Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Tundra”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

164 records · Page 10

Anthropogenic Pathways for Modeling and Managing Future Arctic Fires

Wildland fires, including extreme fire events and seasons, are becoming more common in the boreal and Arctic regions due to climate change. Current climate modeling approaches do not include country- or region-specific socioeconomic pathways that specifically address the drivers of and potential mitigation techniques for wildland fires. Forest management, energy extraction, and tourism, together with firefighting capacity and readiness as well as fuels treatment, can have a significant impact on future wildland fire risks and impacts. To assess the impacts of anthropogenic factors and to align with previous work done on shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs), climate pathways for future wildfires up to 2050 were created for the states that compose the original Arctic Council countries: Canada, the United States, the Kingdom of Denmark, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, and Finland as well as the Russian Federation (with whom the other seven countries withdrew participation from in May 2022 due to the invasion and ongoing war in Ukraine). High and low fire activity and risk pathways for all states comprising the Arctic were made, with expert ‘best guess’ pathways for each state created separately to represent the middle of road. The low activity and low fire risk pathways, named “We Got This”, assume active fire suppression via citizenry participation and official land management, efficient and extensive fuel treatments, and consistent and active wildland firefighting for each new ignition. The high activity and high fire risk pathways, named “Let It Burn”, assume nearly the opposite, due to lack of government and community response and no action on climate change drivers that increase wildland fire risk. The ‘best guess’ pathway, named “The Fire Will Come”, indicates that some countries are currently on the pathway for less fire compared to other Arctic and Boreal states but not a ‘no-fire’ future. For example, in the Nordic countries, human ignition sources from tourism, timber and energy extraction, summer cottages, and expanding wildland-urban intermix due to exurban growth may increase. In North America, these same risks will apply but also may see an expansion of agriculture that increases the likelihood of open burning in croplands. Drier fuel condition and extreme heat events due to climate change create favorable conditions for extreme wildfires from any ignition source. Throughout the Arctic and boreal lightning is expected to increase, increasing the risk of tundra fires in addition to forest fires in hard-to-reach locations that are more difficult to coordinate and execute wildland firefighting. To move the future Arctic fire SSPs forward, several short-term and long-term actions must be completed. Certain data needs are required, like a harmonized pan-Arctic and pan-boreal fuels geospatial product, while also a need to refine and socialize current definitions of fire seasons and fire management – including developing an open-source system to track and share innovation, mitigation, and adaptation strategies across Arctic states.

Arctic↗

The Uncertainty of Biomass Estimates from LiDAR and SAR Across a Boreal Forest Structure Gradient

In this study, weexamined the uncertainty of aboveground live biomass (AGB) estimates based on light detection and ranging (LiDAR) and synthetic aperture radar (SAR) measurements distributed across a low-biomass vegetation structure gradient fromforest to non-forest in boreal-like ecosystems. The conifer-dominant structure gradient was compiled from ground data amassed from multiple field expeditions in central Maine (USA), Aurskog (Norway), and across central Siberia (Russia). Single variable empirical models were built tomodel AGB fromremote sensingmetrics. Using thesemodels, we calculated a rootmean square error (RMSE) and a 95% confidence interval (CI) of the RMSE fromthe difference between the remote sensing AGB predictions and the ground reference AGB estimates within AGB intervals across a 0-100 Mg ha(exp.−1) boreal forest structure gradient. The results show that the error in AGB predictions (RMSE) and the error uncertainty (the CI) from LiDAR and SAR change across a forest gradient. The errors of airborne LiDAR and SAR metrics and spaceborne LiDAR platforms show a general trend of reduced relative errors as AGBmagnitudes increase, particularly from0 to 60 Mg ha (exp.−1). Empirical models relating spaceborne metrics to AGB and estimates of spaceborne LiDAR error uncertainty demonstrate the difficulty of characterizing differences in AGB at the site-level with current spaceborne sensors, particularly below 80 Mg ha (exp.−1) with less than 50-100% error.

Taiga↗