During the 1990s, the Medea program brought together environmental scientists and members of the intelligence community to apply classified assets and data to further the understanding of environmental change (Richelson 1998). Under Medea auspices, the global “fiducials” program was established whereby participating scientists could request collection of classified images at environmentally sensitive locations around the globe. The term “fiducials” refers to the fact that the classified images were to be kept “in trust” in classified archives, with the eventual goal of declassification and release to the broader scientific community for research purposes. In 1999, Medea scientists requested that the intelligence community begin collecting images of Arctic sea ice at four different locations in the Arctic Basin during the summer months (the melt season). Two additional locations were added in 2005. The request forwarded by Medea scientists included collections starting in May and ending in September at the approximate locations shown in Figure 2.1. Collection of images during the summer months at these six sites has continued until the present day
The rationale for selecting these sites was as follows:
Beaufort - The Beaufort Sea has been the site of many field studies since the International Geophysical Year 1957/58. The ice in this region is the most studied and best known. It was a focal point for the automatic data buoy program and many studies of the surface heat budget, as well as submarine sonar cross sections.
Canada - This region typically contains the oldest and thickest ice with the longest residence time in the Arctic Basin.
Fram - Fram Strait between Greenland and Spitsbergen is the dominant exit route of sea ice from the Arctic Basin into the Greenland Sea. The amount of low-salinity ice exported is an important component of the basin-wide ice balance and potentially impacts the global ocean circulation.
Siberia - this oceanic region produces most of the first-year ice and was judged to be most sensitive to interannual changes of oceanic and atmospheric forcing. This has been borne out by the extreme negative anomaly of ice extent in the autumn of 2007.
Two additional sites were added after 2005; they are:
Chukchi - While the other sites are in areas with generally thicker perennial ice (with the exception of 2007, when the East Siberian site was ice free in September), the Chukchi site was chosen to sample ice that is seasonal.
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 11
2
Potential Uses of the Medea Data Set
During the 1990s, the Medea program brought together environmental scientists
and members of the intelligence community to apply classified assets and data to further
the understanding of environmental change (Richelson 1998). Under Medea auspices,
the global “fiducials” program was established whereby participating scientists could
request collection of classified images at environmentally sensitive locations around the
globe. The term “fiducials” refers to the fact that the classified images were to be kept “in
trust” in classified archives, with the eventual goal of declassification and release to the
broader scientific community for research purposes. In 1999, Medea scientists requested
that the intelligence community begin collecting images of Arctic sea ice at four different
locations in the Arctic Basin during the summer months (the melt season). Two
additional locations were added in 2005. The request forwarded by Medea scientists
included collections starting in May and ending in September at the approximate
locations shown in Figure 2.1. Collection of images during the summer months at these
six sites has continued until the present day
The rationale for selecting these sites was as follows:
Beaufort - The Beaufort Sea has been the site of many field studies since the
International Geophysical Year 1957/58. The ice in this region is the most studied and
best known. It was a focal point for the automatic data buoy program and many studies
of the surface heat budget, as well as submarine sonar cross sections.
Canada - This region typically contains the oldest and thickest ice with the longest
residence time in the Arctic Basin.
Fram - Fram Strait between Greenland and Spitsbergen is the dominant exit route of
sea ice from the Arctic Basin into the Greenland Sea. The amount of low-salinity ice
exported is an important component of the basin-wide ice balance and potentially
impacts the global ocean circulation.
Siberia - this oceanic region produces most of the first-year ice and was judged to be
most sensitive to interannual changes of oceanic and atmospheric forcing. This has been
borne out by the extreme negative anomaly of ice extent in the autumn of 2007.
Two additional sites were added after 2005; they are:
Chukchi - While the other sites are in areas with generally thicker perennial ice (with
the exception of 2007, when the East Siberian site was ice free in September), the
Chukchi site was chosen to sample ice that is seasonal.
11
OCR for page 11
12 Scientific Value of Arctic Sea Ice Imagery Derived Products
FIGURE 2.1 Approximate locations of the image collections requested by Medea
scientists in 1999 (red hexagons). The Barrow and Chukchi sites (red squares) were
added in 2005. Images were collected at the North Beaufort site (yellow pentagon)
only during 1999 and are not part of the dataset considered in this report. SOURCE:
Figure courtesy of USGS National Civil Applications Program.
Barrow – Barrow is the site of extensive real time monitoring of fast ice by investigators
at the University of Alaska and elsewhere; imagery acquired here complements these and
other in situ data.
Some products have already been derived from these data sets, in particular
statistics and maps of melt pond distributions in the Arctic, disseminated by the National
Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC, 2000; Fetterer et al., 2008) and used by the Arctic
research community. However, these products are based only on images taken during
1999-2001. Furthermore, only surface type (e.g., ice or water) maps based on the
imagery have been released. The literal imagery itself or a lower-resolution version of it
has not been released. In the latter years of the Medea program, procedures were
established whereby Literal Imagery Derived Products (LIDPs) could be produced from
the classified fiducials data at a resolution deemed suitable for declassification. Several
hundred LIDPs with a nominal resolution of 1 meter have been produced from the
images collected at the six Arctic sites from 1999 to present. Below we discuss the many
potential scientific uses of these LIDPs.
USES OF THE LIDPs: SEA ICE PHYSICAL PROCESSES
The derived images will lend themselves to a wide range of studies, leading to
significant improvements in how sea ice physical processes are represented in climate
OCR for page 11
Potential Uses of the Medea Data Set 13
models. These images will also enable scientists to understand changes in ice habitat. In
particular, the images are useful for studying snow distribution and its relationship to
surface topography, the initiation and development of meltwater ponds and their
profound effect on the surface energy balance and the melting of ice in summer, the
relationship of stress and strain rate and its reflection in the pattern of cracks and other
discontinuities in the ice, lateral oblation, and thickness evolution. The LIDPs will help
scientists better understand these specific physical processes, especially if used in
conjunction with data from operational civil satellite systems.
The utility of data acquired by remote sensing depends on our ability to interpret
them in terms of the actual state of the observed object, i.e. the ground truth. In many
cases, understanding the effects of calibrations, and complex radiative properties of the
observed object and the properties of the intervening medium, require a plethora of
ancillary data sets and ground truth studies. These are particularly difficult to obtain in
areas where field (ground-borne) measurements are logistically difficult or sometimes
impossible.
The one-meter resolution, panchromatic LIDPs are not precisely ground truth.
Nevertheless, they offer exceptional details of the surface features compared to images
derived from widely available passive and active microwave, and infrared sensors. Such
details are exemplified by Figure 2.2, which is a sequence of LIDPs (500 m on a side)
showing the transition of melt ponds to open water during the summer of 2006. This
committee believes that the great value of the Medea data are their potential to augment
the meaning and interpretation of data obtained by other, unclassified, lower-resolution
sensors. Below we describe in more detail the physical processes governing the evolution
of Arctic sea ice that will be better understood through the LIDPs
Snow Distribution
Snow depth is an important ingredient in all thermodynamic models of sea ice.
Most of the snow on Arctic sea ice falls during the autumn. Redistribution by wind
produces an extremely variable snow cover. Smooth ice in frozen leads is often swept
bare, while a large fraction of the snow collects in drifts behind aerodynamic obstacles,
such as pressure ridges and hummocks. During periods of clear, cold weather, which
typically follow precipitation events, the steep temperature gradient in the snow causes
an upward diffusion of water vapor that hardens the snow surface and often makes the
drifts survive for the whole winter. In the returning daylight of spring, drifts can be
identified in 1-meter resolution images. In the absence of any other method to observe
the snow cover, the Medea data collection will provide valuable information about the
morphology of the snow cover and its interaction with the surface topography and help
to improve the interpretation of Ice, Clouds, Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) laser
altimeter records in terms of freeboard, ice thickness, and snow depth. This issue was
addressed in a recent paper by Kwok and Cunningham (2008).
OCR for page 11
14 Scientific Value of Arctic Sea Ice Imagery Derived Products
5/26 6/01 6/04
6/12 6/21 7/03
FIGURE 2.2 Development of melt ponds at the Chukchi Site during the summer of
2006 as seen in the 1-m resolution LIDP imagery. Each image in this sequence
covers an area of ~500 m by 500 m. The last panel is of open water. SOURCE: Figure
courtesy of USGS National Civil Applications Program).
Lateral Ablation
The loss of multiyear ice (Figure 2.3) may be governed, in part, by lateral melting
of ice floes. Open leads with an albedo of less than 0.1 absorb 5-7 times as much solar
energy as flat ice, and convection transfers this energy to the side wall of the floes. The
possible importance of the process has long been recognized (Steele, 1992), but
observations require a field party to spend an entire summer on the ice and make the
technically difficult measurements of ablation in many places. In the history of U.S.
Arctic research, there have been only four all-summer drifting stations.
Sequential one-meter-resolution LIDPs will be capable both of measuring the
kinematic shifts of ice floe assemblies and at the same time tracking the surface area of
each individual piece of ice. Such observations will help explain the contribution of
lateral melting to the loss of multiyear ice.
OCR for page 11
Potential Uses of the Medea Data Set 15
FIGURE 2.3 Imagery from the European Remote Sensing Synthetic Aperture Radar
(ERS SAR; left) and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) Radarsat (right) indicating
the reduction in Arctic multiyear ice cover over 15 years. On the image, the thick
multiyear ice is bright; the thinner first year ice is dark. The figure shows the great
reduction in multiyear sea ice over a 15 year period. Alaska is to the upper left.
SOURCE: Figure constructed by Ron Kwok, JPL.
Ice Topography and Albedo
In the Arctic summer, a strong positive feedback exists between the absorbed
downwelling short-wave radiation and the state of the ice surface. The melting snow and
ice produce melt ponds whose low albedo further enhances the rate of melting. The
meltwater tends to collect on topographically low (i.e. thin) ice. Besides an average
thinning of the ice, this process truncates the thickness distribution g(h) at the thin end
and produces open water. The close linkages between meltwater pooling and ice surface
topography are also key to deriving information about ice albedo from independent
estimates of ice roughness or ice age (Eicken et al., 2004), with LIDP images providing a
means to improve such indirect derivation of information about ice albedo.
There are virtually no sustained, systematic observations of the evolution of the
spatial variability in ice albedo because Moderate Resolution Imaging (MODIS) does not
have sufficient resolution and Landsat does not have sufficient spatial coverage. The
Medea LIDP images will provide an unprecedented view of how the surface topography
affects the initial formation and subsequent evolution of melt ponds and their effect on
the albedo and hence the short-wave radiative energy balance. Thus the sequential high-
resolution pictures will be instrumental in estimating the thermodynamic part of the
OCR for page 11
16 Scientific Value of Arctic Sea Ice Imagery Derived Products
changes in g(h) during summer. To obtain the maximum benefit from these images,
however, calibration information is needed if it can be supplied.
Ice Thickness Evolution
Until recently, the only source of information on the thickness distribution has
come from occasional transects by submarines with upward looking sonar (Rothrock et
al., 2007). It was recently shown by Kwok and Cunningham (2008) that observations
from the ICESat laser altimeter can be interpreted to produce ice thickness distributions
in numerous places within the Arctic Basin (Figure 2.4). As shown in Figure 1.3, dynamic
ice models carry the thickness distribution g(h) as an internal variable, controlled by the
energy balance and by the mechanical deformation. In view of the large effect that the
albedo has on the computed loss of ice during summer, the models have to assign a
certain albedo to the different categories of ice thickness. There are no observational data
documenting a relationship between different categories of ice thickness and their albedo
throughout the summer. Hence, the designers of models have no choice but to
parameterize a relationship between albedo and ice thickness, which makes it a powerful
tuning parameter. Ice thickness distributions from ICESat and albedo from the Medea
LIDPs should be invaluable to improve these parameterizations.
FIGURE 2.4 Sea ice thickness from ICESat. (a) Spatial field of ice thickness from
ICESat data acquired over a 35-day period between October and November of 2005
(ON05). (b) Same as (a) but of data acquired in February and March of 2006
(FM06). The start day and duration of each campaign are shown above. (c) Overall
ice thickness distributions of the Arctic basin in ON05 (black) and FM05 (red). The
quantities in the plot are the mean and standard deviation (in brackets) of the
thickness distributions. (d) Thickness distributions of the multiyear sea ice zone. (e)
Thickness distributions of the first-year ice zone. SOURCE: Kwok and Cunningham,
2008; Modified by permission of American Geophysical Union.
OCR for page 11
Potential Uses of the Medea Data Set 17
Deformation
The realistic representation of the relationship of stress and strain rate of the ice
has been a persistent and seemingly intractable problem in the design of dynamic sea ice
models (Hibler, 2003). In a recent study, Kwok et al. (2008) use Radarsat to analyze the
ice deformation fields on a 10 km scale (Figure 2.5), and compare them to the output of
four different dynamic ice models. Given the different physics and forcing functions in
the models, the authors cannot state the reasons for the differences between observed
and modeled results, but they show that the model outputs are significantly in error,
both in terms of the velocity field and ice production.
If it were possible to compare the 10-km ice velocity and deformation field with
the high-resolution view of the Medea LIDP, we could expect new insight into the
processes whose combined effect lead to the relationship of stress and strain rate at the
larger scales.
Shear and Crack Pattern
The Arctic pack ice is crisscrossed by countless cracks and leads with a wide
range of sizes. They are related to the wind and water stress fields and their gradients,
and sometimes to the land boundaries of the ocean. Synoptic weather systems, eddies in
the ocean, and inertial and tidal motions produce discontinuities in the ice on a scale of
100 to 105 meters. When water at the freezing temperature in winter is exposed to a cold
sky and cold air, rapid ice growth results. It was shown by Kwok et al. (2003) that the
semidiurnal openings and closing caused by tidal and inertial motions could enhance ice
production by 10 percent. In summer, the reverse is the case.
In either case, civilian satellite images cannot resolve the smaller scale of the
spectrum of openings. The 1-meter resolution Medea LIDPs would be of significant
benefit to the calculations of the mass balance of the ice cover.
Melt Pond Recurrence
An issue of importance for the thermodynamic modeling of multiyear ice is the
question whether or not melt ponds have a tendency to recur in the same place in
consecutive summers. As mentioned above, field observations in summer are sparse. In
fact, only one station was maintained by a western country for two consecutive summers
(during the IGY, 1957-1958), but the ice break-up in 1958 forced the team to move to a
different ice floe nearby. When the surface of melt ponds freezes in autumn, liquid water
remains for many weeks under the snow ice cover, acting as a source of latent heat and
retarding the formation of new ice at the base. The ability to follow an individual piece of
ice from freeze-up throughout the winter until the onset of melting in the following
summer would shed light not only at the recurrence of melt ponds but several other
processes addressed in the previous sections.
OCR for page 11
18 Scientific Value of Arctic Sea Ice Imagery Derived Products
FIGURE 2.5 The top six figures show time-varying fields of ice deformation
(magnitude of shear) from November 28, 1999 through January 3, 2000 derived
from 100-m resolution RADARSAT Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery. These
fields cover a large part of the Arctic basin, but not all the details in the fracture
patterns are resolved by the 100-m resolution data (Kwok et al., 2008; Modified by
permission of American Geophysical Union). Bottom figure: A sample LIDP image (1
m spatial resolution) offers a significant improvement in the resolution of the open-
water leads (their width and orientation), and surface morphology beyond that seen
in widely available SAR imagery. The square shows the coverage of one SAR pixel.
