The CEOS Strategy for Carbon Observations from Space

25th CEOS Plenary8th – 9th Nov 2011, Lucca

Takashi Moriyama (JAXA) & Diane Wickland (NASA)

Carbon Task Force Co-Chairs

Rationale

GEO Carbon Strategy report of 2010 – updates the IGOS Carbon Theme Report from 2005

CEOS has agreed to consider how to respond to the requirements for satellite observations laid out in the GEO Carbon Strategy report

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

Approach

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) Ocean: Dr Shubha Sathyendranath (Plymouth Marine Laboratory,

UK) 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.

Slide: 4

Key Milestones

Initiation and agreement on scope, CTF Side Meeting at Carbon from Space Workshop, Oxford – September 2010

CTF Meeting to develop report process and outline, identify domain leads, and recommend co-authors, Arlington – February 2011

Atmosphere Domain Working Meeting, at IWGGMS, Edinburgh – May 2011

Atmosphere Domain Working Meeting, at WCRP Open Science Conference, Boulder – October 2011

Land Domain Working Meeting and Progress Report to Plenary at GEO-Carbon Conference – October 2011

CTF Side Meeting, CEOS Plenary, Lucca – November 2011 Initiate gap analysis for land and ocean observations from

space (to complement those for CO2 and CH4) – Fall 2011 Atmosphere & Land Domains Working Meeting, at American

Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco – December 6, 2011

Slide: 5

Key Milestones (cont.)

Ocean Domain Working Meeting at Ocean Sciences Meeting, Salt Lake City - February 2012

Review and Consultation Meeting for Draft CEOS Response to GEO Carbon Strategy Report, La Jolla – March 29-30, 2012

CEOS Stakeholder Review (Space Agencies, Others) – April-August 2012

Review and approval anticipated at CEOS Plenary in November 2012

Finalisation and Release – September-December 2012

Slide: 6

CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere are modifying the balance of the radiative budget of the Earth. CO2 is the most critically important anthropogenic greenhouse gas.

There is huge uncertainty associated with the behaviour of future natural sources and sinks, as well as of future anthropogenic emissions and the effectiveness of mitigation efforts (both emissions reductions and sequestration).

Only about half of the CO2 emitted from fossil fuels remains in the atmosphere, but we do not know if or by how much this fraction is changing, nor do we understand the forces driving global and regional changes to land and ocean carbon uptake and release.

The ability of nations to implement policies that limit atmospheric CO2 and CH4 concentrations will depend on their ability to monitor progress and determine what is, and what is not working.

This creates the need to monitor carbon with a substantially improved observing, analysis and forecast system.

Rationale for Carbon Observations

Slide: 7

The vision for GEO’s Integrated Global Carbon Observing System (IGCOS) is built around two complementary groups of observations:

The main carbon reservoirs (pools) in the land, ocean, and atmosphere, and

The exchanges (fluxes) among these reservoirs

It is designed to support two major products to be used by policy makers in implementing carbon policy:

A robust and transparent carbon monitoring system, and Accurate carbon budgets at different scales.

Rationale for GEO IGCOS

Slide: 8

Atmosphere Domain

Writing team: Berrien Moore, David Crisp, John Burrows, Michio Kawamiya, Martin Heimann, Peter Rayner

Slide: 9

Synoptic global satellite observations of column-integrated and vertical distribution of atmospheric CO2 and CH4. Sufficient accuracy will be obtained to assess fluxes from

satellite data by making auxiliary observations of aerosols and clouds or development of other disturbance free methods.

Instrument calibrations will be traceable to a primary standard and frequently calibrated using ground-based observations.

A combination of satellite observations, backed up by long-term continuity of measurements, delivering global observations required to estimate surface-atmosphere CO2 fluxes by modeling: Information relevant to fossil fuel emissions

Satellite observational elements

Atmosphere

Slide: 10

CO2 Mission Timelines: Example of Gap Analysis

• Lower Troposphere missions beyond OCO-2 (2016) are uncertain. All of the missions are in concept development and may not be flown, as shown. A timeline gap may exist.

• It is unlikely that ENVISAT and GOSAT will last beyond 2015 due to mission fuel constraints. OCO-2 has fuel for 8-years (until 2020).

• OCO-2 could be the only CO2 mission measuring the lower troposphere beyond 2015 with limited repeat cycle (16 days) and spatial coverage (swath width 10-km). More wide-swath CO2 missions

are needed.

GAP ???

Slide: 11

Ocean Domain

Writing team: Shubha Sathyendranath, Watson Gregg, Nicolas Hoepffner, Joji Ishizaka, Trevor Platt, Johnny Johannessen

Slide: 12

A combination of satellite observations, backed up by long-term continuity of measurements, delivering global observations of the essential variables required to estimate surface-atmosphere CO2 fluxes and changes in ocean carbon storage. Ocean colour (biological carbon) Marine ecosystem composition Ocean physical state (e.g., wind stress, temperature,

salinity)

Develop new space missions and satellite products to improve estimation of carbon capture and biological export production in the ocean.

Remote sensing should be further developed to use water colour as a proxy for dissolved organic carbon (DOC), and to properly assess the surface area and residence time of water in inland water ecosystems.

Satellite observational elements

Ocean

Slide: 13

Terrestrial Domain

Writing team: Christiane Schmullius, Shaun Quegan, Stephen Plummer, Sassan Saatchi, Masanobu Shimada

Slide: 14

Inventories of the spatial and global distribution of forest and woodland biomass, measured in situ at a minimum of five yearly intervals, and annually by high resolution remote sensing techniques. Key control indices such as nitrogen content, and leaf area index will also be measured. In situ and remote-sensing observations of the spatial distribution of permafrost, peatland, and wetland organic carbon pools down to bedrock, measured typically at ten year intervals, but at higher frequency in fast changing areas. Monitoring of the abrupt loss from these pools, due to events such as peatland fire or collapse of permafrost land.

Satellite observational elements (1)

Terrestrial

Slide: 15

A combination of satellite observations, backed up by long-term continuity of measurements, delivering global observations of the essential variables required to estimate surface-atmosphere CO2 fluxes (and carbon pools) by modeling. These essential variables are: Land cover, land use and land-use change Wetland area Fires and other ecosystem disturbances Land ecosystem biophysical variables (FAPAR, LAI) Permafrost area and its dynamics Information relevant to fossil fuel emissions

Satellite observational elements (2)

Terrestrial

Slide: 16

Other Considerations

Slide: 17

Climate and weather variables at the various scales necessary to model atmospheric transport accurately, and ocean and terrestrial CO2 and CH4 fluxes (and carbon pools) and their variability at the relevant scales for modeling.

In situ observations; some may be needed for calibration /validation of satellite data products A comprehensive data archive containing the quality-checked observations and data syntheses.

Not satellite observations, but we may need to address to some degree . . .

Satellite observational elements

Integrative Data Sets

And . . .

Slide: 18

Challenges Encountered;

Request for CEOS Plenary to Help

Slide: 19

Chapter writing team representation; were unable to recruit co-authors from Africa, South America, or parts of Asia other than Japan

It has been difficult to make coordinated progress with only volunteer labour and no dedicated travel support (leveraging existing meetings is not working so well across the 3 domains) Some Domain Leads have asked about the possibility of travel

support for meetings, including La Jolla in March 2012 Consultation meeting to follow SIT-27 in March 2012 will raise

implementation (supply) questions and iterations will be needed (per model of GCOS IP response); exactly how this will work is not clear

Questions were raised at the SIT Technical Workshop in September 2011 about the adequacy of space agency involvement in developing the report CTF discussed this at their side meeting yesterday and believe

the plan is adequate (each chapter has one or more agency participants and CTF members (or their designees) will be available to the authors for inputs)

Challenges

Slide: 20

Domain Chapter AuthorsAtmosphere:Berrien Moore (University of Oklahoma)David Crisp (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory)Michio Kawamiya (Japan Agency for Marine-earth Science and Technology)Martin Heimann (Max Plank Institute for Biogeochemistry, Jena)Peter Rayner (Laboratoire des Sciences du Climat et de L'Environnement)

LandChris Schmullius (Friedrich-Schiller University Jena)Shaun Quegan (The University of Sheffield)Stephen Plummer (European Space Agency) Sassan Saatchi (NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory)Masanobu Shimada (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency)

OceanShubha Sathyendranath (Plymouth Marine Lab)Watson Gregg (NASA Goddard Space Flight Center) Nicolas Hoepffner (Joint Research Centre)Johnny Johannessen (Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre) Trevor Platt (Bedford Institute of Oceanography)Joji Ishizaka (Nagoya University)

Slide: 21

Report Outline and Leads*

Executive Summary (Moriyama, Plummer, Wickland)Section 1: Introduction (Ward)Section 2: Land Domain (Schmullius)Section 3: Ocean Domain (Sathyendranath)Section 4: Atmosphere Domain (Moore)Section 5: Integration (Plummer)Section 6: The Way Forward (Plummer, Moriyama, Wickland)Appendices

* Co-authorship for Chapters 1, 5, and 6 is not completely settled; for

example, each Domain chapter team will designate a co-author to work

on the integration chapter. Moriyama and Wickland remain responsible

for ensuring all chapters meet the CEOS charge, and will contribute as

needed throughout.

Slide: 22

Chapter writing team representation; it is not be too late to suggest additional authors (subject to domain lead concurrence) Can CEOS Agencies from under-represented regions nominate

additional co-authors? CTF can also ask Global Carbon Project (GCP) leaders for

nominations This must be settled by mid-December so as to not impact work

plans Can the CEOS agencies help with travel for the writing teams

and/or host a writing meeting? Support for co-author travel and a few small, dedicated meetings is

believed to be necessary (1 writing meeting each for domain chapter teams, plus 1 for integration seems a necessary minimum).

