World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
49
Citations
8573
World Ranking
5261
National Ranking
1937

Coleen M. Roehl publication distribution in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Environmental Sciences in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Coleen M. Roehl sits on this spectrum.

41–50 publications: 21 scientists 51–60 publications: 62 scientists 61–70 publications: 133 scientists 71–80 publications: 257 scientists 81–90 publications: 361 scientists 91–100 publications: 440 scientists 101–110 publications: 492 scientists 111–120 publications: 541 scientists 121–130 publications: 617 scientists 131–140 publications: 544 scientists 141–150 publications: 541 scientists 151–160 publications: 539 scientists 161–170 publications: 444 scientists 171–180 publications: 444 scientists 181–190 publications: 400 scientists 191–200 publications: 377 scientists 201–210 publications: 318 scientists 211–220 publications: 283 scientists 221–230 publications: 263 scientists 231–240 publications: 220 scientists 241–250 publications: 217 scientists 251–260 publications: 180 scientists 261–270 publications: 181 scientists 271–280 publications: 155 scientists 281–290 publications: 130 scientists 291–300 publications: 127 scientists 301–310 publications: 130 scientists 311–320 publications: 85 scientists 321–330 publications: 106 scientists 331–340 publications: 80 scientists 341–350 publications: 83 scientists 351–360 publications: 75 scientists 361–370 publications: 69 scientists 371–380 publications: 52 scientists 381–390 publications: 54 scientists 391–400 publications: 56 scientists 401–410 publications: 44 scientists 411–420 publications: 40 scientists 421–430 publications: 36 scientists 431–440 publications: 25 scientists 441–450 publications: 25 scientists 451–460 publications: 32 scientists 461–470 publications: 29 scientists 471–480 publications: 21 scientists 481–490 publications: 26 scientists 491–500 publications: 25 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 18 scientists 521–530 publications: 15 scientists 531–540 publications: 22 scientists 541–550 publications: 12 scientists 551–560 publications: 15 scientists 561–570 publications: 11 scientists 571–580 publications: 19 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 9 scientists 601–610 publications: 7 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 5 scientists 631–640 publications: 5 scientists 641–650 publications: 6 scientists 651–660 publications: 3 scientists 661–670 publications: 3 scientists 671–680 publications: 4 scientists 681–686 publications: 3 scientists 687+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 687+

This scientist: 198 publications — 64th percentile

64% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 687 publications or more.

Coleen M. Roehl D-index placement in Environmental Sciences in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Environmental Sciences scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Coleen M. Roehl sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 12 scientists 31 D-Index: 26 scientists 32 D-Index: 51 scientists 33 D-Index: 88 scientists 34 D-Index: 123 scientists 35 D-Index: 163 scientists 36 D-Index: 206 scientists 37 D-Index: 267 scientists 38 D-Index: 265 scientists 39 D-Index: 275 scientists 40 D-Index: 321 scientists 41 D-Index: 343 scientists 42 D-Index: 305 scientists 43 D-Index: 336 scientists 44 D-Index: 330 scientists 45 D-Index: 348 scientists 46 D-Index: 291 scientists 47 D-Index: 275 scientists 48 D-Index: 272 scientists 49 D-Index: 273 scientists 50 D-Index: 263 scientists 51 D-Index: 232 scientists 52 D-Index: 266 scientists 53 D-Index: 217 scientists 54 D-Index: 199 scientists 55 D-Index: 177 scientists 56 D-Index: 202 scientists 57 D-Index: 204 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 177 scientists 60 D-Index: 166 scientists 61 D-Index: 152 scientists 62 D-Index: 143 scientists 63 D-Index: 150 scientists 64 D-Index: 124 scientists 65 D-Index: 119 scientists 66 D-Index: 120 scientists 67 D-Index: 118 scientists 68 D-Index: 82 scientists 69 D-Index: 98 scientists 70 D-Index: 94 scientists 71 D-Index: 105 scientists 72 D-Index: 74 scientists 73 D-Index: 84 scientists 74 D-Index: 70 scientists 75 D-Index: 67 scientists 76 D-Index: 78 scientists 77 D-Index: 60 scientists 78 D-Index: 59 scientists 79 D-Index: 52 scientists 80 D-Index: 47 scientists 81 D-Index: 38 scientists 82 D-Index: 48 scientists 83 D-Index: 42 scientists 84 D-Index: 42 scientists 85 D-Index: 43 scientists 86 D-Index: 29 scientists 87 D-Index: 37 scientists 88 D-Index: 29 scientists 89 D-Index: 30 scientists 90 D-Index: 34 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 22 scientists 93 D-Index: 17 scientists 94 D-Index: 19 scientists 95 D-Index: 24 scientists 96 D-Index: 21 scientists 97 D-Index: 20 scientists 98 D-Index: 24 scientists 99 D-Index: 17 scientists 100 D-Index: 17 scientists 101 D-Index: 21 scientists 102 D-Index: 25 scientists 103 D-Index: 18 scientists 104 D-Index: 26 scientists 105 D-Index: 19 scientists 106 D-Index: 15 scientists 107 D-Index: 10 scientists 108 D-Index: 13 scientists 109 D-Index: 15 scientists 110 D-Index: 12 scientists 111 D-Index: 8 scientists 112 D-Index: 7 scientists 113 D-Index: 9 scientists 114 D-Index: 6 scientists 115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116 D-Index: 7 scientists 117 D-Index: 8 scientists 118 D-Index: 3 scientists 119 D-Index: 5 scientists 120 D-Index: 7 scientists 121 D-Index: 2 scientists 122 D-Index: 4 scientists 123 D-Index: 8 scientists 124 D-Index: 7 scientists 125+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 125+

