Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to History and Evolution of PARCA and How We Got There
Similar to History and Evolution of PARCA and How We Got There (20)
More from WinnieChu21
More from WinnieChu21 (15)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
History and Evolution of PARCA and How We Got There
- 1. History and Evolution of PARCA and How We Got There. Eric Rignot University of California Irvine and JPL
- 2. • 1991: Thomas starts Program for Arctic Regional Climate Assessment (PARCA) w. NASA ATM • 1993: NASAUniv. Kansas’ Depth sounder (to be added on with NSF STC CRESIS). • 1994: Copenhagen meeting at GEUS w. U.S. participants and J. Bamber, N. Reeh, N. Gundestrup, A. Weidick, H. Thomsen, S. Madsen, R. Braithwaite. • 1995: PARCA meeting in Boulder, Colorado. • Many joint annual meetings w. NASA/NSF in ensuing years .. In separate rooms. Bob Thomas✝, Koni Steffen✝, Waleed Abdalati, Julienne Stroeve, Jay Zwally, Prasad Gogineni, Bill Krabill, Ian Joughin, Mark Fahnestock, Jonathan Bamber, Ian Whillans✝, Curt Davis, Ellen Mosley-Thompson, John Wahr✝, Niels Reeh✝, Anker Weidick✝, Bea Csatho, Jason Box, Gordon Hamilton✝, David Bromwich, Simon Ekholm, Roger Bales, Tom Mote, Mary Albert. The year is 1993 .. Robert H. “Bob” Thomas 1937-2015 Goal: What is the mass balance of Greenland Ice Sheet? Objectives: Document it and understand its driving physical processes. Melt? Accumulation? Budget: Winner take all.
- 3. The year is 1995 – Boulder CO
- 4. Bob Thomas✝, Koni Steffen✝, Waleed Abdalati, Julienne Stroeve, Jay Zwally, Prasad Gogineni, Bill Krabill, Ian Joughin, Mark Fahnestock, Jonathan Bamber, Ian Whillans✝, Curt Davis, Ellen Mosley-Thompson, John Wahr✝, Niels Reeh✝, Anker Weidick✝, Bea Csatho, Jason Box, Gordon Hamilton✝, David Bromwich, Simon Ekholm, Roger Bales, Tom Mote, Mary Albert. The year is 1993 .. Robert H. “Bob” Thomas 1937-2015 Mass balance of Greenland Ice Sheet is not known .. Antarctica is not even on the agenda .. PARCA = airborne laser altimetry, radar depth sounding, shallow ice cores, AWS, 2000-m traverse, satellite (passive microwave, InSAR), GPS, coffee cans. “Measure everything we possibly can when we are there” “Avoid a long laundry list search for the Holy Grail” Partners: UK Univ. and GEUS.
- 5. Measure progress .. • Yearly meetings to discuss science, achievements, plan upcoming field seasons (w. NASA, NSF, GEUS, etc.) • Coordinate with other projects (e.g., NGRIP), satellites (Icesat, Cryosat) • Yearly progress reports (printed) • List of publications. • Competition for grant not “open” but sustained funding based on yearly performance and reporting. • Program led by one manager/chief scientist/lead master experimentalist. • Team had diversity in experience, gender, skills, and welcomed new talent if contributing to the goal. • Data out within a few months to all PIs • The program achieved enormously in 5 years and provided a legacy for OIB after 2007. • The need to go to Antarctica became more pressing after 1998. The year is 2001
- 6. What we found .. • Greenland is losing mass • Repeat surveys in 1993/94-1998/99 show balance at high elevation and thinning in the ablation area. • Attempts to compare snow accumulation vs ice discharge in the north reveal loss • 2000-m contour in balance • Thinning caused by melt and faster glacier flow • Glacier changes are rapid • Surge behavior in the northeast • Rapid melt beneath ice shelves • Thinning extends to ice divide in the south. • Shallow core+AWS does not work at coast. • In the interior, no change in snowfall! • Albedo decreasing • 2oC warming of surface temperature (Swiss) • Largest changes in the ablation area • Melt speeds up the ice in some areas. The year is 2001
- 7. What we missed .. • Surface topography was poor, esp. at the margin (S. Ekholm, J. Bamber) • Snow accumulation had to become time dependent, core+AWS could not capture gradients in NW and SE • Many glaciers had very, very poor thickness measurements (NW, SE). • Ablation models were difficult to evaluate • Model projections were not even on the table. • Need more thickness measurements, more antenna elements to resolve echoes, temperate ice at bottom, impossible to make radar work in some areas (SE) • Need better topography, time dependent. • Need comprehensive velocity map but existing missions did not provide enough data. • The compilation of SMB headed nowhere. • The melt-induced speed up was short lived and not sufficient over an entire year to explain speed up • Tracking the fate of melt water required .. Duckies. The year is 2001
- 8. What followed .. • Gravity surveys to completement radar depth sounder (OIB in 2009, OMG in 2015). • Mutibeam echo sounding of fjords to complement radar depth sounder (OMG in 2015). • More comprehensive SAR coverage: Radarsat (2004-), ALOS PALSAR (2008-). Sentinel-1 (2015!). • Emergence of regional atmospheric climate models (RACMO 2006). • Thinning caused by melt (little) and faster glacier flow (lot) • Far more surveys of height and thickness (OIB) needed. • How about Antarctica? Post year 2001
- 9. Operation IceBridge 2009-2019 $12-19M PARCA 1993-2007 $1-2M Post 2001: more funding to do it all!
- 10. ASE from -93 Gt/yr in 1996 to -106 Gt/yr in 2002 NASA/CECS 2002 2004 NSF/BAS AGASEA 2004; NASA Operation IceBridge 2009-2019 The year is 2002: Warm PIG and CECS
- 11. Gravity at McMurdo, Jan. 2009
- 12. Gravity at McMurdo, Jan. 2009 Northwest Greenland: the most well mapped sector of Greenland
- 13. The year is 2014
- 14. Gravity at McMurdo, Jan. 2009 Amundsen Sea Embayment of West Antarctica from OIB
- 15. The year is 2002 Petermann Gletscher Jointly funded by NASA and NSF The melt channels
- 16. The year is 2015
- 17. (Velicogna, 2017): GRACE 2003-2016. 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 Time [Year] −3000 −2000 −1000 0 1000 2000 Mass [Gt] -217.0 ± 33 Gt/yr -10.7± 2.5 Gt/yr2 GIC (Ciraci et al., 2019) Mass balance: GRACE/GRACE-FO/SDC does it all since 2002
- 18. Warm, salty water below > 400 m Glaciers hate seawater 400 m 1,000 m 200 m/yr 0.3 m/yr Jacobs et al. 1996; Holland et al., 2019 170 Sv
- 19. 300 to 700 m/yr 1 m/yr Same in the Arctic ..
- 20. What’s next: FOGGS • Mass balance: Done • Main driving process: Done (SMB, D, IS) • Ice sheet models: Getting there. • Challenges: grounding zone processes, calving, ocean forcing, cavities, subglacial hydrology? • Pick a common goal and a set science objectives. • Measure as much as you can, without generating a laundry list • Serve NASA Missions: Icesat for PARCA and OIB. No thickness mission! • Go to Greenland and be relevant for Antarctica. • FOGGS: ICESAT-2, NISAR, GRACE-FO, SWOT, to be followed by SDC, MC
- 21. Petermann Humboldt 0.6 m Jakobshavn 0.6 m Nioghalvfjerdsbrae Zachariae Isstrom 1.1 m Pine Island Thwaites 1.2 m Totten 3.8 m Marine: 3 m SLR West; 19 m SLR East Marine: 3 m SLR Denman 1.5 m Siple 1.9 m Evans 0.3 m Institute 0.6 m Ninnis 0.9 m West East Antarctica Recovery 6.0 m Peninsula Stable Retreat Collapse Cook 1.6m Rapid sea level rise .. From where? how?
- 22. • Ice thinning (surface melt + dynamic thinning) à floats sooner (meter/year) = half of the signal • Calving of grounded ice blocks? No • Removal of grounded ice by seawater intrusion and undercutting (meter/day) in km-size grounding zones. Wood et al., Sci. Adv. 2021 How do we retreat a grounding line? An et al., PNAS 2021 Ciraci et al., PNAS 2023 Model show seawater intrusion in km-size grounding zones result in projections x 2 (Parizek et al., 2013; Seroussi and Morlighem, 2018; Robel et al., 2022)
- 23. Main trunk Thwaites Glacier in year 2020
- 24. Will the retreat be fast or slow? • We have the NSF/ITGC and NASA/PARCA/OIB legacies • One new frontier: In-situ observations (ocean robotics for cavity, ocean temperature, ice melt, grounding line dynamics). • International partnerships - always • Satellites: ICESAT-2, NISAR, GRACE-FO, SDC, MC; Drones; Airborne.
- 25. Thank you!
- 26. Summit Station Science Coordination Office (SCO) Bob Hawley, Dartmouth College Zoe Courville, CRREL and Dartmouth College Jack Dibb, University of New Hampshire Von Walden, Washington State University History and Evolution of Summit Station https://geo-summit.org
- 27. • Voice for the GrIS science community in discussions and decision making involving National Science Foundation (NSF) Battelle Arctic Research Operations (ARO, its primary Arctic logistics contractor) Other stakeholders • Works with NSF, Battelle ARO, and science teams to work out equitable and efficient use of resources • Strives to ensure that the wide range of science and support activities impact the pristine character of Summit Station as lightly as possible. Summit Science Coordination Office (SCO)
- 28. • Voice for the GrIS science community in discussions and decision making involving National Science Foundation (NSF) Battelle Arctic Research Operations (ARO, its primary Arctic logistics contractor) Other stakeholders • Works with NSF, Battelle ARO, and science teams to work out equitable and efficient use of resources • Strives to ensure that the wide range of science and support activities impact the pristine character of Summit Station as lightly as possible. Summit Science Coordination Office (SCO)
- 29. Unique Summit Station Summit is the only high altitude, high latitude, inland, year-round monitoring station in the Arctic. As such, it is uniquely suited for studies aimed at identifying and understanding long range, intercontinental transport and their ‐ influences on the ice sheet surface, boundary layer, and overlying atmosphere. The pristine and remote location in a year round dry snow and ice ‐ region provides an optimal facility for energy and surface mass balance, radiation measurements, and remote sensing validation studies. Summit Station is also a prime site for astronomy and astrophysics research due to its high altitude and dry and stable atmosphere.
- 30. – Established as a ice-coring camp in 1989, the main focus of activities through 1993 was on recovering the GISP2 deep ice core (3053m). Companion core drilled by Europeans 40km away. – The GISP2 ice core provided an unprecedented high-resolution record of the past 110,000 years of Earth’s climate and atmospheric chemistry. Still being analyzed. – Atmospheric and surface snow studies, initiated during GISP2, became the main science activity at Summit after 1993. – Studies of air-snow exchange in support of ice-core interpretation, and studies of the unique high-elevation arctic troposphere at Summit have been carried out by over 200 investigators from 50 different institutions. – A pilot “winter-over” in 1997-98 led to Summit becoming a year- round observatory beginning in 2000, and an important part of the U.S. arctic and global atmospheric observation system in 2003. Approaching 35 years of science at GISP2→ Summit Camp → Summit Station
- 31. 6 Measurement history at Summit Meteorological measurements have been continuous since mid-1980’s 1994 1993 1995 1996 1997 1998 1992 yr rnd GISP2 1999 year round year round 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 photochemistry shallow coring air-snow exchange Science campaigns 2008
- 32. • Atmospheric monitoring: only source of year-round data for trace gas concentrations in Greenland. • Deep ice core climate record: high-resolution GISP2 ice core record extends back 140,000 years, and is one of a handful of high-resolution, deep cores drilled in the Arctic. • Studies of the free troposphere: immediate access to the free troposphere relatively free of local, anthropogenic influences. • Long range transport of atmospheric gases: ideally suited for studies examining long-range, intercontinental transport and its influences on the ice sheet surface, boundary layer, and overlying atmosphere. • Snow accumulation/ice sheet mass balance: one of the longest, continuous run snow accumulation studies in the Arctic • Arctic clouds: ICECAPS project provided key insights into the role of radiative effects of low level liquid clouds and atmospheric moisture in extreme, ice sheet-wide surface melt events, as in 2012. • Extreme environment analog: planetary and polar technologies test bed, e.g. ice coring drills and autonomous rovers. • Weather forecasting and climate modeling: Balloon data provide key observations to initialize global numerical weather forecasting models and global and regional climate models. • Satellite validation: The orbit for NASA’s IceSAT-2 satellite was centered over Summit because of the station’s long-term snow surface height change over time data record, the longest continually observed elevation measurements over the cryosphere on earth and one of the longest temperature records from the interior of an ice sheet, and are used to validate MODIS- and AIRS-based derivations of ice temperatures. • Astronomy and astrophysics: Due to the high altitude, dry and stable atmosphere, potentially a prime astrophysics site. • Training the next generation of polar researchers: JSEP along with countless grad and undergrad students Science at Summit – too much to list
- 33. Paleoclimate & Coring Studies Deep and shallow firn and ice cores provide unique records of past climate and atmospheric processes, firn microstructure, and physical process studies. Air-Snow Exchange Studying relationships between the atmosphere and snow at and near the surface enables deeper understanding of the records from cores.
- 34. Present Day Processes Measurements at Summit are documenting changing abundances of climate forcers including greenhouse gases, ozone, and aerosol; and how the state of the atmosphere and the energy balance is adjusting by changes in clouds and precipitation. CO2 CH4
- 35. Satellite Validation Numerous studies have made measurements at Summit to check and improve estimates of snow related features like grain size, albedo, and temperature from space. Summit also has the longest record of snow accumulation and surface height on a polar glacier, which is informing the ICEsat-2 program to monitor mass balance of glaciers world wide.
- 36. Astrophysics Phase one of a 7 x 7 km array of radio detectors like the one above left was installed at Summit starting in Summer 2020 as part of the RNO-G project. The goal is to capture the highest energy neutrinos streaming to earth from the far reaches of space. The 12-m microwave telescope above right is currently operating in Thule, but there may be plans to relocate to Summit where it would be part of a network that will make very detailed observations of black holes.
- 37. Technology Test Bed Summit has been used to test power systems, ice drills, electric snowmachines and ATVs and other devices. Some of the most exciting tests have been for robotic systems that may someday be used on other planets and moons in our solar system, like the solar- powered rover above and robotic drill/analyzer pictured to right.
- 38. Infrastructure to support all this science…
- 39. Clean Air Clean Campaign Undisturbed Snow
- 41. Bighouse- Circa 1990 Bighouse- Circa 1990 Bighouse- Circa 2017 20th birthday cake Station management, galley, “Everything” space
- 42. Greenhouse- 1997 - 2022 Winter-over crew quarters, kitchen, living space Winter-over science laboratory space Installed 1997, removed 2022 “Bighouse replacement” “Box on snow” on a berm
- 43. SOB (2007- 2018) / SMG- 2016/7 Science & Operations Barn/Summit Mobile Garage Large, heated space for working on vehicles Radiosonde balloon prep area DNF cargo prep/receive
- 44. (T)AWO- 2007/9 “Temporary” Atmospheric Watch Observatory Trace gas sampling Aerosols Atmospheric monitoring Meteorology 2012 proposed AWO
- 45. “Anchor Tenant” ICECAPS Cloud, Mass, Energy budget focus: Radiometers SODAR, LIDAR, RADAR Total Sky Imager Snowflake camera MSF- 2009/10 Mobile Science Facility Ski-mounted on surface, relocated every few years
- 46. The Trouble with Boxes on Snow Elevate your building, minimize drifting
- 47. SFM DEM shows cost impact of snow removal Hawley & Millstein, 2017 Greenhouse – 4,862 m3 ~69 hours of D6M time Total cost: $19,320 SOB – 4,644 m3 ~66 hours of D6M time Total Cost: $18,480 D6M costs $280 hr-1 (mostly fuel)
- 48. Broader context of Summit Drifting
- 49. Broader context of Summit Drifting An additional 580,000 m3 Over 17,000 hrs D6H time (not happening) Solutions Coming: Jack Dibb tomorrow afternoon!
- 50. Thanks! More info: https://geo-summit.org Get in touch! sco@geo-summit.org or individually : Robert.L.Hawley@dartmouth.edu Zoe.R.Courville@usace.army.mil Jack.Dibb@unh.edu v.walden@wsu.edu