1 / 11

Working Group 2:

Working Group 2:. Observing system/network design: Coordination/integration through observations and modeling. Overarching Question:. As AON is currently a 3-5 year program … it would help us achieve success if we could organize around a tractable question. Possible Question:.

arnav
Download Presentation

Working Group 2:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Working Group 2: Observing system/network design: Coordination/integration through observations and modeling

  2. Overarching Question: As AON is currently a 3-5 year program … it would help us achieve success if we could organize around a tractable question

  3. Possible Question: • Need felt for one central question to keep AON focused and to create greater integration • The question needs to address the practical consideration of what is achievable with the network now in place • Number of candidate questions considered • How are terrestrial and oceanic water systems linked ? • What caused the sea-ice minimum of 2007 ? • Explain sea-ice changes during IPY • Put into context of pre IPY observations (where available) • Design of future observational system post IPY • look for links across disciplines, e.g., counterpart in terrestrial system

  4. Gaps in Network: • A ‘gap’ is a function of the question being asked • AON may need a few years up and running before important gaps are self evident

  5. Gaps across Disciplines: • Each discipline needs to identify what observations it needs from other disciplines • As a guide, atms. boundary fluxes are the lineages between disciplines

  6. Gaps across Disciplines: • Specific gap between ocean and terrestrial: • Natural linkage is river runoff • Problem of coastal erosion is a common interface to ocean and terrestrial disciplines

  7. Gaps in Network: • Does modeling inform the observations? • E.G. 1: DAMOCLES: initial design drawn from obs like SHEBA/IABP and model results • E.G. 2: Perovich: sea-ice model results help decide were to deploy instruments • Counter Point: Failure of model predictions for 2007 cast significant doubt on usefulness of models at this point

  8. Gaps in Network: • Specific data gaps identified, but not inclusive • Terrestrial research lacks spatial coverage • Alaska scale coverage incomplete • Pan-Arctic scale coverage incomplete • Lack of atmospheric boundary layer research • Sea-ice thickness data remains lacking • Lack of seasonal sea-ice zone data

  9. Network Sustainability: • Concern for ability to track long-term changes • Mismatch of time-scale of funding (short) versus time-scale of climate (longer) • LTER funding model much better, (suggesting LAON) • AON continuation could serve as an umbrella to support future sustained observations • Experience gained in AON projects can lead to optimization of future long-term observations (NSF) or monitoring (NOAA) • Concern that satellite observations may disappear (NASA)

  10. Network Sustainability: • Follow up workshop • Identify ‘gap’ sessions • Disciplinary focus sessions • A benefit of AON structure thus far is bringing different observational disciplines together • Greater awareness of other’s activities helps future planning: • Placement of instruments • Piggybacking • Technology transfer

  11. AON Next Steps: • Identify central question • Identify priorities to address the question • Outcome -> AON current activities as lasting legacy of IPY

More Related