1. Scientific Priorities of NSIDC DAAC Data
An assessment based on input from several NSIDC and PoDAG scientists
Mark Parsons
26 April 2001

2. Approach Initial response to lack of explicit scientific priorities
5 SPEC members and 4 PoDAG members prioritized DAAC data in four areas (1=hi, 3=lo)
Included future and current data sets
Limitations:
low PoDAG participation
data set titles only—many similar data sets
From WCRP:
1.Value of the data set in PROCESS STUDIES. How it could be used "to improve knowledge of global and regional climates and their temporal variations and understanding of the responsible mechanisms
2.Value of the data set in MONITORING. How it could be used "to assess the evidence for significant trends in global and regional climates."
3.Value of the data set in MODELLING. How it could be used "to develop and improve physical-mathematical models capable of simulating, and assessing the predictability of the climate system over a range of space and time scales."
4.The basic INTRINSIC VALUE of the data set, i.e., it's uniqueness.
Reviewers:
Serreze, Scambos, Nolin, Weaver, Armstrong
Francis, Shuman, Flato, Markus
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

3. Average Priority Top 10 (n ≥ 12)
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

4. Process Studies Top 5 (n ≥ 3)
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

5. Monitoring Top 5 (n ≥ 3)
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

6. Modeling Top 5 (n ≥ 3)
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

7. Intrinsic Value Top 4 (n ≥ 4)
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

8. Assessment of Heritage Data
sea ice: all < 2 except charts, L2, and ESMR
snow: all < 2
ice sheets: RAMP hi otherwise broad range
PM Tb: only polar stereo < 2
AVHRR: all < 2
met/atmosphere: none
n ≥ 9
sea ice: all < 2 except charts, L2, and ESMR
snow: all < 2
ice sheets: RAMP hi otherwise broad range
PM Tb: EASE slightly higher than PS
AVHRR: all < 2
met/atmosphere : all < 2
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

9. Assessment of EOS Data MODIS AMSR well considered (large n)
sea ice low (>2)
snow med. high (~1.5)
albedo very high but small n (not planned)
AMSR
sea ice high (< 1.5)
SWE medium high (~1.5)
Tbs low but not well considered
level 3 much higher than level 2
Non snow and ice products not considered
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

10. Assessment of EOS Data GLAS not well considered (small n)
Where considered all high except sea ice elevation
many products not considered especially L1
L3 product not considered
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII

11. What Next? Map data sets to science questions and/or NRC report?
Consider relative priority within parameter groups?
Consider value of low level products vs. derived products?
You tell me. Does it matter? (yes)
26 April 2001
PoDAG XVIII