SOURCE: Figure courtesy of USGS National Civil Applications Program.
OCR for page 11
Potential Uses of the Medea Data Set 19
COMPLEMENTING CIVILIAN AND COMMERCIALLY
AVAILABLE DATASETS
The more recent LIDPs would be extremely useful in assessing the performance
of relatively new civilian satellite sensors, particularly the Advanced Microwave Scanning
Radiometer for the Earth Observing System (AMSR-E), which began operation in 2002,
and ICESat, which began operation in 2003. AMSR-E is a passive microwave sensor and
thus suffers from limitations in sea ice retrieval due to surface melt, melt-ponding, and
other sub-pixel processes. The effects on passive microwave emissivity from these
processes are still not well understood. The LIDPs, with dimensions roughly 15 km x 15
km, are roughly the same scale as the AMSR-E sensor footprint (5-15 km, depending on
sensor frequency channel; Figure 2.6). Previous validation campaigns with high-
resolution imagery from satellites and aircraft as well as in situ data have helped
resolved some of the ambiguities in the passive microwave signature (e.g. Cavalieri et al.,
2006; Maslanik et al., 2006). However, the sea ice surface is highly variable in space and
time, and these limited campaigns cannot capture that full variability. The numerous
scenes that could be released here - covering several years, spanning the full range of the
melt season, and encompassing several different geographic regions of different ice
regimes (e.g., first-year vs. multiyear ice) - will encompass the full variability of the sea
ice passive microwave characteristics. Passive microwave sea ice data are crucial for
monitoring the long-term changes in Arctic sea ice because they have a continuous,
consistent, and near-complete 30-year record. The released imagery would help improve
this long-term record.
The imagery will also be very beneficial to ICESat freeboard estimates that are
being developed (e.g., Kwok et al., 2007). The imagery will confirm visible surface
features revealed in the ICESat freeboard data. For example, surface shadows in the
imagery can allow calculation of sea ice ridge freeboard heights, which are generally
below the resolution of ICESat. The imagery may also provide snow cover information,
an important unknown in ICESat data.
The accurate interpretation of lower-resolution visible/infrared data from
MODIS will also benefit from this imagery. MODIS, with 500-m resolution, provides a
reasonably detailed picture of sea ice conditions. However, the resolution is not fine
enough to explicitly capture most meltpond features. There has been some development
in calculating meltpond statistics from MODIS imagery (Tschudi et al., 2008), but this
high-resolution imagery would be a tremendous help in further refining these efforts.
One of the greatest values of the Arctic sea-ice imagery data set lies not only in its
high resolution and image quality, but in the availability of imagery with very high repeat
rates in all key regions. Given the high probability of cloud cover over summer Arctic sea
ice (typically 80 percent or more, Beesley, 1999), any other type of comparable
commercial or research-grade imagery would be available at time intervals of at best
several weeks. Since these acquisition dates are constrained by the satellite, likely many
such acquired images would be unusable due to cloud cover. In contrast, the Arctic IDPs
are available at much higher time resolution, in some cases on a daily basis, allowing
studies of seasonal progression at a scale hitherto extremely difficult or impossible to
achieve. For example, in a previous study one of the committee members worked with
specially acquired commercial (SPOT) imagery over a location at roughly 75˚ N between
the months of May through September. Only one of the more than 100 scenes was not
obscured by clouds and thus could be analyzed in the study. In contrast, on the order of
OCR for page 11
20 Scientific Value of Arctic Sea Ice Imagery Derived Products
two dozen scenes are available for a similar time period in a single year at a comparable
Medea fiducial Site.
FIGURE 2.6 AMSR-E, which began operating in 2002, is a passive microwave
sensor. Because the LIDPs are the same scale as AMSR-E, they would be extremely
useful in assessing the performance of AMSR-E (Image courtesy of Matt Smith,
Information Technology & Systems Center, University of Alabama at Huntsville).