NASA and JAXA have expressed a willingness to help with travel for leads and co-authors from their countries. ESA has contributed substantial time for S. Plummer to help coordinate the report and lead the integration activities, but more support is needed for the travel of other authors and logistics for dedicated meetings.

Request for CEOS Agency Engagement (1)

Slide: 23

Please ensure suitable space agency representation at the meeting for review and consultation on the Draft CEOS Response to GEO Carbon Strategy Report Thu 29th March – review of draft chapters (most important day) Fri 30th March – follow-up working meeting of report authors

CEOS space agency expertise and inputs will be required for report preparation, review, and finalisation Each space agency on the CTF will identify a Point-of-Contact for

mission information and review – in many cases, but likely not all, it will be the CTF member. Could agencies not represented on the CTF name a Point-of-Contact – especially for current information about their missions and plans?

Does the CEOS Plenary have other advice on how we should engage / consult with it and its member agencies?

Request for CEOS Agency Engagement (2)

Slide: 24

Carbon Task Force Members

Abe Satomi JAXA Baek Seonkyun GEOSECBarnet Chris NOAABarrie Leonard WMO/GAWBlackerby Christopher NASA HQBojinski Stephan GCOSBuchwitz Michael Univ. BremenBurrowsJohn Univ. BremenButler Jim NOAACanadell Pep CSIROCiais Phillipe LSCECrisp David NASA JPLDeniel Carole CNESDenning Scott Univ. ColoradoDolman Han COCOS, GCOSDowell Mark ECDyke George ASIEckman Richard NASA HQGoldberg Mitch NOAAHeld Alex CSIROImasu Ryouichi CCSRInoue Gen RIHNIshii Masanori NICTJucks Ken NASA HQ

Kamei Masatoshi RESTECKawamiya Michio JAMSTECKillough Brian NASA LaRCKoopman Rob GEOSECMoore Berrien U. OklahomaMoriyama Takashi JAXAMunro Rosemary EUMETSATNakajima Masakatsu JAXANickovic Slobodan WMONightingale Joanne NASA GSFCOchiai Osamu JAXAPeylin Philippe LSCEPlummer Stephen ESASasano Yasuhiro NIESSawyer Kerry NOAASmith Brent NOAASmith Jonathan USGSStryker Timothy USGS Tanner Mike GEOSECvon Bargen Albrecht DLRWard StephenASIWickland Diane NASA HQZehner Claus ESAZhu Zhiliang USGS

Slide: 25

Schedule

Slide: 26

Backup Charts

Slide: 27

It is critical that we quantify and understand the current and potential impacts of the anthropogenic perturbations on the carbon cycle, both globally and regionally. Selecting the appropriate mitigation options depends upon this understanding, as do possibilities for sequestration.

The ability of nations to implement policies that limit atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations will depend on their ability to monitor progress and determine what is, and what is not working.

Large-scale mitigation actions of the past have all required on-going, independent verification to ensure that the desired outcomes (e.g., reductions in atmospheric concentrations or rate of increase) are achieved.

There is an urgent need for a globally integrated observation and analysis system to track changes in atmospheric GHGs and provide routine estimates (with confidence limits) of net atmosphere-surface exchange at regional or sub-regional scales.

Atmospheric Observations

Slide: 28

Oceanic Observations

Continued GHG emissions may take us past what is referred to as “tipping points” (positive feedbacks mechanisms). The impacts of these thresholds, whether in the Arctic, tropics, or elsewhere, are difficult to specify, much less to quantify.

Uptake of anthropogenic CO2 by the Earth system causes changes to ecosystems, both beneficial and deleterious. One of these is acidification of the oceans caused by the uptake of CO2 by seawater, with substantial consequences on marine ecosystems.

It is critical that we quantify and understand the current and potential impacts of the anthropogenic perturbations on the carbon cycle, both globally and regionally. Selecting the appropriate mitigation options depends upon this understanding, as do possibilities for sequestration.

Beyond the essential knowledge of fluxes, information is also needed about drivers of fluxes in each region. In addition, quantification of carbon pools and their changes in response to human intervention and climate is key for making accurate future projections.

Slide: 29

Terrestrial Observations

Continued GHG emissions may take us past what is referred to as “tipping points” (positive feedbacks mechanisms). The impacts of these thresholds are difficult to specify, much less to quantify. Uptake of anthropogenic CO2 by the Earth system causes changes to ecosystems, both beneficial and deleterious. One of these is the fertilization effect, through which plants grow faster in a richer CO2

environment and perhaps sequester a larger fraction of the CO2 emitted by human action. It is critical that we quantify and understand the impacts of the anthropogenic perturbations on the carbon cycle. Selecting the appropriate mitigation and sequestration options depends upon this understanding.UN-level negotiations on the inclusion of land use activities in developing countries have been held back for many reasons, including technical challenges such as access to regular and sufficient-quality satellite data and analysis tools for national level forest-cover and annual change mapping at sub-hectare resolution. Beyond the essential knowledge of fluxes, information is also needed about drivers of fluxes in each region. In addition, quantification of carbon pools and their changes in response to human intervention and climate is key for making accurate future projections.