World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
W. James Steenburgh

W. James Steenburgh

D-Index & Metrics

Environmental Sciences

D-Index
36
Citations
4260
World Ranking
9196
National Ranking
3297

W. James Steenburgh 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 W. James Steenburgh 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: 282 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: 26 scientists 501–510 publications: 17 scientists 511–520 publications: 19 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 681–689 publications: 4 scientists 690+ publications: 100 scientists
41 publications 690+

This scientist: 102 publications — 14th percentile

14% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 690 publications or more.

W. James Steenburgh 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 W. James Steenburgh 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: 198 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: 20 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: 9 scientists 126+ D-Index: 92 scientists
30 D-Index 126+

This scientist: 36 D-Index — 7th percentile

7% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 126 D-Index or more.

Overview

W. James Steenburgh is affiliated with the University of Utah in the United States, with a research focus primarily in Earth and Planetary Sciences and Environmental Science. Their work is centered on Atmospheric Science and Global and Planetary Change, with some contributions to Management, Monitoring, Policy, and Law.

The main topics of Steenburgh's research include:

  • Meteorological Phenomena and Simulations
  • Climate variability and models
  • Cryospheric studies and observations
  • Tropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
  • Landslides and related hazards
  • Flood Risk Assessment and Management
  • Precipitation Measurement and Analysis

Steenburgh has published extensively in the field, with frequent contributions to specific journals such as:

  • Monthly Weather Review
  • Weather and Forecasting
  • Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
  • Atmosphere
  • Journal of Hydrometeorology

Some of the recent papers by Steenburgh include:

  • Intrastorm Variability of the Inland and Orographic Enhancement of a Sea-Effect Snowstorm in the Hokuriku Region of Japan, 2020, Monthly Weather Review
  • Characteristics of Historical Precipitation in High Mountain Asia Based on a 15-Year High Resolution Dynamical Downscaling, 2021, Atmosphere
  • Downstream Evolution and Coastal-to-Inland Transition of Landfalling Lake-Effect Systems, 2021, Monthly Weather Review
  • Evaluation of Recent NCEP Operational Model Upgrades for Cool-Season Precipitation Forecasting over the Western Conterminous United States, 2020, Weather and Forecasting
  • Climatology of Orographic Precipitation Gradients in the Contiguous Western United States, 2020, Journal of Hydrometeorology

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Steenburgh include:

  • Peter G. Veals
  • Courtenay Strong
  • Summer Rupper
  • Savanna Wolvin
  • Thomas M. Gowan

Best Publications

  • Climatological Characteristics of Atmospheric Rivers and Their Inland Penetration over the Western United States

    Jonathan J. Rutz;W. James Steenburgh;F. Martin Ralph

  • Evaluation of Surface Sensible Weather Forecasts by the WRF and the Eta Models over the Western United States

    William Y. Y. Cheng;W. James Steenburgh

  • The Structure and Evolution of Gap Outflow over the Gulf of Tehuantepec, Mexico

    W. James Steenburgh;David M. Schultz;Brian A. Colle

  • Climatology of Lake-Effect Snowstorms of the Great Salt Lake

    W. James Steenburgh;Scott F. Halvorson;Daryl J. Onton

  • The Inland Penetration of Atmospheric Rivers over Western North America: A Lagrangian Analysis

    Jonathan J. Rutz;W. James Steenburgh;F. Martin Ralph

  • Quantifying the role of atmospheric rivers in the interior western United States

    Jonathan J. Rutz;W. James Steenburgh

  • A Climatological Study of Thermally Driven Wind Systems of the U.S. Intermountain West.

