GLIMS Update: Global ASTER imaging reprioritization
Jeffrey Kargel
jeffreyskargel at hotmail.com
Mon Dec 5 20:08:13 MST 2005
Hi Barry,
Thanks. It did not take long for me to come to agree completely with Luke's
(and your) position, and to agree that the extreme end member of a
moratorium on Greenland and Ellesmere is, to use Cornelis' words, "nonsense"
or at least non wise. At the same time, I do agree with some points Roger
Barry made, reinforcing some that I had made, that more attention needs to
be given to some areas that are especially cloudy and which have relatively
poor coverage. Then there was Hugh's point that we would wish to avoid a
situation where the fraction of cloudy images returned by ASTER increases.
So balancing all these things brings me back to the original intent and goal
of GLIMS, and that is to obtain one image a year of each glacier in the
world, to the extent feasible. The rest of this response is more a message
to the GLIMS RC chiefs than to you, but it follows straight from your
comments and the balancing act I refer to.
Successful completion of GLIMS imaging goals REQUIIRES active involvement of
ALL the regional centers in making sure we have the optimum imaging plan in
place, with the optimum start and stop dates. Suffice it to say, we have
had active involvement from only about half the regional centers. So the
onus is on me to be pushing people harder to do their share to help out. I
also understand that development of GLIMS-support software has lagged,
finally now reaching the point where it was supposed to be at launch; never
mind we didn't have funding to develop it until recently.
Better than any climate reports and first-hand "gut feeling," by now the
best information on optimum start and stop dates is from statistics on the
actual record of returned images (GLIMS and other images, for instance
Global Map) obtained in each region to date. In most cases, the record of
successful clear-sky images ought to correspond mainly to the imaging
seasons specified in the GLIMS planning, but I know this isn't always the
case. Each RC has the greatest vested interest in ensuring that they are
getting clear-sky scenes. They are always going to be better placed than I
in determining which which months are giving the clearest imaging. Some RCs
have assisted in helping me get this information, but others have not yet
done so.
For areas where we want to increase imaging attention, I really need to
develop a strong basis for ordering intensified imaging during the best
windows of opportunity. The Himalaya are a key case in point, where
Bhutan's best clear-sky window might not correspond exactly to that in
eastern Tibet or Pakistan. We certainly want to avoid ordering more imaging
but have a huge increase in cloudy scenes, as Hugh feared. Anyway, I'll be
discussing this type of thing individually with RC chiefs.
So.... we won't do a Greenland moratorium, but some adjustment might be
necessary. Maybe we can get an increase in our overall quota, but I
wouldn't bet on it.
--Jeff K
>From: "Goodison,Barry [Ontario]" <Barry.Goodison at ec.gc.ca>
>To: "Jeff Kargel" <jkargel1054 at earthlink.net>
>CC: <jeffreyskargel at hotmail.com>,<Mark.Drinkwater at esa.int>,"Ken Jezek"
><jezek at frosty.mps.ohio-state.edu>,<Martin.Sharp at ualberta.ca>,"Goodison,Barry
>[Ontario]" <Barry.Goodison at ec.gc.ca>
>Subject: RE: GLIMS Update: Global ASTER imaging reprioritization
>Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2005 10:29:54 -0500
>
>Jeff. I usually keep out of direct discussion on GLIMS - it has turned out
>to be so successful. I still remember the early days of trying to get it on
>the radar screen, so I think we all have to be thankful of how you folks
>have carried it forward.
>
>I certainly understand the varying pressures on coverage that you face. The
>"hot spot" may be in a different area all the time. I think Luke's comment
>on the IPY is important when formulating plans over the next few years.
>There is an IPY proposal called GIIPSY, which aims to bring together
>satellite acquisitions during the polar year to support the proposed
>science. Ken and Mark lead this. It would be good to engage them if you
>can, to look at how GLIMS will fit into the plan, and to determine what is
>needed, what could be planned (hope for clear weather), and how
>acquisitions might be co-ordinated with other planned activities. I realize
>the pressure for other regions of the world, but I would hope ASTER folks
>would also realize the importance of polar snapshots during the IPY
>(especially for areas not already covered).
>
>Thought I would pass this thought on.
>
>Cheers Barry
>
>Atmospheric and Climate Science Directorate
>Meteorological Service of Canada
>4905 Dufferin St.
>Downsview, Ontario M3H 5T4
>Canada
>
>email office: barry.goodison at ec.gc.ca
>email home: barrygo at rogers.com
>
>phone office: (416) 739-4345
>fax office: (416) 739-4265
>cell: (416) 420-4985
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-glims at flagmail.wr.usgs.gov
>[mailto:owner-glims at flagmail.wr.usgs.gov] On Behalf Of Jeff Kargel
>Sent: December 3, 2005 8:32 PM
>To: GLIMS Mail List
>Subject: GLIMS Update: Global ASTER imaging reprioritization
>
>
>Dear GLIMS colleagues,
>
>YOUR COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS ARE NEEDED.
>
>
>
>BELOW ARE TWO ASTER IMAGE ACQUISITION RE-PRIORITIZATION SCHEMES (FOR FUTURE
>IMAGING). ONE IS BASED SIMPLY ON A RANK ORDERING OF CLOUDINESS. CLOUDIER
>AREAS GET HIGHER PRIORITY. (PLEASE NOTE THAT NO REGIONS ARE SO CLOUDY THAT
>IT IS CONSIDERED HOPELESS. EVEN BHUTAN HAS SOME CLOUDY IMAGES THAT
>NEVERTHELESS HAVE MAJOR CLEAR AREAS WHERE GLACIERS ARE VISIBLE, AS ANDY
>KAAB'S WORK HAS SHOWN.) I PREFER THE SECOND SCHEME, AS IT SHOULD ACHIEVE
>ROUGHLY ZERO NET CHANGE IN TOTAL ASTER IMAGING RESOURCES DEDICATED TO GLIMS
>BUT SHOULD ACHIEVE MORE UNIFORM AND MORE COMPLETE GLOBAL COVERAGE.
>
>THE TWO SCHEMES WILL BE SUMMARIZED AT A MEETING WITH ASTER MISSION
>OPERATIONS IN THE DEC. 11-15 TIMEFRAME. A FINAL PLAN, BASED ON YOUR
>COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK, WILL BE SUBMITTED IN EARLY JANUARY 2006.
>
>
>
>-Jeffrey S. Kargel
>
>= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
>
>SCHEME 1. REPRIORITIZATION BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF RETURNED IMAGES HAVING
>¾10% CLOUDS. THIS IS A SIMPLE RANK ORDERING BASED ON THIS CLOUD CRITERION.
>
>
>
>REGIONS REQUIRING MAJOR INCREASE OF PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Bhutan 0%
>
>Canada-Mackenzie Mountains 5%
>
>China-far east Tibet/Sichuan 5%
>
>Nepal 6%
>
>Irian Jaya 11%
>
>China-Kunlun Shan, Altun Shan 11%
>
>China-mid-eastern Tibet 12%
>
>China-western Tibet 17%
>
>Alaska-Kuskokwim Mountains 20%
>
>India- between Nepal & Pakistan 24%
>
>Pakistan/Afghanistan 24%
>
>Alaska-Aleutian Is. & Peninsula 24%
>
>High-latitude Antarctic "pointing" ring --
>
>
>
>REGIONS REQUIRING SMALL INCREASE IN PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>New Zealand-North Island 25%
>
>Tajikistan/Kyrgyzstan 26%
>
>Canada-Rockies 27%
>
>China/Kyrgzstan-Tian Shan 28%
>
>Russian Arctic-Novaya Zemlya 28%
>
>Iceland 28%
>
>Alaska-Brooks Range 29%
>
>Ecuador and Colombia 30%
>
>Alaska- St. Elias/ panhandle 31%
>
>Mongolia and Russia-S Siberia 32%
>
>Russia-Kamchatka 33%
>
>New Zealand-South Island 34%
>
>Norway-Svalbard 34%
>
>Alaska-Chugach/Wrangells/AlaskaRg 35%
>
>Russia-Arctic-FrJosef/Northland 35%
>
>Europe-Alps 36%
>
>Peru-Cordillera Blanca 37%
>
>Chile/Argentina-S.Patagonia Icefd 39%
>
>
>
>REGIONS NOT REQUIRING CHANGE OF PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Norway-mainland 44%
>
>Canadian Arctic-Devon Island 46%
>
>Canadian Arctic-Baffin Island 46%
>
>Europe-Pyrenees and Appennines 47%
>
>Russia-Eastern Siberia 47%
>
>U.S. -Cascades 47%
>
>Canada-British Columbia 49%
>
>
>
>REGIONS REQUIRING DECREASE OF PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Greenland-East Central 50%
>
>Chile-N Patagon. Icefd., N Chile 52%
>
>U.S.-Rockies 52%
>
>Southern Peru/Bolivia 53%
>
>Russia and fmr Soviet-Caucasus 55%
>
>Greenland-Northwest 57%
>
>Antarctic Peninsula 60%
>
>Russia-Ural Mountains 61%
>
>East Antarctica-Scott/Borch/Oates 64%
>
>Canada Arctic-Axel Heib +Ellesm 65%
>
>Greenland- Central 77%
>
>Greenland-Northeast 79%
>
>Greenland-South 82%
>
>West Antarc.-Ellsworth Land 93%
>
>East Antarctica-Wilkes Land coast 94%
>
>Greenland-West Central 96%
>
>West Antarc.-Ronne/Zumberge Coast 97%
>
>
>
>SCHEME 2. MODIFIED REPRIORITIZATION BASED ON PERCENTAGE OF RETURNED IMAGES
>HAVING ¾10% CLOUDS, WITH MOVEMENT UP OR DOWN THE LIST BASED ON IMPORTANCE
>TO PEOPLE (WATER RESOURCES, HAZARDS, TOURISM, POPULATION DENSITY NEARBY);
>IMPORTANCE TO CLIMATE CHANGE TRACKING; AND DENSITY (FREQUENCY) OF IMAGING
>AND EXISTENCE OF GAPS IN IMAGE COVERAGE.
>
>
>
>THE SUGGESTED DECREASED PRIORITIZATION OF THE CANADIAN HIGH ARCTIC AND
>GREENLAND IN SCHEME 2 IS NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE UNIMPORTANT (THEY ARE MAJOR
>FACTORS FOR SEA LEVEL AND OCEANIC CIRCULATION, HENCE CLIMATE FEEDBACKS),
>BUT RATHER THEY HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFULLY IMAGED IN ACCORDANCE WITH GLIMS'
>OBJECTIVES. OTHER REGIONS FALL WELL SHORT OF GLIMS IMAGING REQUIREMENTS.
>I AM SUGGESTING A MORATORIUM ON IMAGING OF THE HIGH NORTHERN LATITUDES FOR
>A PERIOD OF 2 YEARS (SUMMER 2006 AND 2007) WHILE OTHER AREAS CAN BE IMAGED
>WITH GREATER SUCCESS, HOPEFULLY.
>
>
>
>REGIONS REQUIRING TRIPLED PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Bhutan 0%
>
>Canada-Mackenzie Mountains 5%
>
>China-far east Tibet/Sichuan 5%
>
>Nepal 6%
>
>Irian Jaya 11%
>
>China-Kunlun Shan, Altun Shan 11%
>
>China-mid-eastern Tibet 12%
>
>China-western Tibet 17%
>
>India- between Nepal & Pakistan 24%
>
>Pakistan/Afghanistan 24%
>
>Tajikistan/Kyrgyzstan 26%
>
>China/Kyrgzstan-Tian Shan 28%
>
>Ecuador and Colombia 30%
>
>Alaska- St. Elias/ panhandle 31%
>
>Alaska-Chugach/Wrangells/AlaskaRg 35%
>
>Europe-Alps 36%
>
>Peru-Cordillera Blanca 37%
>
>Chile/Argentina-S.Patagonia Icefd 39%
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>REGIONS REQUIRING DOUBLED PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Alaska-Kuskokwim Mountains 20%
>
>Alaska-Aleutian Is. & Peninsula 24%
>
>New Zealand-North Island 25%
>
>Canada-Rockies 27%
>
>Russian Arctic-Novaya Zemlya 28%
>
>Iceland 28%
>
>Alaska-Brooks Range 29%
>
>Mongolia and Russia-S Siberia 32%
>
>Russia-Kamchatka 33%
>
>New Zealand-South Island 34%
>
>Norway-Svalbard 34%
>
>Russia-Arctic-FrJosef/Northland 35%
>
>U.S. -Cascades 47%
>
>
>
>
>
>REGIONS NOT TO HAVE A CHANGE OF PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Norway-mainland 44%
>
>Canadian Arctic-Devon Island 46%
>
>Canadian Arctic-Baffin Island 46%
>
>Europe-Pyrenees and Appennines 47%
>
>Russia-Eastern Siberia 47%
>
>Canada-British Columbia 49%
>
>Chile-N Patagon. Icefd., N Chile 52%
>
>U.S.-Rockies 52%
>
>Southern Peru/Bolivia 53%
>
>Russia and fmr Soviet-Caucasus 55%
>
>Antarctic Peninsula 60%
>
>Russia-Ural Mountains 61%
>
>East Antarctica-Scott/Borch/Oates 64%
>
>West Antarc.-Ellsworth Land 93%
>
>East Antarctica-Wilkes Land coast 94%
>
>West Antarc.-Ronne/Zumberge Coast 97%
>
>
>
>
>
>REGIONS REQUIRING DECREASE OF PRIORITY:
>
>
>
>Greenland-East Central 50%
>
>Greenland-Northwest 57%
>
>Canada Arctic-Axel Heib +Ellesm 65%
>
>Greenland- Central 77%
>
>Greenland-Northeast 79%
>
>Greenland-South 82%
>
>Greenland-West Central 96%
>
>
More information about the GLIMS
mailing list