CEOS Strategy for Carbon
Observations from Space
Masakatsu Nakajima (JAXA) and
Diane E. Wickland (NASA)
CTF Side Meeting at CEOS SIT-28
Hampton , Virginia, USA
March 11, 2013
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Outline for Side Meeting Discussion
• Background on rationale and plan for developing the
report
• Current status of the report
• Summary and discussion of major CEOS actions /
recommendations included in the report, seeking CEOS
SIT participant inputs regarding:
• Reasonableness of actions / recommendations
• Owners / responsible parties for actions/
recommendations
• “Missing” actions / recommendations
• Issues or concerns about actions / recommendations
• Plans for completion of the report
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
CEOS Response to the GEO Carbon
Strategy
CEOS established the Carbon Task Force
(CTF) to coordinate the response from
space agencies to the GEO Carbon
Strategy:
CEOS Strategy for Carbon Observations
from Space
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Rationale
• CEOS established the Carbon Task Force (CTF)
to coordinate the response from space
agencies to the GEO Carbon Strategy.
• Take into account information requirements of
both the UNFCCC and IPCC and consider how
future satellite missions will support them
• Also take account of, and be consistent with, the
GCOS and GEO Implementation Plans.
• Help definition of next generation missions for
individual agencies
• Provide a basis for systematic observation
and reporting of progress towards satisfying
society’s carbon information needs
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
CEOS Response to the GEO Carbon
Strategy: Approach to Report
 Carbon Task Force co-leads (JAXA & NASA) take overall responsibility.
 Domain leads have been identified by CTF to develop the atmospheric,
terrestrial (land) and oceanic chapters:
 Atmosphere: Prof Berrien Moore (Univ. Oklahoma, USA)
 Land: Prof Christiane Schmullius (Univ. Jena, Germany) and Dr. Ralph
Dubayah (Univ. Maryland)
 Ocean: Dr Shubha Sathyendranath (Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UK)
 And the Integration chapter:
 Integration: Dr. Stephen Plummer (European Space Agency)
 Domain leads supported by co-authors from the international EO
scientific community based on recommendations made by CTF
members as well as from the domain leads.
 Follows the model of the CEOS Response to the GCOS Implementation
Plan with actions identified for each domain and for integration as the
basis for monitoring and reporting.
 Recognised that the GEO Carbon Strategy Report may not cover the full
spectrum of societal needs and CEOS should aim to address this.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Outline and Leads for CTF Report
CEOS Strategy for Carbon Observations from Space
Executive Summary (Nakajima, Wickland, Plummer)
Section 1: Introduction (Nakajima, Wickland, and Ward)
Section 2: Land Domain (Schmullius and Dubayah)
Section 3: Ocean Domain (Sathyendranath)
Section 4: Atmosphere Domain (Moore)
Section 5: Integration (Plummer)
Section 6: The Way Forward (Wickland, Nakajima, Plummer)
Appendices
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Domain Chapter Authors
Atmosphere:
Berrien Moore (University of Oklahoma)
John Burrows (Universität Bremen)
David Crisp (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory)
Michio Kawamiya (Japan Agency for Marine-earth Science and Technology)
Martin Heimann (Max Plank Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena)
Ray Nasser (Environment Canada)
Peter Rayner (Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de L'Environnement)
Ocean
Shubha Sathyendranath (Plymouth Marine Lab)
Prakash Chauhan (Indian Space Research Organization)
Watson Gregg (NASA Goddard Space Flight Center)
Nicolas Hoepffner (Joint Research Centre)
Joji Ishizaka (Nagoya University)
Johnny Johannessen (Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre)
Milton Kampel (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais)
Tiit Kutser (University of Tartu)
Trevor Platt (Bedford Institute of Oceanography)
J-H Ryu (Korea Ocean Satellite Center)
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Domain Chapter Authors
Land
Chris Schmullius (Friedrich-Schiller University Jena)
Ralph Dubayah (University of Maryland)
Warren Cohen (USDA Forest Service)
Eric Kasischke (University of Maryland)
Kyle McDonald (City College of New York)
Shaun Quegan (The University of Sheffield)
Jean Ometto (Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais)
Stephen Plummer (European Space Agency)
Steven Running (University of Montana)
