Jong‐Min Kim Byung‐Ju Sohn Sang‐Moo Lee Rasmus Tage Tonboe Eui‐Jong Kang Hyun‐cheol Kim
First published: 03 November 2020
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JD033103
Abstract
Two sources of readily available and non‐overlapping space‐borne data on sea ice thickness over the Arctic (i.e., Ice, Cloud, and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) and CryoSat‐2 (CS2)) were compared using overlapping thermal microwave radiometer data to examine their respective differences.
As a bridge connecting these two datasets, data on the vertically polarized emissivity difference between 10.65 and 18.7 GHz derived from the Advanced Microwave Sounding Radiometer (AMSR) was related to ICESat and CS2 thickness values via regression.
The results indicate that there are substantial and systematic differences in the ice thickness between these two datasets over the Arctic;
ICESat ice thickness was systematically lower than that of CS2 by ~50 cm, compared to ice thickness from Operation IceBridge and upper looking sonar (ULS) data.
The CS2 thickness observed later than that of ICESat was found to be thicker, contradicting the thinning expected under global warming conditions.
Correcting for the 50‐cm difference between ICESat or CS2 data revealed trends in ice volume that are consistent with the expected and modeled declines in the Pan‐Arctic Ice‐Ocean Modeling and Assimilation System (PIOMAS) data, further corroborating the 50 centimeters of relative bias observed between the two datasets.
Key Points
The ICESat and Cryosat‐2 ice thickness datasets, which have a 24‐month gap, were compared
A systematic and substantial difference of ~50 cm was found between the ICESat and CryoSat‐2 datasets
Snow depth used for estimating the ice thickness is found to be one of major sources of uncertainty causing the difference
Recommend this post and follow The birth of
modern Man
https://disqus.com/home/forum/lifeofearth/
No comments:
Post a Comment