broader remit seems like a good idea to me. There is a huge amount of overlap between Geology and Environmental Science.

Yes. The Earth Sciences are one of several vital and prominent Envionrmental Sciences.

There is a great deal of important Environmental Earth Sciences researcb and knowledge. A great deal earth science research deals with modern and ancient environments but the broader science and education communities attach a wide variety of narrow and broad meanings to the term Environmental Science.

For example the Earth and Environmental Science curriculum in the Australian state of New South Wales uses a broad definition where the study of Environmental Science encompasses study of the biota, ecosystems, soils, groundwater systems, the climate and refers to ancient environments as recorded in geological deposits. In contrast, the Australian state of Victoria's environmental science curriculum deals with the science of ecology, ecosystems and present day aquatic, terrestrial and atmospheric systems with a biological emphasis. The new Australian National Curriculum takes the broader, all-encompassing view of the term Environmental Science.

It seems to me that many disciplines mistakenly claim to 'own' the term Environment. Possibly because of the interconnectedness of all things, and therefore the related nature of all things, these ownership claims are valid or least partially valid, but, realistically and practically, Environmental Science is a multi-disciplinary endevour. With each individual investigation using the techniques and approaches of the necessary disciplines whatever they may be. If a little bit of geological science, chemical science, physics, ecology, climatology, etc., is useful or necessary for a 'complete' and rigorous investigation of the environmental phenomenon then employ that knowledge and solve the probliem of interest properly and comprehensively.

When you talk about geology and geophysics, you basically deal with what is under the earth surface and its impacts on the (environment). Earth Sciences is more related to geology and geophysics than environment. Environment includes everything!!! physical, cultural, economical.... etc. So, I think that you could rename it as follows: Department of Earth Sciences- Geology and Geophysics, because the overlap area between them is wider than that with Environment.

Environmental Science includes study of geosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere along with biosphere. It will simply not be correct to say that it is part of Earth Sciences.

The earth is a principal component of the environment. and geology and geophysics are directly related to the earth. So, we have here three levels and scales which can be sorted from the smal to the big level (geologyand geophysics- earth sciences- environment). Therfore, I think that the name should be related directly to earth sciences not to environment.

I think that in this case upper case letters are important. Is not the same earth as Earth. Earth is the planet we live, and earth it can also be understood as soil, rocks and something like that. Earth Sciences to me involved Environmental Sciences, Earth Sciences is really broad, it covers Oceanography processes, Hydrology, Biology, Anthropology, as all are part of the Earth system. Environment is usually linked to dynamics between any living organism with other organisms or water, oil, or any other resource, etc...I guess that is normally seen as different topic because is a Science that integrates and studies the interaction of many other parts that can be studied by separate.

These are all excellent answers. I appreciate all the comments from people who have joined this discussion so far. It seems that there is not complete agreement, but more people believe Earth Sciences is the broader field, and that Environmental Science overlaps with that, but also covers some other areas that are not Earth Science. One aspect that hasn't been mentioned yet, is that Earth Sciences deals with both active processes happening today (volcanoes, earthquakes, erosion, etc.) and also topics in deep time (such as the history of life, how the continents came to be, etc..). Environmental Sciences is usually focused on processes that happen now, in the modern world, usually at the interface with human activities. So this might be another distinction between the two.

Hi Ken. I agree that Environmental Science works on the present time-scale - but I don't see that as a distinguishing factor. A lot of the logical underpinning of the Earth Sciences comes from uniformitarian reasoning (i.e. the present is key to the past). I work as a terrestrial biogeochemist (if this isn't strictly Environmental Science it has a lot of overlap). I look at the present controls on the biogeochemical cycles of peatlands and their interaction with the biosphere, atmosphere and hydrosphere. These systems are very important globally at present but the insights we gain inform not only future climate/Earth system prediction but also help us understand past climatic change. Understanding the present environmental conditions for formation of peatlands is important to understanding the formation of some of our most important hydrocarbon resources. As an Environmental Scientist but I see no distinction between that and also being an Earth Scientist. We use different tool sets but fundamentally we all want to understand how the Earth's systems function.

