World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
61
Citations
17910
World Ranking
2717
National Ranking
211

Richard Essery 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 Richard Essery 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: 192 publications — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Richard Essery 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 Richard Essery 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: 61 D-Index — 72nd percentile

72% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Richard Essery is affiliated with the University of Edinburgh in the United Kingdom. Their research centers primarily on Earth and Planetary Sciences, with a particular focus on Atmospheric Science as a main subfield. They also explore areas including Global and Planetary Change, Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law, Water Science and Technology, and Environmental Engineering.

Essery's work extensively covers topics such as Cryospheric studies and observations, Climate change and permafrost, Landslides and related hazards, Climate variability and models, Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies, Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics, and Arctic and Antarctic ice dynamics.

Their recent publications include:

  • Historical Northern Hemisphere snow cover trends and projected changes in the CMIP6 multi-model ensemble, 2020, The Cryosphere
  • Scientific and Human Errors in a Snow Model Intercomparison, 2020, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
  • Resolving Small-Scale Forest Snow Patterns Using an Energy Balance Snow Model With a One-Layer Canopy, 2020, Water Resources Research
  • Data Assimilation Improves Estimates of Climate-Sensitive Seasonal Snow, 2020, Current Climate Change Reports
  • Increasing the Physical Representation of Forest-Snow Processes in Coarse-Resolution Models: Lessons Learned From Upscaling Hyper-Resolution Simulations, 2021, Water Resources Research

Frequently, Essery collaborates with other researchers. Notable frequent coauthors include Nick Rutter, Melody Sandells, Chris Derksen, Cécile B. Ménard, and Giulia Mazzotti.

Their research has appeared in multiple publication venues, with the most frequent including:

  • The Cryosphere
  • Water Resources Research
  • Geoscientific Model Development
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
  • IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing

Best Publications

  • The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 1: Energy and water fluxes

    M. J. Best;M. Pryor;D. B. Clark;G. G. Rooney

  • The impact of new land surface physics on the GCM simulation of climate and climate sensitivity

    P. M. Cox;R. A. Betts;C. B. Bunton;R. L. H. Essery

  • The Joint UK Land Environment Simulator (JULES), model description – Part 2: Carbon fluxes and vegetation dynamics

    D. B. Clark;L. M. Mercado;S. Sitch;C. D. Jones

  • The Met Office Unified Model Global Atmosphere 7.0/7.1 and JULES Global Land 7.0 configurations

    David Walters;Anthony J. Baran;Anthony J. Baran;Ian Boutle;Malcolm Brooks

  • Explicit representation of subgrid heterogeneity in a GCM land surface scheme

    R. L. H. Essery;M. J. Best;RA Betts;Peter M. Cox

  • Evaluation of forest snow processes models (SnowMIP2)

    Nick Rutter;Richard Essery;John Pomeroy;Nuria Altimir

  • An evaluation of snow accumulation and ablation processes for land surface modelling

    J. W. Pomeroy;D. M. Gray;K. R. Shook;B. Toth

  • A comparison of 1701 snow models using observations from an alpine site

    Richard Essery;Samuel Morin;Yves Lejeune;Cécile B Ménard

  • The Changing Face of Arctic Snow Cover: A Synthesis of Observed and Projected Changes

    Terry V. Callaghan;Margareta Johansson;Ross D. Brown;Pavel Ya. Groisman

  • Validation of the energy budget of an alpine snowpack simulated by several snow models (SnowMIP project)

    Pierre Etchevers;Eric Martin;Ross Brown;Charles Fierz

  • 2011 IEEE INTERNATIONAL GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING SYMPOSIUM (IGARSS)

    Helmut Rott;Donald W. Cline;Claude Duguay;Richard Essery

  • The Influence of Land Use Change on Climate in the Sahel

    Christopher M. Taylor;Eric F. Lambin;Nathalie Stephenne;Richard J. Harding

  • SNOWMIP2: an evaluation of forest snow process simulations.

    Richard Essery;Nick Rutter;John Pomeroy;Robert Baxter

  • Cold Regions Hydrology High-Resolution Observatory for Snow and Cold Land Processes

    Helmut Rott;Simon H Yueh;Donald W Cline;Claude Duguay

  • Changing Arctic Snow Cover: A Review of Recent Developments and Assessment of Future Needs for Observations, Modelling, and Impacts

    Stef Bokhorst;Stine Højlund Pedersen;Ludovic Brucker;Ludovic Brucker;Oleg Anisimov

  • Simulation of high-latitude hydrological processes in the Torne-Kalix basin: PILPS phase 2(e) - 1: Experiment description and summary intercomparisons

    Laura C. Bowling;Dennis P. Lettenmaier;Bart Nijssen;Bart Nijssen;L. Phil Graham

  • A distributed model of blowing snow over complex terrain

    Richard Essery;Long Li;John Pomeroy

  • Multiple Effects of Changes in Arctic Snow Cover

    Terry V. Callaghan;Margareta Johansson;Ross D. Brown;Pavel Ya Groisman

  • The fourth phase of the radiative transfer model intercomparison (RAMI) exercise: Actual canopy scenarios and conformity testing

    Jean Luc Widlowski;Corrado Mio;Mathias Disney;Jennifer Adams

  • Historical Northern Hemisphere snow cover trends and projected changes in the CMIP6 multi-model ensemble

    Lawrence Mudryk;María Santolaria-Otín;Gerhard Krinner;Martin Ménégoz

  • Shrub tundra snowmelt

    J.W. Pomeroy;D.S. Bewley;R.L.H. Essery;N.R. Hedstrom

  • Incoming longwave radiation to melting snow: observations, sensitivity and estimation in Northern environments

    J. E. Sicart;J. E. Sicart;J. W. Pomeroy;Richard Essery;D. Bewley

  • ESM-SnowMIP: assessing snow models and quantifying snow-related climate feedbacks

    Gerhard Krinner;Chris Derksen;Richard Essery;Mark Flanner

Frequent Co-Authors

John W. Pomeroy
John W. Pomeroy University of Saskatchewan
Helmut Rott
Helmut Rott University of Innsbruck
Giovanni Macelloni
Giovanni Macelloni National Research Council (CNR)
Claude R. Duguay
Claude R. Duguay University of Waterloo
Jouni Pulliainen
Jouni Pulliainen Finnish Meteorological Institute
Chris Derksen
Chris Derksen Environment and Climate Change Canada
Danny Marks
Danny Marks Agricultural Research Service
Simon Yueh
Simon Yueh Jet Propulsion Lab
Timothy E. Link
Timothy E. Link University of Idaho
Peter M. Cox
Peter M. Cox University of Exeter

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

Exploring Environmental Sciences in the USA often leads students to consider diverse academic paths and advanced degrees. For those interested in education leadership and policy related to environmental studies, programs like the eds to edd program offer a seamless transition for educators pursuing doctoral-level expertise online.

Additionally, professionals focused on community impact and social justice can complement their environmental knowledge with an online dsw programs in social work. These programs blend social work practice with environmental concerns, preparing graduates for holistic approaches to sustainability.

For students beginning their journey, affordable options like the cheapest online general studies degree programs provide flexible, cost-effective pathways to build foundational skills before specializing in environmental fields.

Moreover, those seeking a quicker route to a bachelor’s degree might explore options highlighted in the easiest bachelor's degree programs, balancing workload with career demands. These degrees can supplement environmental training with complementary skills to enhance employability.

Best Scientists Citing Richard Essery

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles