MCI Break-Out Coordination Time Lines Deliverables Topic Groups –Subregional intensive group –Top-down group –Bottom-up group.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Urban Test Beds: Productivity, Problems, and Progress Measurement Networks, Logistics, and Models William J. Shaw 12 th GMU Conference on Transport and.
Advertisements

Land Surface Evaporation 1. Key research issues 2. What we learnt from OASIS 3. Land surface evaporation using remote sensing 4. Data requirements Helen.
"Ring 2": High-precision, high-accuracy CO 2 mixing ratio measurements in support of the NACP Mid Continent Intensive ring2.psu.edu Scott Richardson, Natasha.
GHG Verification & the Carbon Cycle 28 September 2010 JH Butler, NOAA CAS Management Group Meeting Page 1 Global Monitoring, Carbon Cycle Science, and.
Improving Understanding of Global and Regional Carbon Dioxide Flux Variability through Assimilation of in Situ and Remote Sensing Data in a Geostatistical.
Estimating the contribution of agricultural land use to terrestrial carbon fluxes in the continental US Keith Paustian 1,2, Steven Ogle 2, Scott Denning.
Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems Important Concerns: Potential greenhouse warming (CO 2, CH 4 ) and ecosystem interactions with climate Carbon management (e.g.,
Mid Continent Intensive Campaign Kenneth Davis 1 and Stephen M. Ogle 2 Co-Coordinators of MCI Campaign Task Force 1 Penn State University 2 Natural Resource.
The North American Carbon Program: An Overview for AmeriFlux investigators Kenneth Davis The Pennsylvania State University Co-chair, NACP Science Steering.
NACP Modeling and Synthesis Thematic Data Center (MAST-DC) A project funded by NASA 2005 Research Announcement for the North American Carbon Program Briefing.
Virtual Tall Towers and Inversions or How to Make Productive Use of Continental CO 2 Measurements in Global Inversions Martha Butler The Pennsylvania State.
Carbon sequestration in China’s ecosystems, Jingyun Fang Department of Ecology Peking University Feb. 14, 2008.
Princeton University Global Evaluation of a MODIS based Evapotranspiration Product Eric Wood Hongbo Su Matthew McCabe.
MCI Inversion Comparisons. CarbonTracker vs MCI Inventory MAX CROP SIGNAL In general, looks pretty reasonable However, max crop signal might be reversed?
Investigating Representation Errors in Inversions of Satellite CO 2 Retrievals K.D. Corbin, A.S. Denning, N.C. Parazoo Department of Atmospheric Science.
NESTED GLOBAL INVERSION WITH A FOCUS ON NORTH AMERICA: COMPARISON WITH BOTTOM-UP RESULTS IN CANADA Jing M. Chen, University of Toronto Main Contributors:
NOCES meeting Plymouth, 2005 June Top-down v.s. bottom-up estimates of air-sea CO 2 fluxes : No winner so far … P. Bousquet, A. Idelkadi, C. Carouge,
Andrew Schuh 1, Thomas Lauvaux 2,, Ken Davis 2, Marek Uliasz 1, Dan Cooley 1, Tristram West 3, Liza Diaz 2, Scott Richardson 2, Natasha Miles 2, F. Jay.
West Coast Breakout. Status of west coast project ORCA –Field intensives & data synthesis completed in wildfires, thinning, woody encroachment studies.
Field Measurement Networks D. Hollinger, E. LaPoint, R. Birdsey, L. Heath U.S. North American Carbon Program (NACP) Investigators Meeting, January 22-24,
Sharon M. Gourdji, K.L. Mueller, V. Yadav, A.E. Andrews, M. Trudeau, D.N. Huntzinger, A.Schuh, A.R. Jacobson, M. Butler, A.M. Michalak North American Carbon.
Intercomparison methods for satellite sensors: application to tropospheric ozone and CO measurements from Aura Daniel J. Jacob, Lin Zhang, Monika Kopacz.
Mid-Continent Intensive Campaign Synthesis Stephen M. Ogle Natural Resources Ecology Laboratory Colorado State University Co-Investigators: K. Davis, A.
Establishing a UK OCO/GOSAT expert group Paul Palmer, Hartmut Bösch, Paul Monks, Peter Bernath et al White paper Expert Group: Why? What? Who? OCO Project.
The role of the Chequamegon Ecosystem-Atmosphere Study in the U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan Ken Davis The Pennsylvania State University The 13 th ChEAS.
Discussion Topics – Delaware River Basin Pilot Project Synergistic opportunities between FIA/FHM/GC/USGS –Scaling – top down/bottom up – multi-tier approach.
NACP breakout group: Atmospheric Measurements and Analyses: Summary for the plenary Room: Cheyenne I Time: Monday, 3-5pm.
TOP-DOWN CONSTRAINTS ON REGIONAL CARBON FLUXES USING CO 2 :CO CORRELATIONS FROM AIRCRAFT DATA P. Suntharalingam, D. J. Jacob, Q. Li, P. Palmer, J. A. Logan,
Indianapolis flux (INFLUX) in-situ network: quantification of urban atmospheric boundary layer greenhouse gas dry mole fraction enhancements 18 th WMO/IAEA.
Remote Sensing Break-out: Wed. Jan 24, 9:30-12:00 Summary report Joost van Haren Jeff Morisette.
Atmospheric Validation Working Group Members (23): Heather Graven, Manvendra Dubey, Arlyn Andrews, David Baker, Kevin Bowman, Martha Butler, Jim Collatz,
Spatial and temporal patterns of CH 4 and N 2 O fluxes from North America as estimated by process-based ecosystem model Hanqin Tian, Xiaofeng Xu and other.
Characterizing observational and model uncertainty Kusum Naithani Department of Geography The Pennsylvania State University ChEAS 2012 Workshop.
Natasha Miles, Scott Richardson, Arlyn Andrews, Kathy Corbin, Kenneth Davis, Liza Diaz, Scott Denning, Erandi Lokupitiya, Douglas Martins, Paul Shepson,
Integration of biosphere and atmosphere observations Yingping Wang 1, Gabriel Abramowitz 1, Rachel Law 1, Bernard Pak 1, Cathy Trudinger 1, Ian Enting.
The Role of Virtual Tall Towers in the Carbon Dioxide Observation Network Martha Butler The Pennsylvania State University ChEAS Meeting June 5-6, 2006.
Toward a mesoscale flux inversion in the 2005 CarboEurope Regional Experiment T.Lauvaux, C. Sarrat, F. Chevallier, P. Ciais, M. Uliasz, A. S. Denning,
Quantification of anthropogenic emissions from an urban region: First results of time-integrated flask samples from the Indianapolis Flux Project (INFLUX)
C. Sweeney 1, A. Karion, D.W.Guenther 1, S. E. Wolter 1, D. Neff 1, P.M. Lang 2, M.J. Heller 1, T. Conway 2, E.J. Dlugokencky 2, P. Novelli 2, L. Bruhwiler.
22 January, 2007NACP investigators’ meeting, Colorado Springs, CO NACP breakout group: Atmospheric Measurements and Analyses: Full notes Room: Cheyenne.
Site-Level Model-Data Comparison A Proposed NACP Interim Synthesis Project Ken Davis, Peter Thornton, Kevin Schaefer, Dan Riciutto Coordinators.
Project goals Evaluate the accuracy and precision of the CO2 DIAL system, in particular its ability to measure: –Typical atmospheric boundary layer - free.
ENEON first workshop Observing Europe: Networking the Earth Observation Networks in Europe September, Paris Total Carbon Column Observing Network.
Flux Measurements and Systematic Terrestrial Measurements 1.discuss gaps and opportunities What are gaps? 2. brainstorm ideas about collaborative projects.
Goal: to understand carbon dynamics in montane forest regions by developing new methods for estimating carbon exchange at local to regional scales. Activities:
Ozone time series and trends Various groups compute trends in different ways. One goal of the workshop is to be able to compare time series and trends.
G-IDAS Richard Engelen.
A Modeling and Synthesis Thematic Data Center for the North American Carbon Program Robert B. Cook 1, Yaxing Wei 1, W. Mac Post 1, Peter E. Thornton 1,
MODIS contribution to NACP MODIS Land break-out Session March 24, 2005 Jeff Morisette 1 Bill Emanuel 2 1 NASA Goddard 2 NASA HQ.
INTEGRA Synthesis of LBA Workshops, books, reviews, integrated data analysis of all towers across the basin, model improvements,… Intensive Ground Atmosphere.
Midcontinental intensive update. Top-down summary Successful 2007 atmospheric CO 2 measurement campaign underway. Data array of unprecedented density.
Observing and Modeling Requirements for the BARCA Project Scott Denning 1, Marek Uliasz 1, Saulo Freitas 2, Marcos Longo 2, Ian Baker 1, Maria Assunçao.
Detection and Quantification of Atmospheric Boundary Layer Greenhouse Gas Dry Mole Fraction Enhancements from Urban Emissions: Results from INFLUX NOAA.
Cheas 2006 Meeting Marek Uliasz: Estimation of regional fluxes of CO 2 … Cheas 2006 Meeting Marek Uliasz: Estimation of regional fluxes of CO 2 …
Success and Failure of Implementing Data-driven Upscaling Using Flux Networks and Remote Sensing Jingfeng Xiao Complex Systems Research Center, University.
Spatial and temporal dynamics of atmospheric pollutants in London, UK. Carole Helfter, Eiko Nemitz, Chiara Di Marco, Ben Langford, Neil Mullinger, Ute.
Data assimilation in C cycle science Strand 2 Team.
Ring2.psu.edu Natasha Miles, Scott Richardson, Ken Davis, and Eric Crosson American Geophysical Union Annual Meeting 2008: 17 Dec 2008 Temporal and spatial.
MODIS Atmosphere Products: The Importance of Record Quality and Length in Quantifying Trends and Correlations S. Platnick 1, N. Amarasinghe 1,2, P. Hubanks.
Anna M. Michalak Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Department of Atmospheric, Oceanic and Space Sciences University of Michigan Reconciling.
TS 15 The Great Salt Lake System ASLO 2005 Aquatic Sciences Meeting Climatology and Variability of Satellite-derived Temperature of the Great Salt Lake.
FIVE CHALLENGES IN ATMOSPHERIC COMPOSITION RESEARCH 1.Exploit satellite and other “top-down” atmospheric composition data to quantify emissions and export.
1 Co-ordinator: Detlef Schulze (MPI for Biogeochemistry) Component Leaders: Riccardo Valentini, Philippe Ciais, Han Dolman, Martin Heimann, John Grace.
Non-CO 2 Greenhouse Gases breakout session NACP Science Team meeting 18 February 2009.
Carbon Cycle Data Assimilation with a Variational Approach (“4-D Var”) David Baker CGD/TSS with Scott Doney, Dave Schimel, Britt Stephens, and Roger Dargaville.
North American Carbon Program
CarboEurope Open Science Conference
Validation Working Group
PI: Steven Pawson (GMAO) Atmosphere:
Carbon Model-Data Fusion
Presentation transcript:

MCI Break-Out Coordination Time Lines Deliverables Topic Groups –Subregional intensive group –Top-down group –Bottom-up group

Deliverables Atmospheric CO2 and CH4 concentration, isotopic ratios, trace gases Flux and stock maps from April 2007 through 2008 growing season using bottom-up and top-down approaches –Time Step: weekly to annual –Spatial scale: focus on spatial extent of region identified in science plan but with fuzzy boundaries for top-down; scale of modeling will vary from 1x1 degree to 1 km grid –Bottom-up and top-down will have layers for each investigation –May need to aggregate for comparisons Comparison of top-down and bottom-up, and explanation of differences Mechanistic Understanding of Fluxes/Stock Changes

Subregional Intensives Participation of subregional studies contigent on fundin for serveral studies –Key sites not funded for campaign: Bondville, CHeAS, Minneapolis/St. Paul –However data are available for the past which can be used to inform bottom-up model Data used as input to bottom-up models (e.g., Schmid, Liu) and as model evaluation Coordination of measurements for flux tower data assimilation Expect individual investigators to request additional data needs for their bottom-up modeling

Bottom-Up Group Model inter-comparisons represents a significant but important challenge –Stocks and fluxes –MAST-DC can provide some uniformity in data inputs –Independent model evaluation data Ameriflux data are assimilated for at least approaches OCO?? Timeline is sensitive to the availability of model input data. Deliverables 6-9 months after all input data available –MODIS products (Morisette) about 6 months after year of interest –Daymet weather (Thornton) about 1.5 yrs after year of interest –Crop Maps (USDA) by October following growing season –NASS Yield data (USDA) by next spring –NRI land use histories (USDA) about 2 years

Top-Down Group Data Comparisons –Aircraft to towers –Calibrated short towers to tall towers –Multi-Species Model Comparisons –Flux fields and concentrations –Transport Model Comparison Data to Model Comparisons – if not used in the inversion (aircraft)

Time Lines for MCI Campaign Subregional Intensives Top-Down Bottom-Up Tall Tower Measurements Sampling Campaign AprAugDecAprAugDecAprAugDecAprAug Aircraft Profiles Ring of Towers Calibrated Flux Towers Aircraft Campaign MCI and Arm CART (1-3 wks) Data Stream Intercom- parisons (data and models) Top-Down v. Bottom-Up Input Data Available Intercom- parisons (models, 2003) Top-Down v. Bottom-Up Ameriflux Gracenet Previous Year Fluxes Previous Year Fluxes 2007 Est- imates

Needs/Gaps Some sub-regional studies will not overlap with campaign –e.g., Bondville Bottom-Up Model Inter-comparisons –Common dataset and evaluation data Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up Comparisons –Support for the analysis Continue discussion and planning by teleconferences on an as need basis, probably every 2-4 weeks Workshops for topic groups synthesis activities –1-2 per year Other Needs/Gaps???