World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Hartmut Boesch

Hartmut Boesch

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
48
Citations
7541
World Ranking
5599
National Ranking
376

Hartmut Boesch 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 Hartmut Boesch 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: 140 publications — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Hartmut Boesch 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 Hartmut Boesch 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: 48 D-Index — 44th percentile

44% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Hartmut Boesch is affiliated with the University of Bremen in Germany. Their research primarily focuses on Environmental Science and Earth and Planetary Sciences, with notable activity in the subfields of Global and Planetary Change, Atmospheric Science, Mechanics of Materials, Environmental Chemistry, and Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis.

The scientist's work covers main topics including Atmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics, Atmospheric Ozone and Climate, Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols, Hydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis, Methane Hydrates and Related Phenomena, Climate variability and models, and Air Quality and Health Impacts.

Among their recent papers are:

  • Global methane budget and trend, 2010-2017: complementarity of inverse analyses using in situ (GLOBALVIEWplus CH 4 ObsPack) and satellite (GOSAT) observations, 2021, Atmospheric chemistry and physics
  • Attribution of the accelerating increase in atmospheric methane during 2010-2018 by inverse analysis of GOSAT observations, 2021, Atmospheric chemistry and physics
  • A decade of GOSAT Proxy satellite CH 4 observations, 2020, Earth system science data
  • Post-monsoon air quality degradation across Northern India: assessing the impact of policy-related shifts in timing and amount of crop residue burnt, 2020, Environmental Research Letters
  • Observed changes in China's methane emissions linked to policy drivers, 2022, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Frequent co-authors in their research include Robert J. Parker, Yuzhong Zhang, Joannes D. Maasakkers, A. Anthony Bloom, and Frank Hase.

The most common venues where this researcher publishes are Atmospheric chemistry and physics, Atmospheric measurement techniques, Environmental Research Letters, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research).

Best Publications

  • Precision Requirements for Space-based XCO2 Data

    C. E. Miller;D. Crisp;P. L. DeCola;S. C. Olsen

  • Orbiting Carbon Observatory: Inverse method and prospective error analysis

    Brian J. Connor;Hartmut Boesch;Geoffrey Toon;Bhaswar Sen

  • Estimating global and North American methane emissions with high spatial resolution using GOSAT satellite data

    A J Turner;Daniel J Jacob;K J Wecht;J D Maasakkers

  • Methane observations from the Greenhouse Gases Observing SATellite: Comparison to ground‐based TCCON data and model calculations

    Robert Parker;Hartmut Boesch;Austin Cogan;Annemarie Fraser

  • Global Characterization of CO2 Column Retrievals from Shortwave-Infrared Satellite Observations of the Orbiting Carbon Observatory-2 Mission

    Hartmut Boesch;David Baker;Brian Connor;David Crisp

  • 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

  • Toward robust and consistent regional CO2 flux estimates from in situ and spaceborne measurements of atmospheric CO2

    Frédéric Chevallier;Paul I. Palmer;Liang Feng;Hartmut Boesch

  • The Greenhouse Gas Climate Change Initiative (GHG-CCI): Comparison and quality assessment of near-surface-sensitive satellite-derived CO2 and CH4 global data sets

    M Buchwitz;Markus Reuter;O Schneising;Hartmut Boesch

  • An intercomparison of inverse models for estimating sources and sinks of CO2 using GOSAT measurements

    S. Houweling;D. Baker;S. Basu;Hartmut Boesch

  • Inverse modelling of CH 4 emissions for 2010–2011 using different satellite retrieval products from GOSAT and SCIAMACHY

    M. Alexe;P. Bergamaschi;A. Segers;R. Detmers

  • Carbon Monitoring Satellite (CarbonSat): assessment of atmospheric CO 2 and CH 4 retrieval errors by error parameterization

