Remote Sensing Break-out: Wed. Jan 24, 9:30-12:00

Summary report

Joost van HarenJeff Morisette

Recommendations for framework to integrate remote sensing product into NACP modeling

• ISSUE: Need to list different, similar data sets and acknowledge quality issues. Then work with the modeling community to use these multiple products and report model output sensitivity to the multiple products. – That is, we don’t need to decide on one recommended

product, modelers agreed that they would prefer to do sensitivity testing with different input.

– Framework needs to flexible enough for the modelers to provide feedback into the RS and modeling community.

– Example study by Masek et al.: Tested several NDVI records with CASA and inversion results and did not find match (consensus)

Recommendations for framework to integrate remote sensing product into NACP modeling

• SOLUTION: Break-out group proposed a listing of the possible products available and a first order assessment of quality, through ORNL’s MAST-DC.– Possibly a blog-type communication, which could be specific to a

given product (e.g. the MAST-DC “NDVI blog”)– Consider raw radiance and higher level product.– Produce a list of products modelers know of and establish two-

way communication between producers and modelers (linked blogs?)

– Standardized application sheet for metadata acquisition.– MAST has done a survey for NACP modelers; agreed to extend

the survey to the remote sensing community break-out

participants.

Concerns about disappearing platforms/products

• Advances have been made on some key products, but their continued production is unknown.

• Main concern for NACP: crop type, forest type, wetland, and soils maps - need to assess their status, and consider lobbying for their continuation (noting some are “level 4”, with RS input).

• Consider other Level 3 products, such as biomass maps.• MISR appears to be marginalized and even at present the data is

not presented to the modeling community in a usable format, and there are no multi-angle instruments on the horizon.

• There are LIDAR measurements, especially from aircraft, that are available for several states, but currently can’t even be used for core sites.

• Perhaps a white paper on the critical products could help lobby for there continuation.

Comments on new or improved products• Modelers perspective: use specific version, thus when a new version

comes out there needs to be notification from producers and modelers need to note what version they used.

• Remote sensing perspective: need feedback from modelers on the impact of improvements and direction for future work.

• Improvements are needed to remove bias in products (such as snow and water vapor, needs to be removed from long term records), or at biases should at least be acknowledged.

• NACP need for a given product improvement could help establish a priority for that effort (e.g. snow-bias).

• Calipso could help with snow bias, example of knowledge what existing platforms can do for integration

• EDC might coordinate cutting edge measurements from LIDAR.• Potential national airborne LIDAR

– Products include altimetry and water height

• The Remote sensing community should keep in mind and watch for agencies reaction to the Decadal survey.

High resolution and priority sites• EOS Validation team (Morisette) will submit requests for Aster

and EO-1 for NACP sites, looking for NACP sites where these data are needed for scaling bottom-up studies.

• Some priority sites: Mid-continent/WLEF and Orca• ARM classic site, with land and air measurements

– Contains three super sites (25 km between sites) where soil moisture/Eddy Covariance/landsurface will be assessed.

• Alaska study site could use ASTER’s 30m DEM.• Fluxnet is key for calibration, more coordination might be

warrented. – 7x7 km MODIS cutouts available for Fluxnet, – Aster data over the EOS core sites, some of which are Fluxnet – More communication from “tower people” is needed to discern if

there are more flux tower locations where high res data are needed.

Additional Comments

• David Crisp provided the break-out group with an overview of OCO; which is posted on the meeting discussion forum.

• Website online discussion very useful, everyone is encourage to use this tool.