If the environment belongs to the earth, why should not include environmental science in the Earth science. How can one explain the environment without knowing the Earth science ? How each university is renaming its departments is a question of choice . While the life itself appeared in certain conditions which we struggle to put into evidence by Earth science....So yes , I believe that Earth science should include the environmental science.

The naming of departments is of course something that universities decide arbitrarily, however I believe that it makes sense to have a way to narrow scientific fields for purposes like recruiting, comparisons, journal classifications etc., and in this sense it is ok that Environ Sci is not included in Earth Sci. :-)

I agree with Athanasios. My understanding of Environmental Sciences is it is study of various physical and biological aspects. It is much more than earth sciences except if the nothion is that whatever is happening in earth is to be included under earth sciences.

I takes a part of the introduction to an article entitled "What is Earth Science? " and published by Hobart M. King in the website: www.ggeology.com by or gives a definition of earth science.

« Earth Science is the study of the Earth and its neighbors in space.. Some Earth scientists use their knowledge of the Earth to locate and develop energy and mineral resources. Others study the impact of human activity on Earth's environment and design methods to protect the planet. Some use their knowledge about Earth processes such as volcanoes, earthquakes and hurricanes to plan communities that will not expose people to these dangerous events.”

According to this definition the environmental sciences is one of Earth Sciences.

Currently, the trend is towards interdisciplinary science and also to new concepts which includes more than one discipline.

IMHO, I think the science of the environment is part of the earth sciences.

Maybe it would make sense for you to rename the Department considering the major field you take part in.

All but one Geology Depts that I know of subscribe to your criteria ("deep time", mostly; some "active" processes) and belong to Earth Science teaching, research and funding programs. One department still belongs earth sciences, but its name is a Dept of Sedimentary and Environmental Geology, that occasionally takes part in environmental mobilizations; the timescales that these guys study are probably not as fast as tsunamis, but are fast enough to be framed within the theory of Risk Society.

I still have a view that many environmental sciences departments do diversified research and EIA, fate and transport of pollutants, biological aspects of pollution and pollutants etc. which cannot be characterized as earth sciences in any way.

Medical science is the science and practice (art) student organization of the human body (anatomy), its normal physiology (function), and seeking to restore health by the treatment (therapy) and prevention (prophylaxis) of pathologies (Wikipedia)

The same thing and anologie with earth sciences.

According to my opinion Earth Science and Environmental Science have interconnection,considering the point that both solve earth science problems for sustainable development on our envirinment.I have completed Bachelor of Earth Sciences Honours: Mining and Environmental Geology and for now I have enrolled Master of Science in Environmental Science specialising in Environmental Geochemistry

Interesting topic, in Spanish they are completely separated, maybe overlapping only in the interactions among geological substrate and biosphere. Though my opinion has changed during the years because I have been part of several commissions and other type of decision groups and see that more and more geology (and thus geologists) is relegated to the mere study of rocks as if they were odd, rare, useless, and unprofitable. We have answers for serious environmental questions such as where does oil hide, or long-term storage rocks for depleted Uranium, in other areas of Geology, Palaeontology for instance has a lot to say about the environmental changes of the past. And more....

Concluding, in the modern world I believe that we have to include (paleo)environmental terms in our geological projects to survive.

After many years of Earth Science development (considered as the study of non-living subjects), we realize that everything on the Earth is connected, living and non-living subjects, after all. Now days, new paradigms such as Sustainable Development, Anthropogenic Climate Change, Biodiversity Loss, are vivid examples of how everything on Earth is connected by physical and chemical laws. I hope many of you have had read The Web of Life by Fritjof Capra, otherwise I recommend it broadly.

I think Earth Science implicitly means "solid Earth Sciences", excluding Environmental Sciences while "Geosciences" include both Solid Earth and Environmental Sciences.

Dear Dr. Ken:

You are right.

Dear Ken

you have absolutly right  termilogy fashion within Earth Sciences is terrible actualy

the kind regards,

KI