Sassan Saatchi (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory)
Masanobu Shimada (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency)
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Current Status of Report
• Atmosphere chapter completed in February 2013; some minor
editing (e.g., references, formatting) in process
• Ocean and Inland Waters chapter completed in February 2013;
some minor editing (e.g., co-author proofing, references,
formatting) in process
• A complete draft of the Integration chapter was circulated to all coauthors and the CTF executive team in February 2013 and is in
revision
• Complete draft of revised Land chapter circulated to all co-authors
and CTF executive team on March 5, 2013
• The Introduction and Way Forward chapters are being drafted
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Backup Materials
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Actions / Recommendations
• Each Chapter’s writing team took a slightly different approach to
crafting their actions / recommendations statements:
•
•
•
•
Some followed CEOS response to GCOS IP format
Some made statements in text
Some sorted by types of actions
Some did not draft them as CEOS actions and/or may not have fully
taken into account CEOS’s role
• We recognize that when we integrate the report, we will need to:
• Format and organize the statements consistently across chapters
• Re-draft (and in some cases, possibly reconsider) some statements to
more appropriately reflect what CEOS can do and be reasonably
expected to address
• Reduce the total number of actions / recommendations by integrating
similar actions within and across chapters
• Add one or more recommendations about implementation, likely in the
Way Forward chapter
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Land Chapter Actions / Recommendations
1. Develop satellite observations of forest height and biomass from
such sensors as Lidar and P-band SAR and Pol-InSAR to meet the
global requirements for forest biomass carbon stock and stock
change. CEOS Action: Continue to strongly advocate for new
satellite remote sensing missions that can be used to map
aboveground biomass and forest height, including P-band SAR,
Pol-InSAR, and Lidar. Such missions should clearly support climate
treaty frameworks such as REDD+.
2. Develop and implement approaches to map wetlands, wetland
inundation, and small lakes and ponds at medium resolutions (30
to 100m). CEOS Action: Continue research needed to develop
approaches for developing land data products for mapping
wetlands, wetland inundation and mapping small lakes and ponds.
Implement projects to develop these essential land products at
regional and global scales.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Land Chapter Actions / Recommendations
3. As new satellite remote sensing systems are launched and their
data become available, conduct inter-comparison of land remote
sensing products to ensure consistent global data sets. CEOS
Action: Continue (and initiate if necessary) programs for the
systematic inter-comparison of land data products that are
generated from data collected by new remote sensing systems as
they are launched.
4. Improve the continuity of land surface products through
enhancements of the historical moderate resolution vis/IR and
thermal IR data record. CEOS Action: Continue and expand
projects focused on generation of moderate-resolution land
remote sensing products using historical data records.
5. Expand development of land surface data products from historical
medium resolution vis/IR data sets. CEOS Action: Continue and
expand projects focused on generation of medium-resolution land
remote sensing products using historical data records.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Land Chapter Actions / Recommendations
6. Develop data fusion and data assimilation algorithms using a
combination of remote sensing data (Lidar, SAR, vis/IR) at medium to
moderate resolutions (100-250m) to improve the accuracy of land
variables. CEOS Action: Continue and expand projects focused on
generation of land remote sensing products using historical and
planned data records that require the use of multiple satellite data
sets.
7. The collection of reference data needed for calibration and validation
for all land remote sensing products should be regular and sustained.
CEOS Action: Encourage national agencies to supply ground
reference data in support of calibration and validation requirements.
Support efforts to develop networks for providing observations needed
for calibration and validation of land remote sensing products.
8. Provide spatial error characterization of land variables. CEOS Action:
The Working Group on Calibration and Validation to expand the
number of land variables currently being addressed by the land
product validation sub-group.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Mission 1. Continuity: Ocean colour, SST and Microwave Sensors, for
generation of products listed above, with stability and precision
commensurate with GCOS Requirements. CEOS Action: CEOS and
member agencies to ensure continuity of satellite missions with
adequate on-board calibration and sustained cal/val operations.
Coordinate efforts with corresponding Virtual Constellation and
Climate activities of CEOS.
Mission 2. Coastal waters: In contrast to the open ocean, the high
spatio-temporal complexity of coastal regions requires a dedicated,
oriented coverage rather than a global coverage. High spatial
resolution (better than 0.5 km) is needed as well as fast repetition rate
(< 1 day) for the observation of specific and often transitory events
(e.g. unusual or transient algal blooms). In addition the challenging
optical nature of coastal turbid waters entails more spectral channels
in the visible spectrum (e.g. MERIS-type) that are not necessarily
required for the open ocean. CEOS Action: Ensure continuity of MERIStype missions.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Mission 3. Inland water bodies: Current estimates on the number of
lakes on Earth are based on statistics showing that lakes and reservoirs
cover a much greater portion (around 3%) of the Earth’s land surface
than previously thought. Majority of the lakes in the world are small.
Use of ocean-colour sensors such as MODIS or MERIS is therefore fairly
limited in lake carbon research. On the other hand, land remote
sensing sensors with sufficient spatial resolution (such as Landsat) do
not have sufficient sensitivity to estimate lake CDOM content and
monitor long-term trends. At present there are only a few sensors (such
as ALI on EO-1 used in papers by that are suitable for mapping lake
CDOM/DOC/pCO2 but they do not provide full global coverage. The
launch of Landsat 8 and Sentinel-2 will change the situation, as sensors
on both these missions will provide data with sufficient spatial and
radiometric resolution as well as the global coverage needed for lake
research. CEOS Action: Ensure prompt launch and continuity of
missions such as Landsat 8 and Sentinel-2.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Mission 4. New missions: Ocean colour: MERIS-class sensors at full
resolution meet most coastal requirements with respect to spectral,
temporal and spatial resolution. But it is recognised that there are
specific applications in coastal and inland-water bodies that require
higher resolution in time, space and spectral domains. MERIS-type or
better spectral resolution is needed for phytoplankton functional types
and phytoplankton carbon by type); higher spatial resolution for
certain coastal applications (of order 30 m, for applications including
floods, tides, river discharge). Some of these requirements may be met
through geostationary satellites. CEOS Action: CEOS member
agencies to coordinate geostationary missions to ensure global
coverage at most latitudes, complemented by polar-orbiting satellites
for polar coverage.
Mission 5. New Missions: Salinity (to derive alkalinity, improve pCO2
estimates). Improvements in spatial requirement over SMOS and
Aquarius-type sensors needed, especially for coastal and inland
water applications. CEOS Action: Explore potential for future salinity
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Product/Processing 1. Global-scale validation of algorithms for
estimating pools of carbon from satellite data, in carbon units, in close
collaboration with in situ observation systems. CEOS Action: CEOS to
encourage member agencies to include components of the ocean
carbon pool among products from satellite data, and to ensure that
they are validated appropriately. Link to CEOS Working Group on
Cal/Val activities. Link to GEO Blue Planet initiative, which brings
together communities engaged in satellite as well as in situ
observations.
Product/Processing 2. Ensure appropriate merging of different sensors to
get a consistent, bias-free time-series of all products in Table 2 for
climate impact analyses. Models exist, for example, in the CCI
initiative of ESA, and the MEASURES project of NASA, but they do not
cover all the carbon products required. CEOS Action: CEOS to
coordinate satellite time-series product development to ensure
appropriate merging of data and products from multiple sensors for
climate impact analyses. A product-based approach rather than a
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Product/Processing 3. Provide error characterisation of products. It is
necessary to provide adequate error characterisation of ocean
carbon products, ideally on a pixel-by-pixel basis, to ensure that the
products are used appropriately. CEOS Action: The Working Group on
Calibration and Validation to establish a sub-group dealing with
validation and error characterisation of ocean carbon products
analogous to the land product validation sub-group.
Ocean Integration 2. Development of regional Cal/Val, air-sea fluxes
and carbon measurement networks; adequate archival and
distribution
Ocean Integration 2. Development of regional Cal/Val, air-sea fluxes
and carbon measurement networks; adequate archival and
distribution
Ocean Integration 3. Improved assimilation of ocean-colour data
products in coupled ocean circulation and bio-geochemical models.
Need of providing ocean-colour data with pixels/grid wise error
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Ocean-Land 1. Compare similarities and differences between models
for satellite-based estimates of terrestrial and oceanic primary
production, to facilitate comparison of the two components of global
primary production (see GCOS-GTOS workshop on the topic hosted by
JRC, Ispra, a couple of years ago). CEOS Action: Member agencies
engaged in development of carbon products to ensure compatibility
and comparability and consistency of carbon products across two or
more domains. Example: PAR products and primary production in land
and ocean. CEOS Working Group on Climate to undertake this task.
Ocean-Land 2. Fresh-water aquatic flora (lakes, rivers, reservoirs and
wetlands) and associated biological productivity for land carbon
budgeting. CEOS Action:
Ocean-Land 3. River discharge
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Ocean and Inland Waters Chapter
Actions / Recommendations
Ocean-Atmosphere 1. Retrieval of oceanic products (e.g. chlorophyll,
water-leaving radiances, photosynthetically-available radiation) relies
on knowledge of various atmospheric products (e.g. ozone, surface
pressure, winds, aerosols including absorbing dust and soot). It is
believed that the most consistent and accurate state estimation of the
atmosphere arise from reanalyses (such as available from ECMWF).
Different space agencies do not necessarily use the same reanalysis
products. It is important that the best atmospheric products for use in
retrieval of ocean products be identified, and used consistently across
space agencies. CEOS Action: Virtual constellations to explore the use
of consistent auxiliary data across sensors.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Atmosphere Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
Given that OCO-2 will launch in late 2014 or early 2015 , it is particularly
important to extend the GOSAT mission as long as possible to provide
continuity/overlap with OCO-2, especially since the ENVISAT mission
has ended, and therefore, we will no longer have SCIAMACHY.
Both of these objectives drive observational accuracy and coverage, with
greater accuracy, precision, coverage and frequency required for
constraining sources and sinks at finer space and time scales.
Therefore, for the challenge of monitoring point sources like power
plants, it has been recommended that Geostationary (GEO) satellites
might be the best approach, since they provide continuous coverage of
a selected area. However, consensus on the best observing strategy
has not yet emerged, which might suggest that a balanced approach
including LEO and GEO observations, would offer the most benefit.
The strategy will require a coordinated effort among those doing surface
based, in situ, and remote measurements, as well as engagement with
the broader community studying carbon fluxes from ecosystems,
which would include FluxNet among others.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Atmosphere Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
These are important tenets. There is only a slight expansion that would be
needed; namely, to include within the context of the first tenet, the role
of geostationary platforms, as noted by the previously referenced
Jason study in the United States. In fact, the potential geostationary
role may be implicit with tenet #1.
This is not to suggest that Agency plans are not of value for moving
forward; however, the focus of the first generation of greenhouse gas
satellites has been on accurate measurements (useful) but with much
less attention being given to ensuring adequate coverage, resolution,
or repeat frequency (shortfall). Moreover, the stated Agency plans that
were used in the GEO Carbon Strategy June 2010 are now quite out-ofdate in critical areas: baseline missions have been moved out in time
and/or left undefined and hence more distant.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Atmosphere Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
Given the extraordinary importance of climate change and the intrigue
and close coupling of carbon and climate, it s useful to consider the
remarkable role and structure of the operational systems for
coordinated meteorological observations used in numerical weather
prediction (NWP), which consist of multiple satellites in LEO and GEO
orbits, aircraft, balloon, and ground observing systems; it is a true
system of systems. This system presents a model for the type of
satellite constellations, as part of this needed system of systems,
which could be developed for CO2 and CH4 emissions monitoring.
NASA’s Geostationary Coastal and Air Pollution Events (GEO-CAPE )
mission to launch after (how much after is unclear) 2022 aims to
measure CH4 and other gases. Although it is not formally targeting CO2,
broad spectral range instruments are being considered for the mission
and some of these could be designed to include CO2 bands (and the O2
A-band) yielding GEO observations with the appropriate characteristics
for emissions monitoring. The possibility of CO2 capability on this GEO
mission and any others should therefore be thoroughly considered.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Atmosphere Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
The CarbonSat has been selected for Phase A B1 studies by ESA for its
Earth Explorer Opportunity 8 Mission. If selected for CD studies this
mission would start around 2020. In addition, the concept of a
CarbonSat constellation has been proposed . ESA/EUMETSAT Sentinel
5 is planned to have some CO2 and CH4 capability, but at present, it
has a sub-optimal selection of spectral channels for CO2 when
compared to OCO-2 and CarbonSat .
The Polar Communications and Weather (PCW) mission of the CSA is
expected to launch around 2018 and will use two operational satellites
in HEOs to obtain quasi-geostationary observations of northern
latitudes for meteorological purposes. An enhancement to the mission
called PHEOS (Polar Highly Elliptical Orbit Science) is being considered
which would use an imaging FTS with heritage from GOSAT for NIR and
TIR observations of northern CO2, CH4 (along with the O2 A-band), and
air quality gases. The PHEOS atmospheric concept completed Phase A,
and a decision from the CSA on inclusion of atmospheric research
instruments will be made in the coming years.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Atmosphere Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
Finally, for any constellation the issue of validation and cross-calibration
must be seriously considered.
There is a clear need to developing an internationally coordinated and
comprehensive global observing system that would a) provide the
necessary information for fundamentally increasing our knowledge of
the global carbon cycle and b) support monitoring and verification of
CO2 and CH4 emissions for international purposes.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-1) To establish better links to the carbon cycle community in
general and specifically focusing collective efforts on data provision for
major model-data inter-comparison efforts.
CTF-CEOS-I-2) To strengthen mechanisms for product validation, in
particular the interface between in situ and satellite observations.
CTF-CEOS-I-3) Collaboration in the development and strengthening of
existing Key Science Bodies to act as product clearing-houses,
independent assessment mechanisms following for example the efforts
of IOCCP and GHRSST.
CTF-CEOS-I-4) Reinforce efforts in cross-calibration and methodological
inter-comparison
CTF-CEOS-I-5) Reinforce multi-agency planning for satellites to ensure
the priority observations are made in the future.
CTF-CEOS-I-6)
Ensure that the baseline observations required for
carbon cycle science and policy related matters are maintained and the
long-term archive preserved whilst maintaining efforts on calibration
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-7) Convene workshops on the interface between models
(land-ocean-atmosphere) of the carbon cycle and satellite data
products to reconcile methodological differences and spatial
compatibility.
CTF-CEOS-I-8) Promote consistency between individual and multiple
space agency efforts addressing specific aspects of the carbon cycle
to ensure there is methodological traceability and compatibility
between studies conducted at different resolutions e.g. FCT v global
model. Ultimately the idea would be to have FCT sites as validation
supersites for carbon science.
CTF-CEOS-I-9) Promote and encourage efforts at individual space agency
level to inter-compare product outputs of relevance to the carbon cycle.
Reinforce the mechanisms already in place in CEOS (WGCV for land,
VC for atmosphere and ocean, WG Climate) to ensure this is achieved.
Support existing mechnaisms ex-CEOS in this endeavour (e.g.
GHRSST, IOCCP, GOFC-GOLD)
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-10) Actively pursue a CEOS role within major model-data
inter-comparison exercises as the point of reference for appropriate
satellite products.
CTF-CEOS-I-11) Identify the priority measurements to meet carbon cycle
science and policy needs (see domain chapters) and target those
measurements in future sensor calls.
CTF-CEOS-I-12) Ensure that the carbon cycle community is actively
engaged in the sensor selection process (not just associated to
proposals) and in particular sensor and platform development.
CTF-CEOS-I-13) Ensure that the products required for carbon studies in
terms of their temporal resolution are available to the carbon cycle
community. These require identification with the carbon cycle
community since different temporal resolutions are required for
different purposes (seasonal, ‘diurnal-weekly’, monthly, long timeseries
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-14) Ensure there is a continuous interface between the
research agencies (ESA, NASA et al) and those with an operational
mandate (NOAA, Eumetsat et al) to ensure long-term continuity
opportunities for successful research systems are planned in advance.
CTF-CEOS-I-15) Reinforce collaborative efforts to ensure products
generated by different agencies are inter-compared and compatible.
CTF-CEOS-I-16) Encourage the development of experiments designed to
evaluate policy needs following the model of FCT (p32 GEOCS).
CTF-CEOS-I-17) Ensure that the data required in a) are supplied and
mechanisms developed to ensure these data are effectively evaluated
using funding streams available at individual space agency level.
CTF-CEOS-I-18) Identify the priority missing components for
emissions/storage/stock assessment that are capable of being
addressed with satellite data
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-19) Encourage the development of these experiments in line
with required in situ observation needs in addition to the satellite
observations (e.g. for FCT are in situ observations present and
models/methodologies available)
CTF-CEOS-I-20) Develop (with WG Climate and WGCV) effective
protocols for the generation of products from individual satellites and
platforms and implement these to ensure long-term consistent datasets
relevant to carbon cycle communit
CTF-CEOS-I-21) Ensure that the generation of individual products takes
account of ancillary data dependence (land cover, aerosol, cloud, DEM
et al) such that there is consistency across individual variables.
CTF-CEOS-I-22) Enforce requirements for clarity and traceability in the
generation of products – make all necessary documentation public (p38
GEOCS).
CTF-CEOS-I-23) Develop guidelines for the specification of uncertainty for
given products from signal counts through the various CEOS
Processing Levels
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-24) Reinforce the activities of the WGCV for land products to
generate validation methodologies, protocols and benchmark datasets
for validation. At CEOS-GEO Level engage with in situ observation
networks to make data collections compatible with the needs of
satellite validation and ensure in situ data are accessible to the satellite
community (GAW, Argos, Fluxnet, RAINFOR, AMAZZONICA, GEOCarbon, TCCON). Reorganise the WGCV/VC interface to provide clear
responsibilities for validation for all domains (land, atmosphere,
ocean). Where necessary reinforce to individual agencies the need for
investment in product validation as part of satellite development
CTF-CEOS-I-25) Work closely the carbon cycle/climate communities, in
particular for any upcoming inter-comparison activities (e.g. for IPCC)
on data standards to ensure the data products generated with satellites
are provide for these activities in the appropriate and consistent
formats. Such data collections should be provide with clear information
of product content to permit appropriate use. Coordination with ESGF
is recommended
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-26) Ensure through collaboration with major intercomparison activities (model-data, data-data, multiple data-stream) that
the appropriate data is available and accessible. This should be
undertaken as a CEOS community effort in common with point f).
Previous examples of this could serve as a model e.g. ISLSCP-I, II.
CTF-CEOS-I-27) For each of the relevant variables in each of the domains
assess the current provision of validation data in terms of quality
(defined by protocols e.g. WGCV LAI protocol) and spatial and temporal
coverage, identify potential additional sources and develop strategy to
improve global in situ data distributions in relation to satellite
validation and model parameterisation. Exploit existing infrastructures
to develop key intensive collection sites.
CTF-CEOS-I-28) Review current use of data products including current
data limitations in collaboration with the carbon cycle community.
Develop guidelines for appropriate data use and invest in mechanisms
for community product assessment. Improve interaction through joint
workshops targeting specific data needs, use and interfaces.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-29) At CEOS level establish improved interfaces to major
inter-comparison exercises e.g. CMIP5, CxMIP, OCMIP, RECCAP
dedicated to the carbon cycle.
CTF-CEOS-I-30) In collaboration with the carbon cycle community
identify for the period 2020 onwards what the key priorities for satellite
observations (data gaps, process gaps) are and target these in satellite
mission calls
CTF-CEOS-I-31) Engage the carbon cycle community in the process of
satellite development (beyond just association to proposals) in
particular continuous updating of progress and engagement in key
decision making steps.
CTF-CEOS-I-32) For the near-term (2015-2020) identify any opportunities
to develop additional items in support of existing planned missions as
joint activities CEOS agencies and industry (e.g. DMS approach),
national agencies (at least in Europe). Confirm key priority missions in
land (BOIOMASS, DESDyNI-R), ocean (??) and atmosphere (OCO-2,
GOSAT-2, CarbonSat).
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-33) Ensure commitment to long-term continuity and archive
exploitation for existing resources in terms of product generation
specifically for the carbon cycle community.
CTF-CEOS-I-34) Identify the priorities in terms of measurements in the
context of time (2015-202-2025) and space (increasing resolution of
needs) from the CEOS standpoint and issue to the carbon cycle
community for feedback and eventual confirmation.
CTF-CEOS-I-35) Request the carbon cycle community, through existing
conduits (IOCCG, GCP, GHG-SAG, TRANSCOM, GAW), to undertake the
same process for all domains.
CTF-CEOS-I-36) Convene a working meeting of select representatives
form the EO and carbon cycle communities to compare the two
perspectives and produce a synthesized output with timelines.
CTF-CEOS-I-37) Engage the carbon cycle community to support and
hence protect collectively the existing planned missions
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Integration Chapter Actions /
Recommendations
CTF-CEOS-I-38) Identify the Key Science and Policy Bodies that represent
the international carbon community and engage them collectively
(IOCCG, GCP, GHG-SAG) through the mechanisms of GEO. Reinforce
these groups to permit them to undertake the work envisaged above
and take advantage of existing major investments e.g. GEO-Carbon,
USCCP in this process.
CTF-CEOS-I-39) Exploit existing structures e.g WG Climate in pursuit of
common objectives for climate and carbon. A Task group of WG
Climate could be identified for carbon activities.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Plans for completion of report
• Finish integrating report in March 2013.
• Conduct internal CEOS Review – ask all CTF members to review
carefully and to help ensure Space Agency representation and
perspectives are adequately incorporated into each chapter and
ensure appropriate people in their agencies review the final draft.
[Side meeting on 11 March a first step; one or more full CTF
teleconference calls will follow]
 We request your (CEOS SIT representatives) help as well!
• Will then request review of final draft by CEOS, Global Carbon
Project leadership, GEO Carbon Community of Practice, and the
authors of the GEO Carbon Strategy.
• Will revise report as needed in response to reviews in April-June
2013.
• Anticipate delivery / release by end of August 2013.
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Thoughts on Implementing the Strategy
After the CEOS Strategy for Carbon Observations from Space has been
completed and released in final form, CEOS will need to consider how
to implement the strategy and report its progress
 What CEOS entity or entities should be responsible for coordinating
implementation of the recommendations/actions and monitoring
progress on them?
 Does the CTF or some variation on this group need to continue?
 Should another Working Group do it? Should the actions be divided up and
assigned to relevant Working Groups and Virtual Constellations?
 Does CEOS need one or more new Virtual Constellations (e.g., GHG)
 How should CEOS interact with GEOSS and UNFCCC in implementing
and reporting on the report’s recommendations/actions?
 Carbon supplement to our biennial GCOS IP response to UNFCCC?
 Updated in synchrony with GCOS IP response?
SIT-28 Meeting
Hampton, Virginia, USA
11-15 March 2013
Backup Materials