Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

B. Poulter

Publications and source records attributed to B. Poulter.

4 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2023

Exploring Mission Design for Imaging Spectroscopy Retrievals for Land and Aquatic Ecosystems

The retrieval algorithms used for optical remote sensing satellite data to estimate Earth's geophysical properties have specific requirements for spatial resolution, temporal revisit, spectral range and resolution, and instrument signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) performance to meet biogeoscience objectives. Studies to estimate surface properties from hyperspectral data use a range of algorithms sensitive to various sources of spectroscopic uncertainty, which are in turn influenced by mission architecture choices. Retrieval algorithms vary across scientific fields and may be more or less sensitive to mission architecture choices that affect spectral, spatial, or temporal resolutions and spectrometer SNR. We used representative remote sensing algorithms across terrestrial and aquatic study domains to inform aspects of mission design that are most important for impacting accuracy in each scientific area. We simulated the propagation of uncertainties in the retrieval process including the effects of different instrument configuration choices. We found that retrieval accuracy and information content degrade consistently at >10 nm spectral resolution, >30 m spatial resolution, and >8-day revisit. In these studies, the noise reduction associated with lower spatial resolution improved accuracy vis à vis high spatial resolution measurements. The interplay between spatial resolution, temporal revisit, and SNR can be quantitatively assessed for imaging spectroscopy missions and used to identify key components of algorithm performance and mission observing criteria.

A. M. Raiho↗
NASA NTRS2019

Multimodel Analysis of Future Land Use and Climate Change Impacts on Ecosystem Functioning

Land use and climate changes both affect terrestrial ecosystems. Here, we used three combinations of Shared Socioeconomic Pathways and Representative Concentration Pathways (SSP1xRCP26, SSP3xRCP60, and SSP5xRCP85) as input to three dynamic global vegetation models to assess the impacts and associated uncertainty on several ecosystem functions: terrestrial carbon storage and fluxes, evapotranspiration, surface albedo, and runoff. We also performed sensitivity simulations in which we kept either land use or climate (including atmospheric CO2) constant from year 2015 on to calculate the isolated land use versus climate effects. By the 2080–2099 period, carbon storage increases by up to 87 ± 47 Gt (SSP1xRCP26) compared to present day, with large spatial variance across scenarios and models. Most of the carbon uptake is attributed to drivers beyond future land use and climate change, particularly the lagged effects of historic environmental changes. Future climate change typically increases carbon stocks in vegetation but not soils, while future land use change causes carbon losses, even for net agricultural abandonment (SSP1xRCP26). Evapotranspiration changes are highly variable across scenarios, and models do not agree on the magnitude or even sign of change of the individual effects. A calculated decrease in January and July surface albedo (up to −0.021 ± 0.007 and −0.004 ± 0.004 for SSP5xRCP85) and increase in runoff (+67 ± 6 mm/year) is largely driven by climate change. Overall, our results show that future land use and climate change will both have substantial impacts on ecosystem functioning. However, future changes can often not be fully explained by these two drivers and legacy effects have to be considered.

land use change↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

From CMS to the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center – Improved Tracking of Recent Changes in Co 2 and Ch 4 From NASA’s Quasi-Operational Modeling Systems

Reliable, low latency delivery of high quality global flux and concentration information is a growing but still unmet need to advance expanding measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification efforts that underpin federal climate mitigation strategies. Here we present on progress toward developing space-based greenhouse gas (GHG) monitoring systems that can provide comprehensive information trailing real time by a matter of weeks to a few months. Through support from its Carbon Monitoring System (CMS) program, NASA has developed the capability to assimilate XCO 2 retrievals from the Orbiting Carbon Observatory, 2 (OCO 2 ) into the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) Constituent Data Assimilation System (CoDAS) to create gap-filled, three-dimensional (3D) estimates of CO 2 mixing ratio. When observations are unavailable, concentration fields are further informed by observationally-informed bottom-up flux packages that incorporate remotely sensed fire, nighttime lights, and vegetation observations combined with estimates of atmospheric growth rate based on surface in situ data. The 3D nature of these datasets supports evaluation with independent aircraft data to improve confidence in satellite data, development of new regional modeling approaches, and quantification of the climate impacts of GHGs. The system has recently been expanded to assimilate XCH 4 from ESA’s TROPOspheric Monitoring Instrument (TROPOMI) instrument and is supported by companion efforts to improve delivery of estimates of bottom-up land and ocean fluxes. The quasi-operational GEOS-GHG system is contributing to the recently announced U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center (GHG Center) by delivering information on recent changes in CO 2 and CH 4 emissions and concentrations to support stakeholder and research communities. In this presentation, we provide an overview of the current system configured to support the GHG Center. We highlight examples of how this data contributes to broader NASA initiatives including the Earth Information Center, an innovative virtual and physical exhibit designed to show how NASA data helps the nation combat climate change. We conclude by discussing how innovations in CMS research can address remaining data gaps and modeling challenges to advance operational GHG monitoring in the future.

Lesley Ott↗