This scientist: 49 D-Index — 47th percentile

47% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 125 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • Calibration of the Total Carbon Column Observing Network using aircraft profile data

    Debra Wunch;Geoffrey C. Toon;Paul O. Wennberg;Steven C. Wofsy

  • Comparisons of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 (OCO-2) X CO 2 measurements with TCCON

    Debra Wunch;Debra Wunch;Paul O. Wennberg;Gregory Osterman;Gregory Osterman;Brendan Fisher;Brendan Fisher

  • Improvement of the retrieval algorithm for GOSAT SWIR XCO2 and XCH4 and their validation using TCCON data

    Y. Yoshida;N. Kikuchi;I. Morino;O. Uchino

  • Improved retrievals of carbon dioxide from Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 with the version 8 ACOS algorithm

    Christopher W. O'Dell;Annmarie Eldering;Paul O. Wennberg;David Crisp

  • A method for evaluating bias in global measurements of CO 2 total columns from space

    D. Wunch;P. O. Wennberg;G. C. Toon;B. J. Connor

  • Methane retrieved from TROPOMI: Improvement of the data product and validation of the first 2 years of measurements

    Alba Lorente;Tobias Borsdorff;Andre Butz;Otto Hasekamp

  • The Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2: first 18 months of science data products

    Annmarie Eldering;Chris W. O'Dell;Paul O. Wennberg;David Crisp

  • Preliminary validation of column-averaged volume mixing ratios of carbon dioxide and methane retrieved from GOSAT short-wavelength infrared spectra

    I. Morino;O. Uchino;M. Inoue;Y. Yoshida

  • Atmospheric carbon dioxide retrieved from the Greenhouse gases Observing SATellite (GOSAT): Comparison with ground‐based TCCON observations and GEOS‐Chem model calculations

    A Cogan;H Boesch;R Parker;L Feng

  • OCO-3 early mission operations and initial (vEarly) XCO2 and SIF retrievals

    Thomas E. Taylor;Annmarie Eldering;Aronne Merrelli;Matthäus Kiel

  • Urban-focused satellite CO2 observations from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-3: A first look at the Los Angeles megacity

    Matthäus Kiel;Annmarie Eldering;Dustin D. Roten;John C. Lin

  • The Orbiting Carbon Observatory (OCO-2): spectrometer performance evaluation using pre-launch direct sun measurements

    C. Frankenberg;R. Pollock;R. A. M. Lee;R. Rosenberg

  • TCCON data from Lamont (US), Release GGG2014.R1

    P. O. Wennberg;D. Wunch;C. M. Roehl;J.-F. Blavier

  • Total Column Carbon Observing Network (TCCON) Site: Darwin

    David Griffith;Nicholas Deutscher;Voltaire Velazco;Paul Wennberg

  • Validation of methane and carbon monoxide from Sentinel-5 Precursor using TCCON and NDACC-IRWG stations

    Mahesh Kumar Sha;Bavo Langerock;Jean-François L. Blavier;Thomas Blumenstock

  • Mapping carbon monoxide pollution from space down to city scales with daily global coverage

    Tobias Borsdorff;Joost aan de Brugh;Haili Hu;Otto Hasekamp

  • Temperature dependence of UV absorption cross sections and atmospheric implications of several alkyl iodides

    Coleen M. Roehl;James B. Burkholder;Geert K. Moortgat;A. R. Ravishankara

  • Carbon emissions from the 2023 Canadian wildfires

    Unknown

  • A decade of GOSAT Proxy satellite CH 4 observations

    Robert J. Parker;Alex Webb;Hartmut Boesch;Peter Somkuti

  • The imprint of surface fluxes and transport on variations in total column carbon dioxide

    G. Keppel-Aleks;P. O. Wennberg;R. A. Washenfelder;D. Wunch

Frequent Co-Authors

Debra Wunch
Debra Wunch University of Toronto
Paul O. Wennberg
Paul O. Wennberg California Institute of Technology
Nicholas M. Deutscher
Nicholas M. Deutscher University of Wollongong
Thorsten Warneke
Thorsten Warneke University of Bremen
Justus Notholt
Justus Notholt University of Bremen
David W. T. Griffith
David W. T. Griffith University of Wollongong
Isamu Morino
Isamu Morino National Institute for Environmental Studies
Rigel Kivi
Rigel Kivi Finnish Meteorological Institute
Ralf Sussmann
Ralf Sussmann Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Frank Hase
Frank Hase Karlsruhe Institute of Technology

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

For students interested in Environmental Sciences, exploring related online degrees can broaden your career opportunities. Many find that starting with one of the easiest bachelor's degree to get in environmental studies or related fields provides a manageable foundation while building practical skills.

Specialized programs such as a geology degree online offer insights into earth processes, which are crucial for understanding environmental changes and natural resource management.

Additionally, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) expertise is in high demand. Pursuing degrees from the best GIS schools can equip you with the technology skills necessary to analyze spatial data for environmental planning and conservation.

For those aiming to move into public policy or administration within environmental sectors, enrolling in 1 year MPA programs offers accelerated pathways to leadership roles, focusing on environmental policy, management, and sustainable development.

Choosing the right degree path depends on your career goals, whether scientific research, technical applications, or policy-making. Online programs provide flexibility while covering essential knowledge for impactful work in environmental sciences.

Best Scientists Citing Coleen M. Roehl