    Jebb Q. Stewart;C. David Whiteman;W. James Steenburgh;Xindi Bian

  • An Evaluation of Mesoscale-Model-Based Model Output Statistics (MOS) during the 2002 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games

    Kenneth A. Hart;W. James Steenburgh;Daryl J. Onton;Andrew J. Siffert

  • Short-Term Forecast Validation of Six Models

    Bryan G. White;Jan Paegle;W. James Steenburgh;John D. Horel

  • Extratropical Cyclones: A Century of Research on Meteorology’s Centerpiece

    David M. Schultz;Lance F. Bosart;Brian A. Colle;Huw C. Davies

  • Episodic Dust Events of Utah’s Wasatch Front and Adjoining Region

    W. James Steenburgh;Jeffrey D. Massey;Thomas H. Painter

  • Strengths and Weaknesses of MOS, Running-Mean Bias Removal, and Kalman Filter Techniques for Improving Model Forecasts over the Western United States

    William Y. Y. Cheng;W. James Steenburgh

  • High-Resolution Simulations and Microphysical Validation of an Orographic Precipitation Event over the Wasatch Mountains during IPEX IOP3

    Brian A. Colle;Justin B. Wolfe;W. James Steenburgh;David E. Kingsmill

  • Understanding Utah winter storms: The Intermountain precipitation experiment

    David M. Schultz;W. James Steenburgh;R. Jeffrey Trapp;John Horel

  • Diagnostic and Sensitivity Studies of the 7 December 1998 Great Salt Lake–Effect Snowstorm

    Daryl J. Onton;W. James Steenburgh

  • Can carbon dioxide be used as a tracer of urban atmospheric transport

    D. E. Pataki;B. J. Tyler;R. E. Peterson;A. P. Nair

  • Orographic Influences on a Great Salt Lake-Effect Snowstorm

    Trevor I. Alcott;W. James Steenburgh

  • Multiscale Analysis of the 7 December 1998 Great Salt Lake–Effect Snowstorm

    W. James Steenburgh;Daryl J. Onton

  • The Ontario Winter Lake-Effect Systems Field Campaign: Scientific and Educational Adventures to Further Our Knowledge and Prediction of Lake-Effect Storms

    David A. R. Kristovich;Richard D. Clark;Jeffrey Frame;Bart Geerts

  • Climatological Characteristics and Orographic Enhancement of Lake-Effect Precipitation East of Lake Ontario and over the Tug Hill Plateau

    Peter G. Veals;W. James Steenburgh

  • Impact of Microphysics Parameterizations on Simulations of the 27 October 2010 Great Salt Lake–Effect Snowstorm

    John D. McMillen;W. James Steenburgh

  • Climatology of Strong Intermountain Cold Fronts

    Jason C. Shafer;W. James Steenburgh

Frequent Co-Authors

David M. Schultz
David M. Schultz University of Manchester
Clifford F. Mass
Clifford F. Mass University of Washington
Brian A. Colle
Brian A. Colle Stony Brook University
Bradley F. Smull
Bradley F. Smull University of Washington
Lance F. Bosart
Lance F. Bosart University at Albany, State University of New York
F. Martin Ralph
F. Martin Ralph University of California, San Diego
W. David Rust
W. David Rust National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Aaron Bansemer
Aaron Bansemer National Center for Atmospheric Research
Martin P. Hoerling
Martin P. Hoerling National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Kenneth E. Kunkel
Kenneth E. Kunkel North Carolina State University

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 expanding their expertise beyond traditional Environmental Sciences, exploring best gis programs offers a valuable option. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) skills are essential for analyzing environmental data, making this an excellent complementary pathway for careers in conservation, urban planning, or resource management.

Another relevant field is public administration, where an best online mpa program equips graduates with leadership and policy-making skills crucial for driving sustainable initiatives at local, state, or federal levels.

Understanding societal factors is also important in environmental work. Pursuing best online sociology bachelor degree programs enables students to examine human behavior and social systems—knowledge that can inform more effective community-based environmental projects.

For those aiming at advanced educational roles or organizational leadership within environmental sectors, exploring edd no dissertation programs can be appealing. These degrees focus on applied learning and offer flexibility without the time-consuming dissertation, allowing professionals to elevate their expertise efficiently.

Best Scientists Citing W. James Steenburgh

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles