Members Can Post Anonymously On This Site
-
Similar Topics
-
By NASA
Explore This Section Earth Earth Observer Editor’s Corner Feature Articles Meeting Summaries News Science in the News Calendars In Memoriam Announcements More Archives Conference Schedules Style Guide 21 min read
Summary of the 11th ABoVE Science Team Meeting
Introduction
The NASA Arctic–Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) is a large-scale ecological study in the northern regions of North America (Alaska and western Canada) that was developed to understand environmental changes in the region and the implications of those changes for society. Funded primarily by the NASA Terrestrial Ecology Program, this 10-year campaign has included field, airborne, and satellite remote sensing research to address its overarching scientific question of how environmental change in the Arctic and boreal region of western North America will affect vulnerable ecosystems and society.
ABoVE deployed in three phases: 1) ecosystem dynamics (2015–2018); 2) ecosystem services (2017–2022); and 3) analysis and synthesis (2023–present). Now in the last year of the third phase, the Science Team (ST) consists of 67 active NASA-funded projects with more than 1000 individuals participating. The ABoVE ST has met yearly to discuss the progress of individual teams, plan joint field work, and discuss synthesis activities. ABoVE was featured in a 2019 The Earth Observer article, titled “Summary of the 2019 ABoVE Science Team Meeting” [July–August 2019, Volume 31, Issue 4, pp. 19–22], as well as a 2022 The Earth Observer article, titled “Summary of the Eighth ABoVE Science Team Meeting” [September–October 2022, Volume 34, Issue 5, pp. 28–33].
Meeting Overview
The 11th – and final – ABoVE Science Team Meeting (ASTM11) was held May 12–15, 2025, with 96 registered in-person attendees meeting at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF) and 67 registered virtual attendees – see Photo 1. The meeting included presentations from Phase 3 projects and synthesis reports from thematic working groups (WGs). ABoVE partners, including collaborators [e.g., the Department of Energy’s Next Generation Ecosystem Experiment-Arctic (NGEE-Arctic), Polar Knowledge Canada (POLAR), the Canadian Forest Service (CFS), and the Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT)] and representatives from upcoming NASA campaigns focusing on the Arctic, shared updates on their activities. Additionally, the meeting featured sessions highlighting cross-project activities, e.g., ABoVE’s participation in regional fire workshops. The meeting also focused on collaborations with the Scotty Creek Research Station in Canada, the many types of science communication activities during ABoVE, and projects conducting collaborative research with community or regional partners.
Photo 1.The 11th Arctic–Boreal Vulnerability Experiment Science Team (ABoVE) meeting group photo of in-person and virtual participants. Photo credit: Peter Griffith, Leane Kending, and David Stroud The meeting included additional team activities designed to encourage collaboration and understanding between team members. There were opportunities for multiple field trips for in-person attendees, including visits to the Alaska Satellite Facility (ASF) at the Geophysical Institute, the Permafrost Tunnel operated by the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL), the Yankovich Road Fire Interpretive Trail, and the Arctic Research Open House at UAF – see ABove Field Trips section to learn more. The meeting offered early career researchers a chance to receive feedback on their posters and participate in an Early Career lunch event. The meeting even hosted an ABoVE bingo competition, which encouraged attendees to make new scientific and social connections – see Photo 2.
Photo 2. Scott Goetz [University of Northern Arizona—ABoVE Science Team Lead] poses with ABoVE BINGO winner Wanwan Liang [University of Utah]. Photo credit: Wanwan Liang Meeting Opening
The first day of the meeting began with a series of opening remarks from the ABoVE leadership team. Peter Griffith [NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)/Science Systems and Applications, Inc. (SSAI)—Chief Scientist, Carbon Cycle and Ecosystems Office (CCEO)], Scott Goetz [Northern Arizona University (NAU)—ABoVE ST Lead], and Ryan Pavlick [NASA Headquarters (HQ)—ABoVE Program Manager] all noted the significance of this final meeting and discussed the major scientific advances of ABoVE made possible through the dedication of ST members, WG leads, planning committees, and contributors who have made ABoVE a success. Goetz reviewed the meeting goals and objectives:
receive updates about currently funded projects; receive reports on Thematic WG advances with an emphasis on multiple WG and cross-phase synthesis activities; receive updates on research connections with partners and collaborators; discuss, reflect, and document the history of ABoVE, including major advances, lessons learned, and items to accomplish in the time remaining; and celebrate ABoVE success stories, with advice for potential future NASA large-scale coordinated campaigns. Working Group Presentations and Breakouts
Throughout the first few days of the meeting, leads for the thematic working groups (WG) presented synthetic overviews of the research efforts of their group members, identified current gaps in planned or completed research, and discussed potential future work. Following these presentations, breakout groups convened to discuss future activities of the WGs. Short summaries of each presentation are available below. Together, these presentations demonstrate the highly interconnected nature of carbon cycles, hydrology, permafrost dynamics, and disturbance regimes in Arctic–boreal ecosystems. The presentations also showcase the substantial ongoing WG efforts to synthesize findings and identify critical knowledge gaps for future research priorities.
Vegetation Dynamics Working Group
WG Leads: Matthew Macander [Alaska Biological Research, Inc. (ABR)] and Paul Montesano [GSFC/ADNET Systems Inc.]
The Vegetation Dynamics WG discussed new advances in understanding Arctic–boreal vegetation structure and function that have been made over the past 10 years through comprehensive biomass maps and multidecadal trend analyses. ABoVE research revealed a critical boreal forest biome shift with greening in nitrogen-rich northern forests and browning in drought-stressed southern forests. The group has identified key knowledge gaps in predicting post-fire vegetation recovery and detecting pervasive declines in vegetation resilience across southern boreal forests. The results suggest higher vulnerability to abrupt forest loss that could dampen the expected increase in carbon sequestration under future climate scenarios.
Spectral Imaging Working Group
WG Leads: Fred Huemmrich [GSFC/University of Maryland Baltimore County] and Peter Nelson [Laboratory of Ecological Spectroscopy (LECOSPEC)]
Over the past year, the Spectral Imaging WG focused on the fundamental scale problem in Arctic ecology, which refers to the mismatch between observation scales and ecological process scales, which span spatial scales from leaf level to larger study areas and temporal scales from minutes to decades. The Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer – Next Generation (AVIRIS-NG) and AVIRIS-3 datasets provide the first broad-area and high-spatial and spectral resolution coverage of high-latitude terrestrial ecosystems. The WG is now completing a scaling synthesis paper and preparing for the new era of data-rich spectral imaging with improved capabilities in data management, machine learning, and modeling applications for high-latitude research.
Modeling Working Group
WG Lead: Josh Fisher [Chapman University]
The Modeling WG aims to reduce model uncertainties in simulations and projections in the Arctic–boreal region across all ABoVE ecosystem indicators. The WG had polled the ST to determine the variables most needed for their Earth system models and is now using the field, airborne, and satellite datasets to better constrain these models. This WG discussed the benefits to the modeling community of transforming the more than 100 ABoVE datasets into a common grid and projection format used by modelers.
Carbon Dynamics Working Group
WG Leads: Jonathan Wang [University of Utah] and Jennifer Watts [Woodwell Climate Research Center (WCRC)]
The Carbon Dynamics WG has focused its recent work on three areas: decadal syntheses of carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes from eddy covariance towers, machine learning approaches to upscaling wetland and lake methane (CH4) emissions, and carbon flux modeling across the Arctic–boreal zone. The research integrated atmospheric CO2 observations to improve carbon flux estimates and examined wildfire impacts on both carbon emissions and albedo changes. A significant component of the work involved comparing top-down versus bottom-up carbon flux models, with particular attention to permafrost and peatland regions.
Hydrology-Permafrost-Wetlands Working Group
WG Leads: Laura Bourgeau-Chavez [Michigan Technological University], David Butman [University of Washington], John Kimball [University of Montana], and Melissa Schwab [University of California, Irvine]
The Hydrology–Permafrost–Wetlands WG focused on the processes controlling changes in permafrost distribution and properties and their impacts. There was discussion about the nature, causes, and consequences of hydrologic change (e.g. water storage, mobility, and distribution) and about ecosystem water, energy, and carbon cycle linkages. The presenters mentioned integration of ABoVE datasets with NASA satellite missions [e.g., NASA–Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR) and Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) missions]. WG members discussed the connections between ABoVE research and several crosscutting initiatives, including two NASA Arctic coastlines efforts [e.g., Frontlines Of Rapidly Transforming Ecosystems Earth Venture Suborbital (FORTE EVS) campaign and NASA’s Arctic-COastal Land Ocean InteRactionS (COLORS)] and the WCRC’s Permafrost Pathways.
Disturbance Working Group
WG Leads: Dong Chen [University of Maryland, College Park] and Jinhyuk Kim [University of California, Irvine]
The Disturbance WG leads presented their decade-long perspective on disturbance-related research in the ABoVE domain. The presentation incorporated artificial intelligence (AI)-generated summaries of ABoVE-affiliated research across multiple disturbance types, including boreal wildfires, tundra wildfires, and thermokarst/permafrost degradation processes. Chen and Kim acknowledged the extensive contributions from researchers and WG members while outlining future directions for disturbance research.
Success Stories
Four “Success Story” presentations and panels took place during ASTM11, which showcased efforts of ABoVE ST members and the leadership team to create and coordinate engagement efforts that spanned individual projects.
Success Story 1: ABoVE Participation in Regional Fire Workshops
A substantial portion of ABoVE research has focused on wildfire, and many members of the ST have participated in domestic and international wildfire efforts, connecting researchers with land managers across Alaska and Canada. Randi Jandt [UAF] discussed the Alaska Fire Science Consortium workshops (held in 2017 and 2022). Jenn Baltzer [Wilfred Laurier University (WLU), Canada] discussed Northwest Territories workshops (held in 2014 and 2025), both of which occurred in response to extreme fire seasons in the region. Laura Bourgeau-Chavez outlined ABoVE’s participation in all of these workshops. The workshops facilitated knowledge exchange and collaboration on critical wildfire management priorities, including fire risk assessment, real-time modeling, post-fire effects, and climate change impacts on fire regimes. Key features included small focus groups, field trips to command centers and fire-affected areas, and integration of Indigenous knowledge with new technologies to inform management practices and climate preparedness strategies.
Success Story 2: Collaborations with Scotty Creek Research Station (SCRS)
ASTM11 participants watched the film, “Scotty Creek Research Community – The Spirit of Collaboration,” about the SCRS, Canada’s first and only Indigenous-led research station. Following the film, station team members participated in a panel discussion. Ramona Pearson [Ramona Pearson Consulting, Canada], Maude Auclair [WLU], Mason Dominico [WLU], Michael McPhee [Sambaa K’e First Nation, Canada], and William “Bill” Quinton [WLU] discussed their decade-long collaboration with ABoVE. The partnership involved ABoVE collecting airborne hyperspectral, lidar, and radar imagery, while SCRS researchers provided field data for calibration and validation. In 2022, management of the station transitioned to Łı́ı́dlı̨ı̨ Kų́ę́ First Nation (LKFN, Canada), and ABoVE continued collaborating through knowledge exchange, including with early-career researchers and interns. When a 2022 fire destroyed the field station and surrounding area, ABoVE flew additional flights to capture airborne imagery observations to allow comparison of pre- and post-fire conditions.
Success Story 3: Science Communication
During the ABoVE field campaign, ST members and CCEO staff engaged in multiple strategies to communicate research results to the public. The activities included interactive engagement through airborne open houses and guest flights, ST member narratives in the “Notes from the Field” blog posts on the NASA Earth Observatory website, and professional multimedia production, including Earth Observatory content and award-winning videos. This multifaceted strategy demonstrates effective scientific communication through direct public engagement and high-quality, multimedia storytelling, making complex research accessible to diverse audiences.
Success Story 4: Engagement Activities
This session highlighted several examples of community engagement across the ABoVE domain. Gerald “J.J.” Frost [ABR] discussed synthesizing ecosystem responses and elder observations in western Alaska for his ABoVE project. In another example, ABoVE researchers from Michigan Tech Research Institute (MTRI) partnered with Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) and local organizations. Dana Redhuis [MTRI] and Rebecca Edwards [DUC] described their on-the-land camps that provide hands-on training for Northwest Territories youth in wetlands education and ecological monitoring. Kevin Turner [Brock University, Canada] showcased his work with members of the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation in Old Crow Flats, Yukon, evaluating how climate and land cover change influence water dynamics and carbon balance. These activities demonstrate collaborative research that integrates Indigenous and Western knowledge approaches to address climate change impacts.
ABoVE Phase 3 Project Presentations
Project leads of the 20 NASA-funded ABoVE Phase 3 projects presented updates that were organized by scientific theme. The presentations spanned multiple days of the meeting. Table 1 below provides all the project titles, presenter names, and links to each project and presentation. Science results from four of the presentations are shown in Figures 1–4 below as indicated in the table.
Table 1. An overview ofABoVE Phase 3 projects and presenters. The Project name includes the last name of the Principal Investigator, NASA funding program (TE for Terrestrial Ecology), the year of the NASA solicitation funding the research, and provides a hyperlink to the Project Profile. A hyperlink to each presentation is provided as either PowerPoint (PPT) file or PDF.
Project Carbon Presenter(s) Bloom (TE 2021): Using CO2, CH4 and land-surface constraints to resolve sign and magnitude of northern high latitude carbon-climate feedbacks [PDF] Eren Bilir [NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)]; Principal Investigator (PI): Alexis (Anthony) Bloom [NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)] Butman (TE 2021): Do changing terrestrial-aquatic interfaces in Arctic-boreal landscapes control the form, processing, and fluxes of carbon? [PPT] David Butman [University of Washington] – see Figure 1 Watts (TE 2021): Contributions of tundra and boreal systems to radiative forcing in North America and Russia under contemporary and future conditions [PPT] Jennifer Watts [Woodwell Climate Research Center] Miller-S (TE 2021): A synthesis and reconciliation of greenhouse gas flux estimates across the ABoVE domain [PDF] Scot Miller [Johns Hopkins University] Michalak (TE 2021): Quantifying climate sensitivities of photosynthesis and respiration in Arctic and boreal ecosystems from top-down observational constraints [PDF] Wu Sun and Jiaming Wen [both Carnegie Institution for Science, CI]; PI: Anna Michalak, [Carnegie Institution for Science] Fire Presenter(s) Bourgeau-Chavez (TE 2021): Integrating remote sensing and modeling to better understand the vulnerability of boreal-taiga ecosystems to wildfire [PPT] Laura Bourgeau-Chavez [Michigan Technological University (MTU)] Walker (TE 2021): Drivers and Impacts of Reburning in boreal forest Ecosystems (DIRE) [PDF] Jeremy Forsythe [Northern Arizona University (NAU)]; PI: Xanthe Walker [NAU] Wang (TE 2021): Quantifying disturbance and global change impacts on multi-decadal trends in aboveground biomass and land cover across Arctic-boreal North America [PPT] Jonathan Wang [University of Utah]– see Figure 2 Wildlife Presenter(s) Boelman (TE 2021): The future of the Forest-Tundra Ecotone: A synthesis that adds interactions among snow, vegetation, and wildlife to the equation [PPT] Natalie Boelman [Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, Columbia University] French (TE 2021): Informing wetland policy and management for waterfowl habitat and other ecosystem services using multi-frequency synthetic aperture radar [PPT] Nancy French [MTU] – see Figure 3 Hydrology / Permafrost Presenter(s) Du (TE 2021): High resolution mapping of surface soil freeze thaw status and active layer thickness for improving the understanding of permafrost dynamics and vulnerability [PPT] Jinyang Du [University of Montana] Miller (TE 2021): Enhanced methane emissions in transitional permafrost environments: An ABoVE phase 3 synthesis investigation [PPT] Charles “Chip” Miller [NASA/JPL] Tape (TE 2021): Characterizing a widespread disturbance regime in the ABoVE domain: Beaver engineering [PPT] Kenneth Tape [University of Alaska, Fairbanks] Zhuang (TE 2021): Role of linked hydrological, permafrost, ground ice, and land cover changes in regional carbon balance across boreal and Arctic landscapes [PDF] Qianlai Zhuang [Purdue University] Vegetation Structure Presenter(s) Duncanson (TE 2021): Mapping boreal forest biomass recovery rates across gradients of vegetation structure and environmental change [PPT] Paul Montesano [GSFC/ADNET Systems Inc]; PI: Laura Duncanson [University of Maryland]—see Figure 4 Lara (TE 2021): ABoVE-Ground characterization of plant species succession in retrogressive thaw slumps using imaging spectroscopy [PPT] Mark Lara [University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign] Vegetation Dynamics Presenter(s) Frost (TE 2021): Towards a warmer, less frozen future Arctic: Synthesis of drivers, ecosystem responses, and elder observations along bioclimatic gradients in western Alaska [PPT] Gerald “J.J.” Frost [ABR] Goetz (TE 2021): Mapping and modeling attributes of an Arctic-boreal biome shift: Phase-3 applications within the ABoVE domain [PPT] Scott Goetz [NAU] Liu (TE 2021): Characterizing Arctic-boreal vegetation resilience under climate change and disturbances [PPT] Yanlan Liu [The Ohio State University] Townsend (TE 2021): Functional diversity as a driver of gross primary productivity variation across the ABoVE domain [PPT] Philip Townsend [University of Wisconsin] Determining Aboveground Biomass Density Using ICESat-2 Data and Modeling
Figure 1. Despite their relatively small coverage, surface water extent across boreal and arctic lowlands significantly impacts landscape-scale estimates of carbon emissions. The red points on the map in the figure indicates locations of available lake chemistry data derived from ABoVE-supported research, from collaborators, and from a preliminary literature search. Figure credit. David Butman Figure 2. The Arctic-boreal carbon cycle is inextricably linked to vegetation composition and demography, both of which are being altered by climate change, rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, and climate-induced changes in disturbance regimes. The map in the figure shows above-ground biomass (AGB) change across Arctic-boreal North America (2022–1984) created using a machine learning model of AGB trained on from more than 45,000 field plots and 200,000 km2 of airborne lidar data. Figure credit: Wanwan Liang Figure 3. Wetlands provide many ecosystem services, including waterfowl habitat, carbon sequestration, and water quality. Northern wetlands Iin the ABovE study area) are threatened from both land use expansion and climate change disruptions, prompting the need for informed management strategies. Copernicus Sentinel 1 synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data have been used to create this map of flooding (hydroperiod) in wetland areas around the Great Slave Lake in Canada The color code on the map corresponds to the number of times the SAR imagery indicated a place was flooded (inundated). Such information is helpful for predicting within-season changes in wetland extent. Figure credit: Nancy French Figure 4. Advances have been made in mapping aboveground biomass density (AGBD). Shown here as an example is an AGBD map created using stata from the ICESat-2 pan-Boreal 30-m (98-ft) tree height and biomass data product [left] and the ensemble mean of the standard deviation of AGBD, aggregated to modelling tiles [right]. Current research aims to expand these maps and understand regional vegetation changes. Figure credit. Laura Duncanson/data from ORNL DAAC ASTM11 Poster Sessions
ASTM11 featured 41 research posters across three sessions, organized by thematic area – see Table 3 and Photo 3. The Poster Session agenda details the range of topics that spanned airborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and satellite imagery to northern ecosystem fieldwork. Key research topics that emerged included CO2 and CH4 emissions from terrestrial and aquatic systems, ongoing permafrost thaw, fire impacts on carbon cycling, vegetation mapping and biomass estimation, and the impacts of wildlife on the landscape.
Table 2. A breakdown of ASTM11 poster presentations by science theme.
Poster Theme Poster Count Carbon Dynamics 5 Crosscutting, Modeling, or Other 6 Fire Disturbance 5 Permafrost, Hydrology, and Wetlands 13 Vegetation Dynamics and Distribution 7 Vegetation Structure and Function 4 Wildlife and Ecosystem Services 1 Photo 3. Poster presentations and sessions during ASTM11 offered opportunities for presenters to share their latest research findings with meeting participants. Photo credit: Elizabeth Hoy ABoVE Field Trips
ASTM11 offered multiple field trip options across the Fairbanks region of Alaska. The fieldtrips provided ST members an opportunity to interact with the research community – see Photo 4.
Trip to Alaska Satellite Facility (ASF) and Geophysical Institute
ASF is a data archive for many SAR datasets from a variety of sensors and has multiple ground station facilities. During the tour, participants visited the ASF operations room and ASF rooftop antenna. The Geophysical Institute tour also featured the Alaska Earthquake Center, Wilson Alaska Technical Center, and Alaska Center for Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration.
Trip to Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (CRREL) Permafrost Tunnel
The U.S. Army Core of Engineers CRREL Permafrost Tunnel is located in Fox, AK – about 15 km (9 mi) north of Fairbanks. Over 300 m (984 ft) of tunnel have been excavated, exposing Pleistocene ice and carbon-rich yedoma permafrost that ranges in age from 18,000 to 43,000 years old. The tunnel exposes mammoth and bison bones and a variety of permafrost soils. Ongoing projects in the tunnel cover a range of topics, including engineering and geophysical work, Mars analog studies, and biogeochemistry and microbiology of permafrost soils.
Wildfire Walk: Yankovich Road Fire Interpretive Trail
On July 11, 2021, a wildfire burned 3.5 acres (14,164 m2) of UAF land. In 2024, the UAF Alaska Fire Science Consortium, Bureau of Land Management Alaska Fire Service, and local artist Klara Maisch collaborated with others to develop the Wildfire Walk at the site. The interpretive trail is an outdoor learning experience with interpretive wayside markers that describe the fire incident, the relationship between wildfire and the boreal forest, fire science and environmental change, and wildfire prevention – see Figure 1.
UAF Arctic Research Open House
The UAF Arctic Research Open House was an opportunity for ST members and the public to explore the wide range of research happening at UAF and meet other scientists. ABoVE hosted an information table at the event.
Photo 4: Collage of images collected during a series of field trips, including [top] the Wildfire Walk along the Alaska Fire Science Consortium, [middle] the Permafrost Tunnel with Tom Douglas [Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory], [bottom left] UAF Arctic Open House ABoVE Table with Margaret “Maggie” Wooton [NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)/Science System and Applications, Inc. (GSFC/SSAI)], Elizabeth Hoy [GSFC/Global Science & Technology Inc.], and Qiang Zhou [GSFC/SSAI], talking with Logan Berner [Northern Arizona University], [bottom right] the Alaska Satellite Facility ground receiving antenna. Photo credit: Elizabeth Hoy Research Connections
The success of ABoVE as a large-scale research study over the Arctic and boreal regions within and outside the United States depended on collaboration with multiple organizations. Many of the ABoVE collaborators were able to present at ASTM11.
Andrew Applejohn [Polar Knowledge Canada (POLAR)] provided details about the scope, mandate, and facilities available through POLAR, a Canadian government agency that has partnered with the ABoVE ST for the duration of the campaign.
Ryan Connon [Government of the Northwest Territories (GNWT)] discussed the decade-long collaboration between ABoVE and the GNWT, including knowledge sharing of wildlife collar data, field-data ground measurements, and remote sensing analyses.
Gabrielle Gascon [Canadian Forest Service (CFS), Natural Resources Canada] explained the scope of Canada’s National Forest Inventory and the current CFS focus on wildfire and the CFS’s other areas of research related to the northern regions. Another presentation featured information about various vegetation mapping initiatives where Matthew Macander discussed an Alaska-based effort called AKVEG Map, a vegetation plot database, and Logan Berner [NAU] detailed a pan-Arctic plant aboveground biomass synthesis dataset.
Brendan Rogers [WCRC] showcased research from Permafrost Pathways, designed to bring together permafrost-related science experts with local communities to inform Arctic policy and develop adaptation and mitigation strategies to address permafrost thaw. NGEE-Arctic is another U.S. government effort that partnered specifically with ABoVE for the duration of the two efforts, and Bob Bolton [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)] provided updates on the project.
Tomoko Tanabe [Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research (JNIPR)] gave a presentation about NIPR to better inform ABoVE scientists about other international Arctic efforts, including a new Japanese Arctic research initiative called the Arctic Challenge for Sustainability III (ArCS III), designed to address social issues related to environmental and social changes in the Arctic.
Additional Presentations
An additional presentation aimed to keep the ABoVE ST informed of future NASA Arctic research efforts. Kelsey Bisson [NASA HQ—Program Scientist for the Ocean Biology and Biogeochemistry Program] discussed NASA Arctic-COLORS and Maria Tzortziou [City University of New York/Columbia University, LDEO] discussed the FORTE EVS campaign. The proposed Arctic-COLORS field campaign would quantify the biogeochemical and ecological response of Arctic nearshore systems to rapid changes in terrestrial fluxes and ice conditions. The NASA FORTE EVS campaign will fill a critical gap in understanding Alaska’s northernmost ecosystems by investigating eroding coastlines, rivers, deltas, and estuaries that connect land and sea systems, using airborne platforms.
Scott Goetz continued with a presentation on U.S. efforts to plan the International Polar Year, scheduled for 2032–2033. Ryan Pavlick provided details on the NISAR mission, which launched after the meeting on July 30, 2025, and discussed other possible future NASA missions.
A Career Trajectory panel featured Jennifer Watts, Jonathan Wang, Brendan Rogers, and Xiaoran “Seamore” Zhu [Boston University]. The panelists discussed opportunities for researchers from different academic backgrounds and at different career stages, and they provided details about how ABoVE has impacted their careers. They also discussed how NASA campaigns offer opportunities for early career scientists to join a team of peers to grow their abilities throughout the duration of the decade-long research.
Klara Maisch, a local artist, discussed her work creating science-informed artwork through interdisciplinary collaborations with scientists and other creators – see Figure 5. Maisch described the benefits of partnering with artists to share science with a broad audience and showcased artwork she has created.
Figure 5. Lower Tanana Homelands – 2022 Yankovich Fire – Plot Painting [left], with original plot reference photograph [right]. Image Credit: Klara Maisch Overarching Presentations
A series of presentations on the overall structure and outcomes of ABoVE were held during ASTM11. Charles “Chip” Miller [NASA/JPL—Deputy ABoVE ST Lead, ABoVE Airborne Lead] provided details about SAR, hyperspectral, and lidar airborne measurements collected between 2017 and 2024 for the ABoVE Airborne Campaign.
ABoVE Logistics Office members Daniel Hodkinson [GSFC/SSAI], Sarah Dutton [GSFC/SSAI], and Leanne Kendig [GSFC/Global Science & Technology, Inc. (GST, Inc.)] discussed the many field teams and activities supported during ABoVE. Overall, more than 50 teams were trained in field safety topics, with more than 1,200 training certificates awarded. Elizabeth Hoy [NASA GSFC/GST, Inc.] and Debjani Singh [ORNL] discussed the more than 250 data products developed during the ABoVE program and how to access them through NASA Earthdata. Example visualizations of ABoVE data products can be found in Figure 6.
Figure 6. ABoVE logo created with different data products from the campaign used to compose each letter.A: Active Layer Thickness from Remote Sensing Permafrost Model, Alaska, 2001-2015;. Tree (inside A): Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) Trends across Alaska and Canada from Landsat, 1984-2012;. B: Landsat-derived Annual Dominant Land Cover Across ABoVE Core Domain, 1984-2014;; O: Wildfire Carbon Emissions and Burned Plot Characteristics, NWT, CA, 2014-2016;; V: AVHRR-Derived Forest Fire Burned Area-Hot Spots, Alaska and Canada, 1989-2000;; E: Lake Bathymetry Maps derived from Landsat and Random Forest Modeling, North Slope, AK; and Underline (under O): Plot lines from the ABoVE Planning Tool visualizer. Figure credit: Caitlin LaNeve The Collaborations and Engagement WG held a plenary discussion to highlight the many activities that ABoVE researchers have been involved in over the past decade. The discussion highlighted the need for individual projects and campaign leadership to work together to ensure participation and understanding of planned research at local and regional levels.
A highlight of the meeting was the “Legacy of ABoVE” panel discussion moderated by Nancy French [MTU]. Panelists included Eric Kasischke [MTU], Scott Goetz, Chip Miller, Peter Griffith, Libby Larson [NASA GSFC/SSAI], and Elizabeth Hoy. Each panelist reflected on their journey to develop ABoVE, which included an initial scoping study developed more than 15 years ago. Members of the panel – all a part of the ABoVE leadership team – joined the campaign at different stages of their career. Each panelist arrived with different backgrounds, bringing their unique perspective to the group that helped to frame the overall campaign development. Following the panel, all ST members who have been a part of ABoVE since its start over a decade ago came to the front for a group photo – see Photo 5.
Following the panel, the ABoVE ST leads presented their overall thoughts on the meeting and facilitated a discussion with all participants at the meeting. Participants noted the important scientific discoveries made during ABoVE and enjoyed the collegial atmosphere during ASTM11.
Photo 5. A group photo of participants who have been with ABoVE since its inception: [left to right] Ryan Pavlick, Chip Miller, Elizabeth Hoy, Libby Larson, Peter Griffith, Fred Huemmrich, Nancy French, Scott Goetz, Laura Bourgeau-Chavez, Eric Kasischke, and Larry Hinzman. Photo credit: Peter Griffith Conclusion
Overall, ASTM11 brought together an interdisciplinary team for a final team meeting that showcased the many accomplishments made over the past decade. The group outlined current gaps and needs in Arctic and boreal research and discussed possibilities for future NASA terrestrial ecology campaigns. The synthesis science presentations at ASTM11 highlighted the advances ABoVE has made in understanding carbon and ecosystem dynamics in Arctic and boreal regions. It also highlighted the need for further study of cold season and subsurface processes. While this was the last meeting of this ST, research for some projects will continue into 2026, and more publications and data products are expected from ST members in the near term.
Elizabeth Hoy
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Global Science & Technology Inc. (GSFC/GST,Inc.)
elizabeth.hoy@nasa.gov
Libby Larson
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Science System and Applications, Inc. (GSFC/SSAI)
libby.larson@nasa.gov
Annabelle Sokolowski
NASA GSFC Office of STEM Engagement (OSTEM) Intern
Caitlin LaNeve
NASA GSFC Office of STEM Engagement (OSTEM) Intern
Share
Details
Last Updated Sep 10, 2025 Related Terms
Earth Science View the full article
-
By NASA
Explore This Section Earth Earth Observer Editor’s Corner Feature Articles Meeting Summaries News Science in the News Calendars In Memoriam Announcements More Archives Conference Schedules Style Guide 31 min read
Summary of the 2025 GEDI Science Team Meeting
Introduction
The 2025 Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI) Science Team Meeting (STM) took place April 1–3, 2025 at the University of Maryland, College Park (UMD). Upwards of 60 participants attended in-person, while several others joined virtually by Zoom. The GEDI Mission and Competed Science Team members were in attendance along with the GEDI NASA program manager and various postdoctoral associates, graduate students, collaborators, and data users – see Photo. Participants shared updates on the GEDI instrument and data products post-hibernation with the GEDI community. They also shared progress reports on the second Competed Science Team cohort’s projects as well as applications of GEDI data.
This article provides a mission status update and summaries of the presentations given at the STM. Readers who would like to learn more about certain topics can submit specific questions through the GEDI website’s contact form.
Photo. Attendees, both in person and virtual, at the 2025 GEDI Science Team meeting. Photo credit: Talia Schwelling Mission Status Update: GEDI Up and Running After its Time in Hibernation
When the 2023 GEDI STM summary was published in June 2024 – see archived article, “Summary of the 2023 GEDI Science Team Meeting” [The Earth Observer, June 18, 2024] – GEDI had been placed in a temporary state of hibernation and moved from the International Space Station’s (ISS) Japanese Experiment Module–Exposed Facility (JEM–EF) Exposed Facility Unit (EFU)-6 to EFU-7 (storage).
Two years later, as the 2025 GEDI STM took place, the GEDI instrument was back in its original location on EFU-6 collecting high-resolution observations of Earth’s three-dimensional (3D) structure from space.
DAY ONE
GEDI Mission and Data Product Status I
Ralph Dubayah [UMD—GEDI Principal Investigator (PI)] opened the STM with updates on mission status (see previous section) and the development of current and pending GEDI data products.
Following its hibernation on the ISS from March 2023–April 2024, the GEDI mission entered its second extension period. Since re-installation, the instrument’s lasers have been operating nominally, steadily collecting data, increasing coverage, and filling gaps. As of November 27, 2024, GEDI had collected 33 billion Level-2A (L2A) land surface returns, with approximately 12.1 billion passing quality filters. Since the last STM, an additional 1422 new simulated GEDI footprints have been added to GEDI’s forest structure and biomass database (FSBD), which is a database of forest inventory and airborne laser scanning data (ALS) from around the globe that is used for cal/val of GEDI data. The FSBD now has 27,876 simulated footprints in total – see Figure 1. This data will support improved L4A biomass algorithm calibration.
Figure 1. Training samples, or simulated footprints, are derived from coincident forest inventory and ALS data. DBT = deciduous broadleaf, EBT = evergreen broadleaf, ENT = evergreen needleleaf, GSW = grass, shrub, woodland. Figure credit: David Minor Version 2.1 (V2.1) of GEDI L1B, L2A, L2B, and L4A data products are the latest product releases available for download. This version incorporates post-storage data through November 2024. In January 2025, the team also released the new L4C footprint-level Waveform Structural Complexity Index (WSCI) product using pre-storage data. The upcoming V3.0 release will incorporate pre- and post-storage data that will improve quality filtering, geolocation accuracy, and algorithm performance.
Although GEDI met its L1 mission science requirements before entering hibernation, orbital resonance on the ISS impacted GEDI’s coverage in the tropics. To help address these gaps, the team is exploring data fusion opportunities with other missions – e.g., NASA-Indian Space Research Organisation Synthetic Aperture Radar (NISAR), the Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt’s (DLR – German Aerospace Center) Terra Synthetic Aperture Radar–X (TerraSAR-X) and TerraSAR add-on for Digital Elevation Measurement (TanDEM-X) missions, and the European Space Agency’s upcoming forest mission – Biomass. [UPDATE: Biomass launched successfully on April 29, 2025 from Europe’s Spaceport in Korou, French Guiana, and NISAR launched July 30, 2025 from the Satish Dhawan Space Centre located on Sriharikota Island in India.] Additional ongoing mission team efforts include advancing waveform processing, developing gridded products tailored to end-user needs, understanding error and bias, and continuing expansion of the FSBD.
Dubayah concluded by highlighting the steady rise in GEDI-related publications and datasets appearing in high-impact journals, including PNAS, Nature, and Science families. Visit the GEDI website to gain access to a comprehensive list of GEDI-related publications.
After hearing general updates from the mission PI, attendees heard more in-depth reports on science data planning, mission operations, and instrument status.
Scott Luthcke [NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)—GEDI Co-Investigator (Co-I)] reported on Science Operations Center activities, including geolocation performance and improvements. He shared that the Science Planning System, which is used to plan GEDI data acquisition locations, has been upgraded to improve targeting capabilities using high-resolution Reference Ground Tracks. The Science Data Processing System also underwent a technical refresh that increased computational and storage capability and has completed processing and delivery of all V2.1 data products, including post-storage data (April–November 2024), to the Land Processes and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs).
Luthcke explained that V2.1 improves on precision orbit determination, precision attitude determination, tracking point modeling, time tags, and oscillator calibration. Looking ahead, V3.0 will enhance range bias calibration, improved pointing bias calibration, and modifications to L1A, L1B, L2A, and L2B products. Luthcke also discussed updates to the L3 data product, which include corrected timing and range bias, improved positioning and elevation, and a wall-to-wall 1-km (0.62-mi) elevation map to be released alongside V3.0.
Tony Scaffardi [GSFC—GEDI Mission Director] provided an update on the Science and Mission Operations Center since its post-hibernation return to science operations on June 3, 2024. He addressed various on-orbit events that may have briefly disrupted data collection and reviewed upcoming ISS altitude plans. As of March 2025, each of the instrument’s three lasers logged over 22,000 hours in firing mode, collecting more than 20 billion shots each, with 72% of that time directly over land surfaces. As of April 2025, 95,346 hours of science data have been downlinked, averaging 51.21 GB of data per day.
Bryan Blair [GSFC—Deputy PI and Instrument Scientist] concluded this section of the meeting with a discussion of GEDI instrument status, reporting that all three lasers are operating nominally and that both the detectors and digitizers continue to perform well. He noted that the laser pulse shapes have remained stable since the mission began, indicating consistent system performance over time. Blair also addressed the inherent challenges of operating in space, such as radiation exposure, and emphasized the importance of designing systems for graceful degradation. A recent firmware update was successfully applied to all three digitizers, and no life-limiting concerns have been identified to date.
Competed Science Team Presentations – Session I
Jim Kellner [Brown University—GEDI Co-I] kicked off the Competed Science Team (CST) presentations with an overview of his work investigating the role of stratification and quality filtering to improve GEDI data products and the impact of stratification error on prediction. He explained how GEDI quality filtering and aboveground biomass density (AGBD) model selection and prediction rely heavily on stratification by plant functional type (PFT) and geographic world region. Thus, evaluation and improvement of stratification and quality filtering will help maximize the number of usable GEDI shots, some of which are potentially excluded unnecessarily. To support these improvements, Kellner is exploring replacement of the current 1-km (0.62-mi) stratification layer with a 30-m (98-ft) product derived from Landsat and similarly upgrading the 500-m (1640-ft) phenology stratification layer to a 30-m (98-ft) Landsat version. These changes aim to improve the L4A footprint-level AGBD estimates in particular, but flow through to the GEDI L4B data product.
Birgit Peterson [United States Geological Survey (USGS), Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center] presented her research on the decomposition of GEDI waveforms to derive vegetation structure information for 3D fuels and wildfire modeling, emphasizing the importance of consistent and comprehensive information on vegetation status for effective wildland fire management. Canopy structure data, like that provided by GEDI, can play a key role in developing physics-based fire behavior models, such as QUIC-Fire. With study sites in South Dakota, the Sierra Nevada, and dispersed around the southeastern United States, Peterson’s work aims to demonstrate how vegetation structure parameters needed to run the QUIC-Fire model can be derived from GEDI waveform data.
David Roy [Michigan State University] shared updates on his CST project leveraging GEDI data to improve understanding of species-specific tropical forest regrowth in central Africa. Focusing on the Mai Ndombe region of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the project aims to quantify forest regrowth by integrating GEDI-derived structural data with satellite and airborne laser scanner (ALS) based maps of forest height. Roy emphasized the potential of secondary and recovering forest conservation as a low-cost mechanism for carbon sequestration and climate change mitigation. GEDI data combined with satellite maps provides new opportunities to quantify forest regrowth and carbon sequestration in secondary forests at finer detail, although high species diversity and varying regrowth rates can be complex to assess with remote sensing. Roy also presented a 2025 paper validating the GEDI relative height product in the DRC and at two US temperate forest sites with a simple method to improve the GEDI canopy height using digital terrain heights measured by airborne laser scanning (ALS).
Perspectives I
After the morning CST presentation session, meeting attendees heard the first perspectives presentation from Amanda Whitehurst [NASA Headquarters (HQ] GEDI Program Scientist and NASA Terrestrial Ecology Program Manager]. Whitehurst is new to the GEDI Program Scientist role; she used this opportunity to officially introduce herself to the ST and expressed her enthusiasm for the work ahead She commended the GEDI team on the impressive accomplishments of the mission to date, and spoke about the exciting potential for continued data collection and scientific discovery through the program.
Matteo Pardini [DLR] shared his perspective on the potential of combining synthetic aperture radar (SAR) with lidar data to improve four-dimensional (4D) forest structure mapping. He highlighted DLR’s TerraSAR-X and TanDEM-X missions, which have been acquiring interferometric data since 2007 and 2010, respectively. Both missions are expected to continue acquiring data through 2028. The TanDEM-X Global Digital Elevation Model, covering 150 million km2 (58 million mi2) with approximately 1-m (3-ft) accuracy, can be used to derive forest height and biomass. The fusion of TanDEM-X and GEDI data can improve biomass estimates – see Figure 2 – and help researchers parameterize the relationship between coherence and forest structure. Pardini also previewed the upcoming BIOMASS mission, which will operate at a lower frequency and be able to penetrate vegetation, providing complementary information to the TerraSAR-X and TanDEM-X missions.
Figure 2. Biomass estimates over the Amazon basin at 25-m (82-ft) resolution derived using a fusion of data from NASA’s GEDI and DLR’s TanDEM-X missions. Figure credit: Wenlu Qi CST Presentations – Session II
Chris Hakkenberg [University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA)] opened the second CST presentation session with a discussion on his research using GEDI to characterize fuel structure, burn severity, and post-fire response across the regions of California affected by wildfire. He began by highlighting significant land cover changes resulting from wildfires in recent years that are visible as enormous [greater than 100 km2 (38 mi2)] conversions from forest to grass/scrub in the National Land Cover Dataset. Hakkenberg’s project aims to examine the role of fuel structure in driving fire severity patterns, improve burn severity maps using GEDI for change detection, and characterize post-fire response using data from Landsat 5, 7, and 8 and GEDI. He noted that while fire behavior is heavily dependent on weather, topography, and fuels – only fuels can be actively managed. GEDI provides valuable insights into forest fuel structure by measuring canopy volume (total fuel quantities) and vertical continuity (how fire may spread through those volumes). Hakkenberg and his team found that vertical fuel continuity metrics were stronger predictors of severity than fuel volume, especially in extreme weather conditions, and are most closely related to the high-burn severities that can delay long-term recovery. Finally, Hakkenberg presented research that combines GEDI and Landsat to improve burn severity assessments, which will be the focus on the next phase of this research project.
Sean Healey [U.S. Forest Service (USFS)—GEDI Co-I] presented an overview of the Online Biomass Inference using Waveforms and iNventory (OBI-WAN) project. OBI-WAN provides globally consistent estimates of biomass and carbon, as well as changes in these estimates over time, for user-defined areas and periods of interest rather than fixed 1-km (0.62-mi) squares. The project leverages GEDI L4A models to predict biomass at the footprint level and uses this dense collection of footprints to create local-level biomass models with Landsat (assuming consistent calibration of Landsat through time). To quantify uncertainty in change estimates, OBI-WAN employs a statistical method called bootstrapping, which can be embedded into customized accounting systems through a powerful programming interface accessed through Google Earth Engine.
Data Product Status I
Michelle Hofton [UMD—GEDI Co-I] and Sarah Story [GSFC] returned to the topic of GEDI data product status. They presented an update on the GEDI L2A product, which includes ground topography and canopy height measurements. Encouragingly, preliminary testing shows that GEDI’s post-storage performance has remained consistent with pre-storage. Hofton explained GEDI observations are compared with high-quality intersections with the Land, Vegetation, and Ice Sensor (LVIS) (an airborne lidar) data in order to assess GEDI data quality and accuracy. She highlighted the use of bingos – pairs of GEDI waveforms believed to be spatially coincident in vegetated areas – as a valuable tool for assessing geolocation and waveform errors as well as algorithm performance. As of December 2024, more than one million bingos had been collected. Hofton and Story concluded with a preview of anticipated updates to the L2A product for V3.0, including new quality flags for data cleaning and a refined algorithm selection approach.
John Armston [UMD—GEDI Co-I] presented on GEDI L2B data, which provides gridded footprint-level [25-m (82-ft) resolution] metrics such as canopy cover (see Figure 3), plant area index (PAI), plant area volume density (PAVD), and foliage height diversity (FHD). Waveform analysis will remain largely unchanged from V2.0. He shared that the upcoming V3.0 release will differ from V2.0 in that it will use GEDI-derived canopy-ground reflectance ratios — rather than values derived from NASA LVIS — to estimate canopy cover, thus allowing for spatial variability. Waveform analysis will remain largely unchanged from V2.0. Armston also presented 1-km (0.62-mi) leaf-on and leaf-off gridded L2B canopy cover fraction maps using both pre- and post-storage data (April 2019–November 2024), explaining how post-storage data were used to fill gaps. Additionally, the mission team has mapped GEDI canopy cover distributions using a H3-indexing API developed by Tiago de Conto [UMD], which are being used to improve GEDI L2A algorithms for ground detection. V3.0 will offer a more direct measure of canopy structure to complement L2A relative height metrics by improving quality flags and including relative canopy height metrics. Finally, the team presented progress on the independent validation of GEDI L2B V3.0 algorithms and products using the GEDI FSBD and NASA LVIS campaign data from Costa Rica, Gabon, French Guiana and the United States.
Figure 3. GEDI L2B leaf-on canopy cover fraction map derived from data obtained April 2019–October 2024. Figure credit: John Armston Jamis Bruening [UMD] shared the final data product update of the day. He discussed GEDI’s L4B gridded aboveground biomass density (AGBD) product, which is a 1-km (0.62-mi) raster dataset representing area-level estimates of mean AGBD and associated uncertainty across the mission’s range of observation. GEDI’s L4B estimates are derived from the footprint-level L4A AGBD predictions through one of two statistical modes of inference. Currently, hybrid estimation is used to generate L4B. This approach uses GEDI data as the sole input and requires at least two GEDI tracks in a 1-km (0.62-mi) grid cell to produce a mean estimate. The hybrid estimator also provides a standard error, accounting for both model variance in the L4A predictions and GEDI’s sampling uncertainty. To address gaps in GEDI’s coverage where hybrid estimates cannot be produced, the team has begun implementing an alternative inference mode, called generalized hierarchical model-based (GHMB) estimation. GHMB incorporates auxiliary imagery, such as Landsat, SAR, and GEDI’s L4A predictions, to infer mean biomass and its standard error. Although the addition of post-storage data has increased GEDI’s coverage, GHMB remains essential for producing a complete, gap-free 1-km (0.62-mi) AGBD map. Both hybrid and GHMB approaches will soon be used together to generate a global, gap-free L4B product. Users can expect the release of V3.0 L4B estimates – featuring hybrid and GHMB models of biomass inference using both pre- and post-storage data – later in 2025.
What’s Next?
Day one concluded with John Armston, who presented on the potential new satellite laser altimetry mission called Earth Dynamics Geodetic Explorer (EDGE), which was competitively selected for a Phase A Concept Study under NASA’s Earth Systems Explorer Announcement of Opportunity. If selected, EDGE would launch in 2030 and operate for a two-year mission, providing a critical link between current and future satellite laser altimetry missions.
Armston explained that EDGE addresses two of the targeted observables identified in the 2017 Earth Science Decadal Survey – terrestrial ecosystem structure and ice elevation. It provides a dramatic improvement in coverage and resolution over current active missions by operating in a Sun-synchronous orbit that will enable the direct measurement of change in the three-dimensional (3D) structure of vegetation and the surface topography of ice at the spatial and temporal scales needed to observe the driving processes. EDGE will provide fine-scale detail of ecosystem structure in some of the world’s most critical and challenging-to-quantify regions, including the boreal, transforming the field’s understanding of global terrestrial ecosystem structure and its response to natural and anthropogenic change over all of Earth’s wooded ecosystems.
DAY TWO
Data Product Status II/Extended and Demonstrative Products I
Jim Kellner began day two with an L4A footprint-level AGBD product update. His presentation focused on current product status and planned evaluation of and improvements to the L4A algorithm. Since the last STM, L4A V2.1 was updated to include data through MW 311 (through November 2024) and is now available to end users. V3.0, along with an updated Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD), is expected later in 2025. The revised ATBD will outline enhancements to the waveform simulator, quality filtering, stratification, and model selection thanks in part to the availability of on-orbit data. V3.0 will also benefit from the ingestion of approximately 35% more simulated waveforms that passed quality assurance and quality control in the FSBD, significantly expanding training data coverage, particularly in Africa and North America. Kellner noted that users should be aware of key differences between L2 and L4 quality flags; L4 flags account for factors such as sensitivity, water presence, urban conditions, and phenology. Additionally, updates to the selected models may lead to changes in AGBD estimates, which will be more clearly communicated in the V 3.0 release. Comparing pre- and post-storage data, Kellner and his team found that AGBD estimates remain stable across both periods. He encouraged users to review the updated ATBD upon release to fully understand the changes and their implications.
Tiago de Conto [UMD] presented the new GEDI L4C WSCI product, which was released in May 2024 and available through the ORNL DAAC – see Figure 4. This footprint-level metric captures the amount and variability of canopy structure in 3D space, reflecting the richness of structural information underlying any given GEDI observation. It synthesizes multiple structural attributes into a single metric and incorporates elements of both vertical and horizontal variability. WSCI models are trained at the PFT level (i.e., deciduous broadleaf trees, evergreen broadleaf trees, evergreen needleleaf trees, and the combination of grasslands, shrubs, and woodlands) using crossovers of GEDI and airborne lidar point clouds. While WSCI tends to scale with canopy height, the relationship varies across biomes. Looking ahead, de Conto previewed forthcoming WSCI–SAR fusion work designed to produce wall-to-wall maps that are suitable for applications, such as change detection. Early fusion results using data from the European Union’s Copernicus Sentinel-1 (a synthetic aperture radar mission) and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency’s (JAXA) Advanced Land Observing Satellite Phased Array L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (ALOS-PALSAR) show stable prediction performance across different biomes and time periods as well as consistent performance against airborne lidar wall-to-wall reference data.
Figure 4. The global frequency distribution of GEDI L4C Waveform Structural Complexity Index. Figure credit: Tiago de Conto Paul May [South Dakota School of Mines and Technology] presented his work predicting interpolated waveforms, along with their associated uncertainties, over USDA Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) field plots across the contiguous United States (CONUS). This project aims to develop regression models that convert GEDI’s waveform data into measurements of key forest attributes and enhance monitoring capabilities for a variety of applications. The resulting data product – GEDI-FIA Fusion: Training Lidar Models to Estimate Forest Attributes – was released June 2025 and is publicly available through the ORNL DAAC.
Sean Healey presented ongoing work on the GEDI L4D Imputed Waveform product, led by postdoctoral researcher Eugene Seo [Oregon State University]. This product aims to generate a wall-to-wall 30-m (98-ft) resolution map of GEDI waveforms across the globe in 2023. To achieve this, Seo, Healey, and Zhiqiang Yang [USFS] are using a k-nearest neighbor (k-NN) imputation approach to address areas without GEDI observations. The model operates at a 10-km (6-mi) scale but draws neighbors from a surrounding 30×30 km (19×19 mi) window. The resulting 30-m (98-ft) resolution imputed waveform map is aligned with Landsat data from 2023. Users can expect the release of the L4D product later in 2025.
GEDI Applications and Perspectives II
Neha Hunka [European Space Agency] shared her work using GEDI to fill gaps in the Republic of Sudan’s National Forest Inventory (NFI) in support of their Forest Reference Level (FRL) report to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Using existing NFI data for calibration, Hunka and colleagues developed a geostatistical model-based approach that interpolates between NFI sample units, allowing predictions of AGBD to be made in areas of interest – see Figure 5. (Hunka was lead author on a 2025 paper in Remote Sensing of Environment that describes a similar approach to what she described in this presentation.) UNFCCC called for the modeling approach to be transparent and replicable. Hunka emphasized the importance of access to and preparation of covariate data and called for greater capacity-building and knowledge-transfer support to help other countries adopt GEDI in their reporting. Sudan’s submission marks the first time GEDI data has been used in an FRL report.
Figure 5. A geostatistical model-based approach uses data from the Republic of Sudan’s National Forest Inventory (NFI) for calibration and interpolates between NFI sample units, allowing predictions of aboveground biomass density where desired. Figure credit: Neha Hunka Forests cover about 30% of Earth’s land area, store over 80% of terrestrial biomass and carbon, and absorb around 30% of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions. While storing carbon in forests can help mitigate carbon emissions, deforestation, disturbances, shifting global economy, and low confidence in forest carbon credits add risk and uncertainty to this strategy. By monitoring forest biomass, some of these risks can be alleviated. Stuart Davies [Smithsonian Institution] joined the STM to present his work on GEO-TREES, a global forest biomass reference system aiming to provide high-quality, publicly available ground data from a network of long-term forest inventory sites to improve biomass mapping on the global scale. Despite many Earth observing (EO) missions focused on forest biomass, a lack of standardized ground reference data has hindered accurate validation. GEO-TREES addresses this need, by fostering collaboration between carbon monitoring, biodiversity research, and EO communities. The project includes 100 core sites and 200 supplementary sites across tropical and temperate regions, selected to represent environmental and human-use gradients, with greater emphasis on sampling in the tropics. Each core site follows Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) protocol and includes three types of measurements: forest plot inventory plot, terrestrial laser scanning, and ALS.
CST Presentations – Session III
Atticus Stovall [GSFC] shared first-year findings from his research on post-fire disturbance forest recovery in Mediterranean ecosystems – specifically Spain and Portugal – where the frequency and intensity of wildfires have significantly increased in the 21st century. Using Iberian Forest Inventory ALS data and GEDI footprint data, Stovall and his team showed that GEDI can be used to assess post-fire change as well as evaluate degradation patterns from increasing fire recurrence and intensity. Stovall shared examples demonstrating the use of GEDI to detect both immediate fire effects as well as recovery after disturbance, including stand-replacement and understory clearing. By overlaying disturbance maps with GEDI data, the team observed that recovery rates differ across height class. Looking forward, they plan to investigate how recovery rates vary across environmental gradients and incorporate field plot data to validate their findings.
KC Cushman [ORNL] presented on biomass calibration and validation (cal/val) activities for the NISAR mission, which launched in July 2025. She outlined the general approach to the NISAR biomass algorithm, which uses multiple observations from NISAR every year to produce annual biomass estimates at 1-ha (0.004 mi2) resolution. Cal/val efforts will use ALS to link sparse field data to larger landscapes with estimates at two or more sites in 15 different ecoregions. NISAR has supported cal/val field plot data collection in Spain, South Africa, and various National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON) sites in addition to ALS campaigns at Agua Salud, Panama, near the Los Amigos Biological Station, Peru, in the Chaco ecosystem, Argentina, and near Madrid, Spain.
Chi Chen [Rutgers University] presented his work exploring vertical acclimation of vegetation canopy structure and photosynthetic activities using GEDI data. Chen’s research aims to generate gap-free, high-temporal-frequency canopy profile data and to develop a novel framework that integrates GEDI observations into a multi-layer canopy process model. By training a random forest model with spatially discontinuous GEDI PAVD profiles and multiple features, e.g., multiband spectral reflectance, tree height, and forest type, Chen and his team successfully estimated spatially continuous PAI profiles across different canopy heights. The team cross-validated their predicted PAI with GEDI PAI, NEON PAI, and LAI measurements from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instrument on NASA’s Terra and Aqua platforms. These data could be used to study seasonal variation in different canopy heights. Using a Global Multilayer Canopy OPTimization (GMC-OPT) model, they also found that GEDI-informed data has the potential to identify the vertical position of “net” seasonal leaf turnover – ultimately improving the accuracy of estimates of carbon and water fluxes.
CST Presentations – Session IV
Marcos Longo [Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) in transition to Brazilian National Institute for Space Research (INPE)] and his team presented a proposed project that integrates GEDI data with process-based models to assess the impact of wildfires on forest structure, recovery, and ecosystem function. As western US forests face increasing wildfire risk due to drier climates, more human ignitions, and a legacy of fire suppression, changes in forest structure, composition, and function are likely to become more detectable over time. This project, under the leadership of Robinson Negron Juarez [University of California, Irvine and LBNL—PI] aims to quantify biomass changes in mixed conifer forests across California, Oregon, and Washington using both ALS and GEDI data. The team plans to use GEDI L2A and L2B data to assess immediate fire impacts on forest structure, investigate post-fire forest recovery, and establish relationships between forest structure and fire intensity/severity. This information will inform process-based models – e.g., the U.S. Department of Energy’s Functionally Assembled Terrestrial Ecosystem Simulator (FATES) – and support a better understanding of forest resilience under fire disturbance regime changes.
Ovidiu Csillik [Wake Forest University] presented work using GEDI and ALS to investigate biomass and structural changes in tropical forests. The work, conducted with Michael Keller [NASA/ Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), USFS—PI], aims to use models to quantify changes in tropical forest biomass and evaluate understanding of topical forest productivity drivers. The project will use ALS data from over the Brazilian Amazon and other sites in Brazil, Gabon, French Guiana, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Borneo alongside GEDI data over pantropical regions around the globe. Csillik and Keller are currently conducting ALS–ALS and GEDI–GEDI comparisons, and are planning to estimate aboveground biomass change from ALS–ALS, ALS–GEDI, and GEDI–GEDI comparisons at both regional and pantropical scales from 2008–2026.
Zhenpeng Zuo [Boston University (BU)] presented his team’s research, led by Ranga Myneni [BU—PI], using mechanistic model-GEDI integration to map potential canopy top height (pCTH) and inform forest restoration planning. Predicting restoration potential is challenging, as empirical, deep-learning, and mechanistic methods vary in their accuracy, interpretability, and spatial detail. This project uses a mechanistic model based on water use and supply equilibrium, calibrated using GEDI canopy height metrics, to predict pCTH. The team found this approach produced robust pCTH predictions and shows that the Eastern US has vast restorable areas. Future work will expand to dynamic modeling to incorporate disturbance risks and effects under different climate scenarios.
DAAC Reports
Rupesh Shrestha [ORNL DAAC] presented the status of GEDI L3 and L4 datasets at the ORNL DAAC – see Figure 6. Since the 2023 STM, three new datasets have been released: L4B (country-level summaries of aboveground biomass), L4C (footprint level waveform structural complexity index), and a GEDI-FIA (fusion dataset for training lidar models to forest attributes). In total, almost 34,000 unique users have downloaded GEDI L3 and L4A-C data 13,770,648 times, with L4A being the most popular at 13.1 million downloads. As of April 30, 2025, all GEDI footprint-level datasets from L1–L4 are available with data through mission week 311 (November 2024), besides L4C. Users can look forward to a GEDI L4D Imputation Dataset later in 2025 along with the much-anticipated V3.0 GEDI data product release. All levels of GEDI data can now be accessed in one place through the NASA Earthdata Search and Data Catalog. In addition to the data products themselves, data tools and services, publications citing GEDI data and GEDI data tutorials and workshops can be found at the ORNL DAAC website. The ORNL DAAC provides data user support through the Earthdata Forum, or via their email uso@daac.ornl.gov.
Figure 6. GEDI L3 and L4B data projected on NASA WorldView/GIBS API. Explore the program here. Figure credit: Rupesh Shrestha Jared Beck [Land Processes Distributed Active Archive Center (LP DAAC)] presented on GEDI data products at the LP DAAC, a USGS–NASA partnership that archives and distributes lower-level GEDI products (GEDI L1B, L2A, and L2B). The LP DAAC has distributed over seven petabytes of GEDI data so far, and is now exclusively distributing GEDI data through NASA’s Earth Data Cloud. GEDI L2A is the most popular of the products in terms of terabytes of distribution. Like the ORNL DAAC, data user support also flows through the NASA Earthdata Forum. Tutorials can be found on GitHub. All levels of GEDI data can now be accessed in one place through the NASA Earthdata search and data catalog options.
GEDI Extended and Demonstrative Products II
Scott Goetz [NAU] discussed his team’s research leveraging GEDI data for biodiversity applications, emphasizing its potential to help improve species distribution models and the high value of understanding forest structure for conservation assessments. He highlighted a 2022 Nature Ecology & Evolution article showing that forests with higher structural integrity and cover reduced the extinction risk for over 16,000 threatened or declining species. Another 2023 study in Nature demonstrated how biodiversity indicators, such as habitat cover, canopy structure, and human pressures, can influence the effectiveness of protected areas. In order to have a wider variety of gridded products to work with for species distribution models, Pat Burns [NAU], Chris Hakkenberg, and Goetz developed the Gridded GEDI Vegetation Structure Metrics and Biomass Density at Multiple Resolutions product that has been released through the ORNL DAAC and Google Earth Engine along with a data descriptor paper published in a Nature Scientific Data paper – see Figure 7. Burns elaborated that, relative to fusion products, gridded GEDI products performed better when measuring structure, especially in the understory. The team is now comparing species distribution models in mainland Southeast Asia using fusion versus solely GEDI data.
Figure 7. GEDI mean foliage height diversity (FHD) map using shots from April 2019 to March 2023 at 6-km (4.7-mi) spatial resolution. Red boxes indicate the approximate location of airborne lidar used for intercomparison. Three insets show GEDI mean FHD at finer spatial resolution [1 km (0.62 mi)] as well as more detailed airborne lidar coverage (red polygons). From left to right the insets show: Sonoma County, California, Coconino National Forest, Arizona, and Sumatra/Borneo. Figure credit: From Patrick Burns et al (2024) Nature Scientific Data Perspectives III
STM attendees concluded day two with a perspective talk from Marc Simard [JPL], who showcased a range of studies demonstrating diverse applications of GEDI data, opportunities for its improvement, and potential for informing future scientific research. Drawing on his own work, Simard shared examples of using GEDI data for cal/val of global Digital Elevation Measurement (DEM) and Digital Terrain Model (DTM), mapping global mangrove heights, monitoring forest growth, and analyzing hydrological processes. In more detail, he explained how he led the development of a 12-m (39-ft) spatial resolution global mangrove height product using GEDI and TanDEM-X data. Additionally, he discussed a study evaluating tree growth rates in the Laurentides Wildlife Reserve in Quebec, Canada using both GEDI and ALS. The analysis revealed an average growth rate of approximately 32 ±23 cm (12 ±9 in) per year. Finally, he presented a paper under review examining water level detection and hydrological conditions in coastal regions using GEDI alongside Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite 2 (ICESat-2) data. In closing, Simard emphasized that GEDI datasets can help identify critical data and knowledge gaps, guiding the development of new missions – e.g., the Surface Topography and Vegetation (STV) mission concept called for in the 2017 Earth Science Decadal Survey report. As described in the STV Study Team Report, the mission would focus on elevation and vertical structure to study the solid Earth, cryosphere, vegetation structure, hydrology, and coastal geomorphology.
DAY THREE
CST Presentations – Session V
Jody Vogeler [Colorado State University] opened the final CST presentation session with an overview of her research using GEDI data fusions to characterize post-fire landscapes and understand habitat refugia for the threatened Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis). This project builds on her team’s phase-I work, which produced 30-m (98-ft) resolution gridded GEDI fusion maps across six Western U.S. states to support habitat and diversity applications related to cavity-nesting birds, small mammals, and carnivore–prey relationships. The team is now focusing on validating and improving their GEDI fusion products within post-disturbance landscapes, specifically post-fire. Using this data, Vogeler and her team aim to better understand how post-fire structural information from GEDI improves their ability to understand lynx behavior–habitat relationships across early post-fire landscapes. This information can help evaluate what structural attributes determine post-fire refugia patch use by lynx. Next steps for this work include integrating GEDI V3.0 data upon its release, identifying new GEDI metrics and derived products, and incorporating lynx radio-collar data into their analyses. Vogeler also presented her work as co-PI on a NASA Ecological Conservation Project in Greater Kruger National Park, South Africa, where she and her team are developing spatial monitoring tools to support management and conservation planning.
Jingfeng Xiao [University of New Hampshire] provided updates on his team’s research using GEDI data to understand how structural diversity influences productivity and carbon uptake of forests in the United States. The project aims to assess GEDI’s ability to quantify structural diversity, investigate how that diversity regulates forest productivity and carbon uptake, and understand its role in resilience of forest productivity to drought. When analyzing the relationships of gross primary production (GPP) and evapotranspiration (ET) with canopy structure metrics, the team found that increased canopy structure complexity positively affected GPP and ET and reduced their seasonal variability. They also found that greater canopy complexity improved ecosystem resistance to drought. As part of the project, the team also produced 1-km (0.62-mi) resolution gridded maps of GPP and ET.
Lei Ma [UMD] delivered the final talk of the STM, presenting his project that integrates GEDI observations with mechanistic ecosystem modeling to quantify forest regrowth in a changing climate. Ma used GEDI data and the Ecosystem Demography (ED) model in his research and found that height and aboveground biomass (AGB) regrowth rates can be derived by combining GEDI and land-use and land-cover change data. Ma found that regrowth rates derived from different inputs are generally consistent at large scales but variable at fine scales. Notably, regrowth rates showed temporal dependence, decreasing by roughly 50% every decade. Lastly, Ma and his team found that spatial variation in height and AGB regrowth rates can be partially explained by environmental conditions and disturbance frequency.
Conclusion
The 2025 GEDI STM was especially exciting, as it came on the cusp of post-storage data being processed and released as V2.1. Additionally, it marked the first time the new CST cohort presented on their research and joined breakout sessions with the wider GEDI team. The meeting highlighted the mission’s ongoing success and scientific value following hibernation on the ISS. Looking ahead, data users can anticipate the V3.0 product release later in 2025.
Talia Schwelling
University of Maryland College Park
tschwell@umd.edu
Share
Details
Last Updated Aug 18, 2025 Related Terms
Uncategorized Earth Science View the full article
-
By NASA
Explore This Section Earth Earth Observer Editor’s Corner Feature Articles Meeting Summaries News Science in the News Calendars In Memoriam Announcements More Archives Conference Schedules Style Guide 12 min read
Summary of the 54th U.S.–Japan ASTER Science Team Meeting
Introduction
The Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) Science Team (ST) organized a three-day workshop that took place June 9–11, 2025, at the Japan Space System’s (JSS) offices in Tokyo, Japan. About 25 people from Japan and the United States participated during the in-person meeting – see Photo 1.
U.S. participants included representatives of NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL); two universities – University of Arizona (UA) and University of Pittsburgh (UPitt); and Grace Consulting. Japanese participants represented JSS, the Geologic Survey of Japan (GSJ), National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), and the Remote Sensing Technology Center of Japan (RESTEC). Participants from Ibaraki University (IU), Nagoya University (NU), University of Tokyo (UT), and University of Tsukuba (Uts) also joined.
Photo 1. Several attendees sit for a photo at the 54th ASTER Science Team meeting at the Japan Space System’s offices in Tokyo, Japan. Photo credit: Osamau Kashimura The main objectives of the 54th ASTER STM were to:
discuss impacts of the proposed NASA budget reductions for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026; respond to plans for future impacts on ASTER from possible power reductions on the Terra platform; receive updates on data acquisition status, data calibration and validation (cal/val) activities, data distribution plans, and applications using ASTER observations; and discuss the end-of-mission plans for Terra and ASTER and archive documentation requirements. The remainder of this article summarizes the highlights from the meeting, which includes an overview of the opening plenary session and summaries of the four working group sessions. A brief review of the closing plenary, which included summary reports from the chairpersons of all working groups, rounds out the report, followed by some overall concluding thoughts.
Opening Plenary Session
Yasushi Yamaguchi [NU—Japan ASTER ST Lead] and Michael “Mike” Abrams [JPL—U.S. ASTER ST Lead] welcomed participants and reviewed the agenda for the opening plenary and the schedule for the working group sessions.
Abrams presented highlights of science results based on ASTER data. He also discussed some issues that Woody Turner [NASA Headquarters—ASTER Program Scientist] had raised, including NASA’s response to the President’s proposed fiscal year (FY) 26 budget and the status of FY25 funding. Abrams reported that Terra passivation is currently scheduled for February 2027 and described Terra’s power status. [UPDATE: If the President’s proposed FY26 budget goes into effect without modification by Congress, the three Flagship missions will enter accelerated Phase F (closeout); Terra passivation would start in November 2025 and be complete by March 2026.]
Abrams reviewed the status of the Terra spacecraft, showing slides provided by Jason Hendrickson [GSFC]. The Flight Operations Team staffing remains constant. Science data capture for ASTER remains above 99%. The impact of the shunt failure on November 28, 2024 required the safe halting of the instrument. Visible-near-infrared (VNIR) observations resumed in mid-January, and thermal infrared (TIR) observations resumed in mid-May. Collision avoidance events continue to be part of normal operations.
Hitomi Inada [JSS] provided a status report on the ASTER instrument. Many of the monitored components (i.e., VNIR pointing motor) are beyond their original useful life in orbit, but the aging hardware shows no signs of wearing out or a decrease in performance. She showed data that indicated that the temperature and current telemetry trends remain stable.
Abrams presented ASTER product distribution statistics provided by Cole Krehbiel [Land Processes Distributed Active Archiver Center (LP DAAC]). The ASTER Digital Elevation Model continues to be the most ordered product among all users of ASTER data. As defined by the ST at the last meeting, most ASTER data products [e.g., Version 4 (V4) products] are being created and placed in a searchable/orderable archive that can be accessed through NASA’s Earthdata tool. Abrams reported that the LP DAAC started producing these files in January 2025 and will be finished before August 2026.
Koki Iwao [GSJ] presented AIST’s product distribution statistics. Over 4.7 million scenes have been acquired and processed to Level 1A (L1A) since June 10, 2025. AIST continues to distribute ASTER’s pseudo-natural color scenes in keyhole mark-up language (KML – a file format used to display geographic data) and scene-based Digital Elevation Models. The largest number of users of Japanese products are from the United States.
Tetsushi Tachikawa [JSS] summarized the status of ASTER observations since the beginning of the mission. He reported that all of the global observation programs are functioning normally, acquiring data as planned. Updates to the observation programs will be considered by this week’s working groups. Tachikawa also added that the change of the orbit repeat – after Terra’s October 2022 exit from the Morning Constellation – has been accommodated in the ASTER scheduler.
Abrams presented a report on behalf of Simon Hook [JPL], who was unable to attend the meeting. Hook’s information provides a status update for the multispectral TIR instrument on NASA’s ECOsystem Spaceborne Thermal Radiometer Experiment on Space Station (ECOSTRESS) mission. Abrams also spoke about NASA’s future Surface Biology and Geology (SBG) mission, which is part of the planned Earth System Observatory.
Applications Working Group
The applications session provided a sampling of how ASTER data are used. A few examples are highlighted below. The second half of the session was devoted to a discussion of end-of-mission documentation requirements. This included a review of the NASA guiding document and sharing of existing documents.
Michael Ramsey [UPitt] presented work on forecasting volcanic activity with the ASTER long-term archive. His team developed a statistical detection code to extract accurate temperature anomalies for five test volcanoes over 25 years. They used these results to train a deep learning approach for anomaly detection in future TIR data. The method showed 73% success for Piton del la Fournaise volcano, Réunion island, and near 100% success for Sheveluch volcano, Kamchatka Krai, Russia.
Miyuki Muto [IU] reported on waste volume changes in 15 open landfills in developing countries using more than 20 years of ASTER time-series digital surface models – see Figure 1. The method was found to be consistent with reports using synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data, which dates to 2016. Thus, ASTER can provide a longer time series for future optical or radar studies.
Figure 1. Time variation in the relative volume of waste for landfills, obtained from ASTER time-series digital surface model data for the four Indian sites – Ghazipur, Bhalswa, Okhla, and Deonar. Figure credit: Figure taken from Muto and Tonooka (2025), Sensors Mike Abrams presented the 25-year history of ASTER data applied to geologic mapping and mineral exploration. He explained how the first published papers appeared a few years after launch and validated the unique mineralogical information contained in the ASTER data. Over the following 20 years, several reports from mineral exploration companies announced the discovery of gold, chromite, and lithium deposits, which were found largely based on analysis of ASTER data.
Calibration/Validation Working Group
The Calibration/Validation (cal/val) working group is responsible for monitoring the radiometric and geometric performance of ASTER’s VNIR and TIR instruments. Three different cal/val techniques are used including: analysis of onboard calibration lamps, comparison with onboard blackbodies, and measurements of pseudo-invariant ground targets during field campaigns. The L2 software algorithms are being updated for the final, archival processing which is anticipated to be completed in May 2026.
Bjorn Eng [JPL] reported that the newest version of the L2 algorithm for ASTER VNIR and TIR cal/val was delivered to the LPDAAC for ingest and testing. Eng explained how the new software includes Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2 (MERRA-2) data, which allows users to create atmospheric profiles for temperature, pressure, water vapor, and ozone. MERRA-2 is an improvement – both spatially and temporally – over the National Centers for Environmental Prediction’s Global Data Assimilation System that is used in the original MERRA. The new L2 production algorithms were validated, and the LP DAAC began incorporating the algorithms into the static archive in January 2025.
Mike Abrams presented on behalf of Cole Krehbiel [LP DAAC] and reported on the assessment of geometric performance of the L1 processing software, which was updated to the new Landsat ground control point library. He also presented an improved global digital elevation model. The ASTER final processing campaign uses the improved control point library.
Satoru Yamamoto [GSJ] presented updates to the calibration trends of the onboard VNIR lamps. Two onboard calibrations were performed on September 20, 2024 and November 8, 2024. Several analyses of the calibration lamps showed no significant change in the data trends – see Figure 2. The signal-to-noise ratios are still greater than the requirement of 140.
Figure 2. Onboard lamp calibration data for Bands 1, 2, and 3. The lamp data show no significant change in the three bands after updating the calibration. Figure credit: Satoru Yamamoto Soushi Kato [RESTEC] presented results from his September 2024 field campaign in Nevada and Utah. The campaign was marked by clear weather during ASTER’s day and night overpasses. Kato compared his in situ TIR measurements with the standard ASTER temperature products from the LP DAAC. The agreement for the five AESTER TIR bands was within ± 1.5 K.
Hideyuki Tonooka [IU] presented the results of his TIR field calibration campaigns at the same time and location as those conducted by Kato (described in previous presentation summary). Additionally, he reported that several calibration campaigns conducted at Lake Kasumigaura, Japan were cancelled due to cloudy weather, which led to the suspension of ASTER data acquisition. Tonooka compared his in situ TIR measurements with the standard ASTER temperature products from the LP DAAC. The agreement for the five ASTER TIR bands was within ± 1.3 K, except for band 10 at the Utah site where the discrepancy was -2.3 K.
Temperature–Emissivity Working Group
This group focuses on ASTER’s kinetic temperature and emissivity products, as well as application of these products and review of the nighttime TIR global mapping program status.
Mike Abrams presented his analyses of the ASTER Level-2 Surface Kinetic Temperature Product (AST_08) for a nighttime scene acquired over Lake Tahoe, CA. He compared the on-demand MERRA-2 product from NASA’s Global Modeling and Assimilation Office with the archive-produced product. The comparison showed that the two products were identical, pixel-by-pixel. Abrams conducted a second analysis to compare the archived MERRA_2 AST_08 product with the on-demand Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) AST-08 product to assess the difference in temperature due to improved MERRA-2 atmospheric parameters. The MERRA-2 product had lower temperature values for higher elevations and higher values for lower elevations with more column water vapor – see Figure 3. This result is physically correct and validates the improvement using MERRA-2 atmospheric data.
Figure 3. Colorized difference by temperature, in Kelvin, between the product using MERRA-2 and MODIS atmospheric values: blue -1.0 to -0.6; green -0.5 to -0.1; red 0.0; and yellow 0.1 to 0.5. Figure credit: Michael Abrams Hideyuki Tonooka discussed the status of installation of the JPL radiometer at Lake Kasumigaura. The plan is to mount the radiometer on an existing observation in the middle of the lake. The radiometer will be operated jointly by JPL and IU. The installation is planned to start in the Summer 2025.
Tetsuchi Tachikawa reviewed the status of the current Thermal Global Mapping acquisition program to acquire cloud-free TIR nighttime images over most of the Earth’s land surface. He explained that the program is refreshed every year, with most recent refresh beginning May 2025.
Operations and Mission Planning Working Group
The Operations and Mission Planning Working Group oversees and reviews the acquisition programs executed by the ASTER scheduler. Because ASTER data acquisitions have to be scheduled every day to accommodate ASTER’s average 8% duty cycle, ST members developed an automatic program to select 600–700 daily scenes from the possible 3000 plus images uploaded in the request archive.
Tachikawa reviewed the status of acquisition scheduling. Urgent observations receive the highest priority and can be scheduled close to acquisition time. Approximately 70 scenes are programmed per month – with over 95% acquisition success. By contrast, global mapping data acquisitions receive the lowest priority and are used to fill in the scenes for the daily quota. He explained that the goal of the ASTER is to have the instrument acquire at least one cloud-free image for every place on Earth. Due to persistent cloud cover, success is typically ~85% after several years, at which time the program is restarted. Tachikawa next gave short updates on three other acquisition programs that focus on islands, volcanoes, glaciers, and cloudy areas, respectively. The global volcano image acquisition program will continue with no change to the observation parameters. Acquisition of images of islands and over cloudy areas will also continue in current form. The global glacier acquisition program will be modified to change the VNIR gain settings to optimize images over snow and ice.
Tachikawa also discussed the effect of the ASTER shutdown in November 2024 and cessation of all ASTER data acquisitions. VNIR-only acquisitions were resumed in January 2025, and TIR acquisitions resumed in May 2025, with full operations and acquisitions of data from both VNIR and TIR instruments.
Closing Plenary Session
Each chairperson summarized the presentations, discussions, and recommendations that occurred during their respective working group session. The overall consensus maintained that the ASTER instrument is operating normally again – with no indications of any component failures. The ST is preparing to absorb the impact of the 50% budget reduction on the Flight Operation Team at GSFC. At this time, the main impact has been a small increase in lost data (1–2%) as a result of the absence of operators to attempt immediate recovery. The ST also approved plans for ASTER’s contribution to the Terra power mitigation plan, and the recommendation has been forwarded to the Terra Project Scientist and the Flight Operations Team.
Conclusion
The 54th ASTER ST Meeting successfully covered all critical issues introduced during the Opening Plenary Session. The ST worked on formulating priorities for reduction of ASTER instrument operations in response to possible future Terra power reductions. During working group sessions, participants received updates on a variety of topics (e.g., instrument scheduling, instrument performance, archiving plans, and new applications). Although this may be the last Joint U.S./Japan ASTER ST Meeting, the 55th joint meeting was tentatively scheduled for May 2026.
Acknowledgments
The lead author’s work on this article was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with NASA.
Michael Abrams
NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology
mjabrams@jpl.nasa.gov
Yasushi Yamaguchi
Nagoya University/Japan Science and Technology Agency
yasushi@nagoya-u.jp
Share
Details
Last Updated Aug 18, 2025 Related Terms
Earth Science View the full article
-
By NASA
Explore This Section Perseverance Home Mission Overview Rover Components Mars Rock Samples Where is Perseverance? Ingenuity Mars Helicopter Mission Updates Science Overview Objectives Instruments Highlights Exploration Goals News and Features Multimedia Perseverance Raw Images Images Videos Audio More Resources Mars Missions Mars Sample Return Mars Perseverance Rover Mars Curiosity Rover MAVEN Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Mars Odyssey More Mars Missions Mars Home 3 min read
An Update From the 2025 Mars 2020 Science Team Meeting
A behind-the-scenes look at the annual Mars 2020 Science Team Meeting
Members of the Mars 2020 Science Team examine post-impact sediments within the Gardnos impact structure, northwest of Oslo, Norway, as part of the June 2025 Science Team Meeting. NASA/Katie Stack Morgan Written by Katie Stack Morgan, Mars 2020 Acting Project Scientist
The Mars 2020 Science Team gathered for a week in June to discuss recent science results, synthesize earlier mission observations, and discuss future plans for continued exploration of Jezero’s crater rim. It was also an opportunity to celebrate what makes this mission so special: one of the most capable and sophisticated science missions ever sent to Mars, an experienced and expert Science Team, and the rover’s many science accomplishments this past year.
We kicked off the meeting, which was hosted by our colleagues on the RIMFAX team at the University of Oslo, with a focus on our most recent discoveries on the Jezero crater rim. A highlight was the team’s in-depth discussion of spherules observed at Witch Hazel Hill, features which likely provide us the best chance of determining the origin of the crater rim rock sequence.
On the second day, we heard status updates from each of the science instrument teams. We then transitioned to a session devoted to “traverse-scale” syntheses. After 4.5 years of Perseverance on Mars and more than 37 kilometers of driving (more than 23 miles), we’re now able to analyze and integrate science datasets across the entire surface mission, looking for trends through space and time within the Jezero rock record. Our team also held a poster session, which was a great opportunity for in-person and informal scientific discussion.
The team’s modern atmospheric and environmental investigations were front and center on Day 3. We then rewound the clock, hearing new and updated analyses of data acquired during Perseverance’s earlier campaigns in Jezero’s Margin unit, crater floor, and western fan. The last day of the meeting was focused entirely on future plans for the Perseverance rover, including a discussion of our exploration and sampling strategy during the Crater Rim Campaign. We also looked further afield, considering where the rover might explore over the next few years.
Following the meeting, the Science Team took a one-day field trip to visit Gardnos crater, a heavily eroded impact crater with excellent examples of impact melt breccia and post-impact sediment fill. The team’s visit to Gardnos offered a unique opportunity to see and study impact-generated rock units like those expected on the Jezero crater rim and to discuss the challenges we have recognizing similar units with the rover on Mars. Recapping our Perseverance team meetings has been one of my favorite yearly traditions (see summaries from our 2022, 2023, and 2024 meetings) and I look forward to reporting back a year from now. As the Perseverance team tackles challenges in the year to come, we can seek inspiration from one of Norway’s greatest polar explorers, Fridtjof Nansen, who said while delivering his Nobel lecture, “The difficult is that which can be done at once; the impossible is that which takes a little longer.”
Share
Details
Last Updated Jul 01, 2025 Related Terms
Blogs Explore More
2 min read Curiosity Blog, Sols 4584–4585: Just a Small Bump
Article
1 hour ago
4 min read Curiosity Blog, Sols 4582-4583: A Rock and a Sand Patch
Article
3 days ago
2 min read Curiosity Blog, Sols 4580-4581: Something in the Air…
Article
5 days ago
Keep Exploring Discover More Topics From NASA
Mars
Mars is the fourth planet from the Sun, and the seventh largest. It’s the only planet we know of inhabited…
All Mars Resources
Explore this collection of Mars images, videos, resources, PDFs, and toolkits. Discover valuable content designed to inform, educate, and inspire,…
Rover Basics
Each robotic explorer sent to the Red Planet has its own unique capabilities driven by science. Many attributes of a…
Mars Exploration: Science Goals
The key to understanding the past, present or future potential for life on Mars can be found in NASA’s four…
View the full article
-
By NASA
Explore This Section Earth Home Earth Observer Home Editor’s Corner Feature Articles Meeting Summaries News Science in the News Calendars In Memoriam More Archives 27 min read
Summary of Special Engage Session on “Remote Sensing and the Future of Earth Observations”
Introduction
On October 16, 2024, a special session of the NASA Goddard Engage series took place in the Goett Auditorium (Building 3) at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The Engage series is intended to explain work at GSFC in an immersive and nontechnical setting. GSFC’s Office of Communications, Earth Sciences Division, and Scientific Colloquium organized this special session.
The featured speaker for this event was The Honorable Al Gore [former Vice President of the U.S.], who has a long history of advocating for the environment and raising public awareness of the worsening “climate crisis” – having received the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.
The event also featured a panel discussion called “Remote Sensing and the Future of Earth Observations.” Three distinguished scientists spoke about what drew their interest in Earth science and responded to questions from the moderator and the in-person and online audience.
Editor’s Note: This is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all NASA’s future plans regarding Earth Remote Sensing. Rather the panelists focused on some specific activities on which they had expertise that was intended to give a sense of the full suite of activities planned for the coming decade.
While The Earth Observer typically does not usually report on Center-specific events, the newsletter makes an exception for this event because the former Vice President participated – and because the topic of the panel discussion is directly relevant to this publications’ wider audience. The remainder of this article summarizes the Engage session, including Gore’s remarks, the panel discussion, and the question-and-answer (Q&A) session that followed. A YouTube video of the full event is available for viewing.
Opening Remarks
Dalia Kirschbaum [GSFC—Director of Earth Sciences Division] welcomed the participants – both in-person and virtual. Casey Swails [NASA Headquarters—Deputy Associate Administrator] continued by thanking Gore for being one of most influential voices in the U.S. on climate . She said that Gore’s words and actions have inspired much more than just the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) mission. NASA – and GSFC in particular – has been conducting environmental studies since its beginning. She named historical missions, such as Vanguard, the Television Infrared Observation Satellite (TIROS), Landsat (partnership with U.S. Geological Service), and the Earth Observing System (EOS) – including more than 20 years of observations from the three Flagship Missions: Terra, Aqua, and Aura. (The Earth Observer’s Archives Page includes a “Bibliography of Articles with Historical Content” in which links to articles written on most of the missions mentioned in the previous sentence can be found.)
Swails pointed out that GSFC is home to the largest population of Earth Scientists who produce more than 400 journal articles each year.
“It will be you and your successors who will also make NASA (GSFC) the future of Earth observations,” said Swails. “You are continuing to accelerate core science research and enable action through the newly established Earth System Observatory project office, the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) project office, and new flagship missions, such as the Atmospheric Observing System (AOS) and Landsat Next.”
On behalf of – at the time of the meeting – NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, Swails thanked Gore for participating in the Engage event, and she thanked all the scientists and engineers – past and present – that have led the way in making NASA (GSFC) a leader in Earth observations for more than six decades.
Featured Speaker: The Honorable Al Gore
Kirschbaum then introduced Al Gore – shown in Photo 1 – whom she described as an environmental advocate and a central figure in advancing public discourse on climate and sustainability. Following Gore’s many years of political service, he confronted the world with “An Inconvenient Truth,” a documentary on climate change that helped raise global awareness of the worsening state of Earth’s climate. For these efforts, Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize on October 12, 2007.
Photo 1. Former U.S. Vice President Al Gore was the featured speaker at the Engage session on October 16, 2024. In addition to overall discussion of NASA’s Earth observing fleet and how Earth observations are used to investigate Earth’s changing climate, Gore’s remarks included reminiscences about his involvement in the Triana mission, which NASA canceled, then later revived and revised becoming known as DSCOVR – a NASA–NOAA partnership. See related article, “Summary of the 10th DSCOVR EPIC and NISTAR Science Team Meeting,” to learn more about DSCOVR and its scientific achievements over a decade in space. Photo credit: Travis Wohlrab [NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC)] Kirschbaum continued that Gore played a pivotal role in inspiring Triana , a NASA Earth science mission that would provide a near continuous view of Earth and measure Earth’s complete albedo while orbiting the first Sun–Earth Lagrange Point (hereinafter referred to as “the L1 point”). While Triana was canceled, the concept would live on and ultimately transition into the NASA–NOAA DSCOVR mission, which celebrates the 10th anniversary of its launch in February 2025. Gore made brief remarks at the opening session of the 10th DSCOVR Science Team meeting earlier in the day before coming to this meeting. A full “Summary of the 10th DSCOVR EPIC/ NISTAR Science Team Meeting” is published as a separate article in The Earth Observer.
Gore began by thanking all who worked on DSCOVR and other missions at NASA and NOAA. He thanked Makenize Lystrup [GSFC—Center Director] and the team for welcoming him. He also acknowledged the DSCOVR project leaders from GSFC: Adam Szabo [DSCOVR Project Scientist (PS)], Alexander Marshak [DSCOVR Deputy PS], Jay Herman [Earth Polychromatic Imaging Camera (EPIC) Instrument Scientist], Richard Eckman [National Institutes of Health’s Advanced Radiometer (NISTAR) Instrument Scientist], and all those who worked on the mission.
Gore reminisced about when the Triana mission was put into storage in 2001. He remembered his former Senate colleague, Barbara Mikulski [longtime MD Senator] assuring him that they would “feed [the satellite] space snacks” and take care of it until it was ready to use – which ultimately happened in 2008. He also acknowledged those who’ve worked on the DSCOVR mission since launch to extend its capabilities. He also recognized Francisco Valero [former Triana Principal Investigator] who was at University of California, San Diego’s Scripps Institute of Oceanography at the time, and was integral in championing the first iteration of this mission (i.e., Triana), as well as Alan Lazarus [Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)—Research Scientist], who helped design DSCOVR’s solar particle sensor. (Jay Herman was also involved in Triana.) He also mentioned how Bill Nelson chaired the House Space Subcommittee contemporaneously to when Gore chaired the Senate Space Subcommittee.
Gore acknowledged that DSCOVR is just one member of NASA’s fleet of Earth observing satellites – see Figure 1 er– plus those of domestic and international partners. What’s unique about DSCOVR, however, is its location – orbiting the L1 point, nearly one million miles (1.1 million km) away from Earth.
Figure 1. [Top] NASA’s Earth Observing Fleet consists of over 20 satellite missions that, with one exception, continuously monitor our home planet from polar or low Earth orbit – including several installed on the International Space Station. The exception is the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) which orbits the first Earth–Sun Lagrange point in the Earth–Sun system [bottom], about 1 million mi (~1.1 million km) from Earth [bottom]. This gives the mission’s two Earth-observing instruments (EPIC and NISTAR) a unique vantage point for observing the full sunlit Earth. [Bottom] Some version of the placeholder diagram above showing DSCOVR orbiting the L1 point between Sun and Earth, 1 million miles from Earth. Figure credit: TBD It can be argued that the modern environmental movement – which resulted in the development NASA’s Earth Observing System and other Earth observing missions – was inspired by a single image – “Earthrise,” which NASA Astronaut Bill Anders took of Earth on Christmas Eve 1968 during the Apollo 8 mission. The adage that “a picture is worth 1000 words” proved true in this instance as this single image changed how society viewed Earth, opening society’s awareness to the fragility and beauty of our home planet. Four years later, on Christmas Eve 1972, the first “Blue Marble” image was released, having been taken by Apollo-12 astronauts, as the spacecraft approached the Moon. (The image inspired subsequent “Blue Marble” images created using composites of satellite data.)
Per the Wikipedia page linked above, “The [Blue Marble image] has been identified as one of the most widely publicized and influential images since its release – particularly in the advocacy for environmental protection.”
Gore mentioned this in his remarks and stressed that this iconic image helped inspire the Triana/DSCOVR concept. This mission has helped scientists develop a more “complete picture” of Earth. He noted that today, DSCOVR/EPIC obtains a new “Blue Marble” (i.e. a full-disc image of Earth) every fifteen minutes – e.g., a set of images of Africa obtained on the 50th anniversary to mimic the original image from Apollo 12. Gore said that we learn so much about Earth from observing it from above (e.g., cloud dynamics, heating, vegetation, and the concentrations of ozone, sulfur dioxide, and particulate matter in the atmosphere). More than 100 peer-reviewed papers have been published on the unique science done at the L1 point by DSCOVR.
Gore said that DSCOVR – along with the rest of NASA’s Earth observing fleet – has produced a treasure trove of information that makes it possible to make the invisible, visible. What was once a mystery can now be explained with scientific data. When DSCOVR was proposed in 1998, the scientific community was on the verge of a technological explosion via the Internet that would allow the collection, storage, processing, and display of untold mountains of information about Earth. It has now evolved even further with the advent of Artificial Intelligence (AI), leading to another potential information explosion just at the time when having such information is crucial.
“We are in the midst of a violent collision between our current society’s organization and the surprisingly fragile ecological systems on which human flourishing depends,” said Gore.
As the participants convened to celebrate the 10th anniversary of DSCOVR, he encouraged those present to think about how this data can be applied to address the incredible challenges of our generation – chief among them the Earth’s rapidly changing climate.
“It’s hard to grapple with just how serious the [situation] is,” said Gore. However, he noted that, “Mother nature is a persuasive advocate. She has our attention!”
He cited the two hurricanes – Helene and Milton – that impacted the U.S. in the weeks prior to this event. Despite the ever-present threat, Gore also pointed to the problematic “assault on funding” for science throughout the Federal budget. To address this need, Gore spoke of the growing need for private–public partnerships to address the imposing climate crisis.
Gore discussed how Climate TRACE, the organization he cofounded, is harnessing NASA data and fusing it with other sources to pinpoint the sources of GHGs. Climate TRACE has determined the 500 million most relevant point sources, along with metadate (data describing the data). In essence, Climate TRACE seeks to reverse-engineer the GHG levels based on other environmental variables. He said that the newest Climate TRACE dataset will be released on November 14, 2024 at COP-29. Gore acknowledged that NASA [Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)] contributes data and conducts analysis of data used in Climate TRACE.
Quoting Lord Kelvin, Gore said, “you can only manage what you measure,” noting that our society has been having trouble managing global warming to date. However, thanks to organizations like NASA, our society is gaining the ability to measure it accurately.
Gore then referenced John F. Kennedy’s famous speech at Rice University in 1961 that is most remembered for the line about “going to the Moon in this decade.” But in that speech Kennedy also said, “We set sail on this new sea, because there is new knowledge to be gained and new rights to be won. And they must be won and used for the progress of all people.”
Gore applied this quote to the ongoing study of Earth’s climate. He said that our society is continuing to “sail on this new sea.” He gave kudos to all the people at NASA who are seizing all the opportunities to gather and reflect on “new knowledge” and apply it to issues directly relevant to societal flourishing.
Gore concluded by saying that the DSCOVR mission is a great example of combining scientific discovery and public enlightenment. It has been incredibly successful, and he feels it should be extended, counting on scientists to expand our access to the knowledge we need to ensure the survival of human civilization.
“If you ever doubt we have the political will to make changes,” said Gore, “just remember that political will is itself a renewable resource.”
After a standing ovation from the audience, Kirschbaum thanked Gore for his remarks and his continued support of the Earth science community.
Panel Discussion on the Future of Earth Science Remote Sensing
Kirschbaum then transitioned to the panel discussion. She reflected on how we live with the impacts of climate every day – e.g., air quality impacting students, hurricanes impacting coastlines and coastal communities, shifting storm patterns impacting farmers.
Since its inception in 1958, NASA has been a leader in studying Earth. The agency makes critical observations from space, aircraft, and the ground to understand climate change. NASA researchers integrate this information into climate models to understand the past, represent the present, and project the future state of our home planet.
Kirschbaum said that today’s panel discussion focuses on the future. While questions remain, she emphasized that the agency works with partners on opportunities to do things differently and open new possibilities. She then introduced three NASA scientists, who also provide leadership beyond the walls of NASA.
Miguel Román[GSFC Earth Sciences Division—Deputy Director for Atmospheres]; Lesley Ott [GSFC—Project Scientist for the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center]; and John Bolten [GSFC—Chief of Hydrological Sciences Branch]. She asked each panelist – shown in Photo 2 – to start with by sharing a bit of their story with the audience to give some initial insights into their work and background on how they themselves became interested in studying climate.
Photo 2. Following Gore’s remarks, there was a panel discussion entitled “Remote Sensing and the Future of Earth Observations.” Dalia Kirschbaum [GSFC—Director of Earth Sciences Division – left] moderated the discussion, directing questions to the three panelists seated to her right [left to right]: Miguel Román [GSFC Earth Sciences Division—Deputy Director for Atmospheres]; Lesley Ott [GSFC—Project Scientist for the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center]; and John Bolten [GSFC—Chief of Hydrological Sciences Branch]. Photo credit: Travis Wohlrab Román began his career as an intern at NASA. After rising through the ranks, he left NASA to work in private industry before recently returning to GSFC. Originally from Puerto Rico, Román has been “inside the walls of a hurricane six times in his life.” He said that American citizens are increasingly experiencing what he experienced as a youth. He noted that two things happen when one in the middle of a hurricane – barometric pressure drops (ears pop) and there is a distinctive hissing sound.
Román said the term hurricane is derived from a Taino word. He explained that in Puerto Rican folklore, Juracán (i.e., the “evil” Goddess of wind – especially hurricanes) was in opposition to Yucahu (i.e., the “good” God of creation, agriculture, peace, and tranquility).
“The hissing winds of Juracán now reverberate across Florida, “ said Román—see Figure 2.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that
supports HTML5 video
Figure 2. Animation of brightness temperature data obtained by the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS) on NASA’s Aqua mission, showing Hurricane Milton as it approached and impacted Florida in October 2024. Colder temperatures (blues) are associated with the tops of high clouds, so the storm track stands out from the warmer temperature over the waters of the Gulf of Mexico.
Figure credit: TBD
He stressed that these winds are “different” – more intense – than the ones dealt with in the past. He added that we now have “land hurricanes” – called derechos, which are intense, widespread, and fast-moving lines of storms.
Ott said that, in a sense, “science chose her.” She was raised by two scientists who met while studying physics. But she chose to study meteorology because it seemed to her to be the most ‘personal’ of the sciences. As Kirschbaum alluded to in her remarks earlier, weather impacts us all – physically and even emotionally. She loved this aspect of weather and wanted to understand the science behind the “air that we all swim in.”
“Weather seems to be less in background and more on the ‘front page’ these days,” said Ott. “We regularly hear news stories about superstorms and devastating fires. We’re all increasingly impacted by extreme weather.”
She also spoke about the ‘untold’ costs of climate change (e.g., lost school days, lost wages, not knowing if your home will survive a natural disaster), which has impacted how Ott practices meteorology. While she is a meteorologist, Ott doesn’t work on weather prediction. Instead, she uses the same kind of predictive models that are used for weather forecasting to focus on GHGs, which could help society navigate the realities of a changing planet.
In her work, Ott tracks how climate changes – for better or worse. While the trend toward a warming world (climate) fuels more frequent and powerful extreme events (weather), e.g., heat waves, droughts, and storms, there are exceptions achieved through intentional human intervention – e.g., the recovery of the ozone hole (bought about through enforcement of the Montreal Protocol and its Amendments) and improvements of air quality. Both of these examples of positive change illustrate the value of international collaboration to address environmental issues. Ott said that research efforts can help to “track the future of the planet,” leading to more positive changes. Extending these positive changes to GHGs will help communities more effectively plan for and respond to a rapidly changing world.
Bolten began by saying that he comes from Wood County WV and is the youngest of five boys. He could see the Ohio River from his kitchen window where he swam and canoed. Bolten explained that Wood County is in an area known as chemical valley, because a large number of chemical plants in the region provide important products for the world. These plants employ many of the people living in the region.
Bolten’s father designed wastewater treatment systems for these chemical plants and passed along a deep appreciation of the impact humans can have on the environment. Similarly, Bolten spent many years enjoying the Ohio River and West Virginia wilderness, which instilled in him the value of protecting our freshwater resources. He grew up immersed in the environment and wanted to contribute to the greater good of society and make a positive difference in the world. He said that NASA is championing these same core values as an innovator and leader in Earth System Science. Bolten thanked Gore for spurring public discourse around climate.
Question and Answer Session
Kirschbaum began the Q&A session with several prepared questions followed by questions from both in-person and virtual participants – along with some more interspersed comments from the guest of honor.
Kirschbaum posed the first question to Román: How do you see GSFC (NASA) advancements in tech and science helping us to predict extreme weather (e.g., heatwaves and hurricanes)?
Román began his answer by stating that NASA’s EOS era is coming to an end – after more than two decades of observations. NASA’s EOS flagship missions – Terra, Aqua, and Aura – have each far exceeded their scheduled mission life. While scientists and engineers work together to extend the function as long as possible, practical realities (e.g., fuel supply, orbit decay) dictate that all the satellites must be decommissioned in the next few years. The EOS era has taught NASA and its partners many lessons about how to operate under what he described as “an accelerated set of extreme climate events.”
“We simply could not have anticipated some of things we’re facing now when the EOS missions were designed,” said Ramon, citing the development of derechos and the rapid intensification of tropical cyclones.
The EOS mission instrument teams developed a whole Earth observing technology toolbox on the fly. For example, scientists learned that while microwave sounders work well over water, these instruments face challenges over land due to surface emissivity variations. Infrared (IR) sounders, on the other hand, provide valuable data over all surfaces during clear conditions, but they can’t penetrate thick clouds. Investigators combined both measurements, producing a powerful tool for observing the changing Earth system and beginning to quantify the impact of those changes.
While it is sad to see the EOS era end, Román said that NASA is entering an exciting new era where new technologies will allow for miniaturization of sounders. He also mentioned new observing technologies, such as the Hyperspectral Microwave Photonic Instrument (HyMPI) . The microwave sounders currently flying – which are part of NASA’s current Program of Record – retrieve atmospheric profiles with approximately 20 vertical layers. By contrast, HyMPI can produce as many as 1000 layers, offering enhanced thermodynamic sounding skill in the Earth’s planetary boundary layer (PBL) – the first 2 km (~1 mi) of the atmosphere – over conventional microwave sounders from the current Program of Record.
Román emphasized that the PBL is an area that is still poorly observed and understood. This lowest level of the atmosphere is where humans and other plants and animals live – and where most climate impacts occur. It is thus vitally important to improve our understanding of the PBL. To emphasize this point, Román cited that one million stillbirths can be linked to tropospheric ozone pollution every year. The encouraging news is that NASA’s data can inform public health policy to help mitigate these harmful impacts.
“The problem is an integrated one,” said Román, “and the Earth System Observatory (ESO) is designed for all of its missions to be integrated.”
Román stressed that the climate challenges are complex, and ESO provides a model for all future campaigns to integrate many approaches to solve big problems.
Kirschbaum directed the next question to Ott: As the NASA leader of the U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center, where do you see NASA making contributions?
Ott responded that there has been tremendous innovation and advancement in the field of Earth observations over the past several decades – i.e., during the EOS era. As Al Gore alluded to in his earlier remarks, increasingly, this innovation comes from the pairing of private sector with the public data from satellites, aircraft campaigns, and ground networks that provide the infrastructure that companies need to test and improve new approaches.
NASA has also played a foundational role in developing the systems approach to studying Earth. For example, half of human-produced emissions (sources) of carbon dioxide (CO2) are absorbed by vegetation and the ocean (sinks). It remains unclear how long this balance will continue, however. NASA aims to bring together different measurements of vegetation, ocean productivity, and gases in the atmosphere and make them readily available to the public. A wholistic approach to climate requires input from multiple satellites to successfully model changes in the concentration GHGs throughout the Earth system. To achieve this goal, the best from the government (e.g., NASA data) needs to merge with private industry to produce consistent long term data records that people can trust.
Kirschbaum agreed that delivering trusted information and providing foundational datasets are core activities for NASA, and used that to segue to the next question, which she addressed to Bolten: NASA (GSFC) sits at the nexus of satellite observations and modeling. Where do you see progress of Earth Science to Action particularly in area of water quality?
Bolten said that the first image of Earth was obtained 78 years ago in 1946. It happened somewhat by chance. Soldiers and scientists at White Sands Missile Range strapped a camera to a captured German V2 rocket, and they were fortunate to get a clear image of Earth. Fast forward to today, NASA has a fleet of more than 20 Earth-observing satellites – see Figure 1 [top] – that provide routine Earth observations. These data are vital for understanding our home planet, and for decision making. The observations from these satellites can be analyzed and used to inform decisions about Earth.
The Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer (ENIAC) was created the same year as the first Earth image. He noted that ENIAC took up an entire room. Today, his smart phone, which fits in his pocket, is more than 230 million times faster than ENIAC – driving home the point that technology has advanced beyond what most could imagine. Bolten also noted that 2024 is NASA’s Year of Open Science.
Bolten said that his job focuses on food and water insecure areas, which often correlates with areas that lack data infrastructure. There is a vital need to strategically integrate open science and cloud-based services.
“We can’t do this [work] in a bubble,” said Bolten. “We must work together.”
Kirschbaum elevated a question from an attendee: There have been various climate change scenarios that have been offered as possibilities. Which one seems most likely to you to be correct?
Ott explained that the worst- or best-case scenarios are usually outliers (i.e., the conditions in the “real world” typically lie somewhere in between the extremes). She commented that we’ve seen a large climate change investment from the Biden Administration. Those kinds of investments will have impact and have the power to change the trajectory for the future. Part of what NASA does is to show the world that the data we collect does make a tangible difference. That gives society reason for hope. The point of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Center is to bring together all these GHG observations in one place to analyze them and study them to show that we’re making progress on confronting this challenging issue. The objective is to create tangible evidence that, “when we take action, we can change things.”
As if to underscore Ott’s point, Gore responded during her presentation that he believes that public choice does significantly impact how the future unfolds.
“What we decide has consequences,” he said.
Gore is convinced the issue of our changing climate could be addressed if our society made up our collective mind to do it and then committed ourselves to take the decisive action needed to make that decision a reality in the near future.
“The future is really up to us,” said Gore.
The final three questions came from online participants.
How can NASA improve its messaging?
Bolten replied that this is a question that comes up repeatedly in the context of NASA outreach and communications. In the context of today’s discussion, he suggested the need to produce information that is not just useful but also usable (i.e., it can be applied in ways that directly benefit society). As an example, he pointed to the use of machine learning to model a flash flooding event in Ellicott City, MD (described in a 2020 article in Journal of Hydrometeorology) where waters rose from a normal levels to a devastating flash flood in about seven minutes – see Photo 3. Bolten continued that transparency, as well as connecting to people’s motivations, are keys to being more successful with NASA’s messaging.
Photo 3. In May 2018 devastating floodwaters impacted the town of Ellicott City, MD. Water levels in the small basin above the down rose from normal levels to flash flooding in seven minutes. Figure credit: NOAA’s Physical Science Laboratory What big challenges could NASA turn to an opportunity to address climate change?
Román said that advances in forecasting on seasonal to sub-seasonal scales are key areas of focus for studies of Earth’s atmosphere. He noted that it is important to have observations and understand these observations to model events. For sub-seasonal prediction, we need to understand stratospheric dynamics and the chemistry going on in the upper troposphere and lower stratosphere.
“Major fires and volcanic eruptions create massive changes in the atmosphere,” said Román. “We can’t see them like we can when we view a Landsat image.”
One tool that could help us with sub-seasonal forecasting is the Stratosphere Troposphere Response using Infrared Vertically-resolved light Explorer (STRIVE) mission, which is one of four mission proposals for the first Earth System Explorer missions chosen for initial Phase A study. This mission aims to examine the interaction between the upper troposphere and the lower stratosphere. In particular, STRIVE will make observations of Earth’s limb (i.e., a narrow slice of atmosphere), which can help scientists gain insight into aerosol loading. According to Román, this data will be key to getting an accurate 30-day forecast. He referred to this information as the “holy grail” in terms of preparedness and resilience by improving early warnings for extreme weather. Some nations are limited to only using Doppler radar and if it fails, they are essentially blind to what is coming.
Kirschbaum cited NASA’s AOS mission, which will be part of ESO, as another example of an important new measuring capability. This mission will represent the “next generation” for precipitations and aerosol observations. Scientists can use the data collected to understand how these phenomena interact with each other and with other atmospheric constituents to form storms.
“AOS will be the baseline while STRIVE would be the bottom line,” concluded Román.
What is the path forward to develop capacity for new observations while still maintaining high-quality, long-term time series and making the data accessible to the public?
Ott cited the Carbon Mapper coalition as a current example where such a balance is being achieved/. Carbon Mapper made its first light images available to the public last week. This mission brings together a unique coalition of partners (including NASA/JPL and Planet, a private company) to develop and deploy two satellites with capabilities to detect and quantify methane (CH4) – e.g., see Figure 3 – and CO2 super-emitters at a level of granularity needed to support direct mitigation action.
Figure 3. On December 4, 2024, the Tanager–1 satellite detected methane (CH4) plumes streaming downwind from oil and gas facilities in the Permian Basin (in west Texas and southeast New Mexico). This is one of more than 300 images of CH4 super-emitters from the oil and gas, coal, waste, and agriculture sectors across 25 countries that were released in February 2025. Tanager–1 launched in August 2024 and is the first satellite developed by the Carbon Mapper coalition between Planet (a private company) and NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) and other partners. Planet owns, launched, and operates the satellite, which is equipped with technology from JPL. Figure credit: Carbon Mapper NASA’s investments in technology via its Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO) have enabled new airborne instruments that can be deployed in partnership with industry to demonstrate the quality of present-day satellite technologies and to provide a pathway toward next generation technologies. She stressed that the Federal government continues to play a crucial role in establishing standards and ensuring data integrity and continuity. NASA, for example, invests in ground-based systems and data services that help enable the commercial satellite industry. Long-term continuity of measurements is essential to connect new observations to existing ones. In this way, we can enable the continuing rise of NewSpace, while still providing foundational integrity and stability of the long-term climate data records that NASA and other Federal agencies maintain. This framework helps tie all the NewSpace endeavors together.
Gore cited an example of a public–private partnership that happened in the past. He commented that in 1998 (the same year that Triana was proposed) he was also involved in proposal for Digital Earth. The guiding vision behind Digital Earth was to be able to hover over any point and drop down through successively more detailed layers. NASA contracted with a company called Keyhole, which Google acquired in the early 2000s. Gore raised this example to point out that Google Earth is the result of those initial efforts.
Gore also connected this discussion to his work on Climate TRACE, which he had mentioned in his remarks earlier as a current example of public–private partnership. He stated that while we can see CH4 from space, the resolution is relatively low, i.e., a wide area must be scanned to get a CH4 measurement) and higher resolution is required to identify specific (or point) sources of CH4. Climate TRACE offers such higher resolution CH4 measurements, allowing researchers to focus more on identifying specific sources of pollution. By contrast the atmosphere is so enriched with CO2 that the signal-to-noise ratio is too high to measure the gas from space. For CO2 analysis, Climate TRACE uses AI to fuse together various images to allow CO2 to be detectable. The resulting measurements are precise enough to detect ripple ponds created by rotating fan blades.
Closing Remarks
Dalia Kirschbaum closed the meeting by thanking the guest of honor, Al Gore, once again for coming to the GSFC event. Gore not only spoke but was an active participant who demonstrated his knowledge of this subject area gained from years of experience working on climate issues. She quipped that “he’s the only former Vice President ever to use the Term signal-to-noise ratio correctly when talking to scientists.”.
Kirschbaum also thanked everyone who participated in this event – including the over 800 online participants. While the discussions today offered numerous glimpses into the future of Earth remote-sensing observations, this information barely scratches the surface of all the work being carried out by scientists and engineers at NASA to make these plans a reality. She thanked all of those who work at NASA – who often put in long hours, quietly, behind the scenes without much recognition – for the work they do daily to enable NASA’s mission.
Alan B. Ward
NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center/Global Science & Technology Inc.
alan.b.ward@nasa.gov
Share
Details
Last Updated Mar 11, 2025 Related Terms
Earth Science View the full article
-
-
Check out these Videos
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.