    M. Buchwitz;M. Reuter;H. Bovensmann;D. Pillai

  • Attribution of the accelerating increase in atmospheric methane during 2010–2018 by inverse analysis of GOSAT observations

    Yuzhong Zhang;Yuzhong Zhang;Daniel J. Jacob;Xiao Lu;Joannes D. Maasakkers

  • Global methane budget and trend, 2010–2017: complementarity of inverse analyses using in situ (GLOBALVIEWplus CH 4 ObsPack) and satellite (GOSAT) observations

    Xiao Lu;Daniel J. Jacob;Yuzhong Zhang;Yuzhong Zhang;Joannes D. Maasakkers

  • Advancing Scientific Understanding of the Global Methane Budget in Support of the Paris Agreement

    Anita L. Ganesan;Stefan Schwietzke;Benjamin Poulter;Tim Arnold;Tim Arnold

  • A decade of GOSAT Proxy satellite CH 4 observations

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

  • The greenhouse gas climate change initiative (GHG-CCI): Comparative validation of GHG-CCI SCIAMACHY/ENVISAT and TANSO-FTS/GOSAT CO2 and CH4 retrieval algorithm products with measurements from the TCCON

    B Dils;M Buchwitz;Markus Reuter;O Schneising

  • An increase in methane emissions from tropical Africa between 2010 and 2016 inferred from satellite data

    Mark F. Lunt;Paul I. Palmer;Liang Feng;Christopher M. Taylor

  • Estimating regional methane surface fluxes: the relative importance of surface and GOSAT mole fraction measurements

    Annemarie Fraser;Paul Palmer;Liang Feng;H. Boesch

  • Effects of atmospheric light scattering on spectroscopic observations of greenhouse gases from space: Validation of PPDF‐based CO2 retrievals from GOSAT

    Sergey Oshchepkov;Andrey Bril;Tatsuya Yokota;Isamu Morino

  • Satellite-derived methane hotspot emission estimates using a fast data-driven method

    Michael Buchwitz;Oliver Schneising;Maximilian Reuter;Jens Heymann

  • Attribution of recent increases in atmospheric methane through 3-D inverse modelling

    Joe McNorton;Joe McNorton;Chris Wilson;Manuel Gloor;Rob J. Parker;Rob J. Parker

Frequent Co-Authors

Robert J. Parker
Robert J. Parker University of Leicester
Paul I. Palmer
Paul I. Palmer University of Edinburgh
Nicholas M. Deutscher
Nicholas M. Deutscher University of Wollongong
Justus Notholt
Justus Notholt University of Bremen
F. Chevallier
F. Chevallier University of Paris-Saclay
Ralf Sussmann
Ralf Sussmann Karlsruhe Institute of Technology
Otto Hasekamp
Otto Hasekamp Netherlands Institute for Space Research
Heinrich Bovensmann
Heinrich Bovensmann University of Bremen
André Butz
André Butz Heidelberg University
Thorsten Warneke
Thorsten Warneke University of Bremen

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

Pursuing a degree in Environmental Sciences opens doors to a variety of interdisciplinary career paths, many of which benefit from supplemental education in related fields. For instance, students interested in understanding societal impacts on the environment might explore the best online bachelor degree in sociology programs. These provide valuable insight into human behavior and social systems, which are crucial for effective environmental policy and advocacy.

For those aiming to advance their expertise and leadership roles, online doctorate options have become more accessible. Programs such as doctorate degree online no dissertation offer flexible formats, ideal for professionals balancing work and study without the traditional dissertation demand.

Educators or professionals seeking to influence environmental education can consider the best online eds to edd programs, blending advanced educational leadership with environmental awareness. Meanwhile, those who want to integrate social welfare with environmental justice may find dsw programs particularly relevant, emphasizing social work approaches that can address community and environmental well-being simultaneously.

Exploring these diverse academic paths enriches career opportunities and enhances the impact of an environmental sciences background across multiple sectors.

Best Scientists Citing Hartmut Boesch

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles