Introduction

1. Introduction Welcome! SWOT Hydrology Workshop September 15-17, 2008 sponsored by: CNES, JPL, NASA, and OSU’s Climate, Water, & Carbon Program

2. Agenda Today • Introductions • Morning: How SWOT works • Afternoon: SWOT for various geographic regions • Break-out Sessions: Arctic, mid-latitudes, tropics Tuesday • Morning: SWOT for hydrodynamics, water cycle • Afternoon: SWOT for water resources • Break-out Sessions: applications and models Wednesday • Morning: the next steps needed in mission design

3. Welcome to OSU A welcome to OSU from Matt Platz Interim Dean of Mathematical and Physical Sciences Interim Dean of Biological Sciences

4. Who We Are • SWOT Hydrology Leaders: Doug Alsdorf and Nelly Mognard • The people doing the hard work! Kostas Andreadis, Sylvain Biancamaria, Liz Clark, Mike Durand, Delwyn Moller, and Ernesto Rodriguez • Our Program People: CNES: Thierry Lafon, Eric Thouvenot NASA: Jared Entin, Eric Lindstrom JPL: Tony Freeman, Parag Vaze

5. Introduction What will SWOT do?

6. Amazon Matthews, E. and I. Fung, GBC, 1, 61-86, 1987. Siberia Ohio Photos: K. Frey, B. Kiel, L. Mertes

7. Introduction What is SWOT?

8. Credit: Karen Wiedman

9. SWOT Timeline • 1998 – Wide Swath Ocean Altimeter (WSOA) was selected for NASA’s Instrument Incubator Program (IIP). • 2003 – “Hydrology from Space” at CNES in Toulouse France • 2004 – Irvine CA meeting where three different technologies were discussed • 2007 – Decadal Survey recommended SWOT as a combined mission for terrestrial hydrology and oceanography. • 2007 – U.S. Congress recognizes SWOT as one of seven key missions and allocates $40M to initiate the missions. (see agenda page 4)

10. Introduction Lets put this in a different perspective.

14. Introduction Looks great, so why am I here?

15. Introduction To further refine the mission questions and requirements, improve the mission design, and to become more involved in SWOT.

16. SWOT Hydrology Questions • Water Cycle: What is the spatial and temporal variability in the world's terrestrial surface water storage and discharge.  How can we predict these variations more accurately? • Floodplains & Wetlands: How much water is stored on a floodplain and subsequently exchanged with its main channel? How much carbon is potentially released from inundated areas? • Society: What are the policy implications that freely available water storage data would have for water management? Can health issues related to waterborne diseases be predicted through better mappings? (see agenda page 1)

17. Answer Two Questions • Monday & Tuesday: Are there other science and/or applications questions that should be considered central to the mission? What are the related mission science requirements? (2) Wednesday: Given the motivating science and applications questions as they may be amended by our group, how do we quantify the mission design so that the technology remains affordable and that data through-put constraints are met? (see agenda page 1)

18. Mission Science Requirements • To answer the science questions, SWOT needs to measure h, dh/dt, dh/dx, and area (inundated floodplains, river channel widths) • Ideally, SWOT would directly measure S and Q, but this is not possible. • Velocity is also very difficult • What are the spatial and temporal accuracy requirements for the measurements? • temporal example: Arctic vs. Amazon • spatial examples: • large rivers (Ohio) vs. small streams (Olentangy) • large lakes (Great Lakes) vs. millions of small lakes • height accuracies: h and/or dh/dx

19. Mission Science Requirements • What are the other required characteristics for the measurements? • Canopy penetration • Sampling during rain events • Ice cover issues • Can the requirements change with scale? • Q from small rivers with large % errors, but small absolute Q • vs. Q from big rivers with small % errors, but large absolute Q • What is the smallest river and lake required to answer the science questions?

20. Some Considerations • Potential other science targets (bathymetry, land topography, etc.) should be identified, but only those that avoid science, technology, and cost creep. • e.g., sea-ice could be a target but probably should not drive the orbit selection. • Technology and Mission Considerations: • Mission lifetime design is 3 to 5 years, with increasing costs for longer times. Science questions should be answerable with data collected during mission timeframe. • Questions should be answerable by the accuracy and resolutions provided by KaRIN. • What are the minimum requirements to equal success? • e.g., storage changes, but not discharge? • What must be done and is the mission driver • What is a goal, but not a mission driver

21. At the end of the meeting: • Are the science questions worded and prioritized? • Are the science requirements defined in terms of spatial and temporal resolutions and in terms of height and slope accuracies? • Are the science requirements also defined in terms of data or hydraulic characteristics (rain, vegetation, ice cover, scale of water body, etc.) • Are the minimum mission requirements defined: must be done vs. possible goals.

22. Concluding Thoughts This Mission is for Everybody! • SWOT brings together the communities of physical oceanography and terrestrial hydrology. • Over 200 people from 30 countries are SWOT participants. Please click on the SWOT web page and sign-up. Look at your name badge for the web page. • Hundreds more participate through oceanography. • SWOT vs. WatER vs. WATER HM

23. Concluding Thoughts • SWOT is not a stream gauge replacement strategy. Never has been, never will be. SWOT is NOT designed to replicate gauge-based measurements. • SWOT is two-dimensional thus unique and new measurements, perhaps revolutionary, and certainly never before routinely available on a global basis. • When listening to the talks, don’t think conventional in-situ point-based (which is good thinking), rather think new 2D measurements of h, dh/dx, dh/dt, and area. Think of spatial sampling of entire basin and averaging to reduce errors.

24. Concluding Thoughts • Talk is Cheap: so lets talk alot! • If you are not happy about something you hear, or misunderstand something, please let me know. I’ll get clarity. • If you are happy, let me know that, too! • Perhaps you have a role in mind, please let me know and I’ll make certain you are more involved. • Rooms 330 and 340 are available throughout Monday and Tuesday for work and smaller meetings.

25. Introduction Questions?

26. Comments from Others Comments from Eric Lindstrom, Nelly Mognard others?

27. Tuesday Welcome! SWOT Hydrology Workshop September 15-17, 2008 sponsored by: CNES, JPL, NASA, and OSU’s Climate, Water, & Carbon Program

28. Tuesday A welcome to OSU from Joseph Alutto OSU Executive Vice President and Provost

29. Tuesday Yesterday • Introductions • Morning: How SWOT works • Afternoon: SWOT for various geographic regions • Break-out Sessions: Arctic, mid-latitudes, tropics Today • Morning: SWOT for hydrodynamics, water cycle • Afternoon: SWOT for water resources • Break-out Sessions: applications and models Wednesday • Morning: the next steps needed in mission design

30. Summary of Monday • Feedback and thoughts on the mission design? • the orbit and temporal revisits? • spatial sampling and height accuracies? • Feedback and thoughts on h, dh/dx, dh/dt, and area to get Q and S? • is there a desired accuracy on Q and S? • swapping space for time; measurements throughout basin but at differing times • Feedback and thoughts on mission science questions? • surface water for terrestrial branch of the water cycle • geographical coverage and importance of Arctic, mid-latitudes and tropics

31. Did we make progress on these? • Are the science questions worded and prioritized? • Are the science requirements defined in terms of spatial and temporal resolutions and in terms of height and slope accuracies? • Are the science requirements also defined in terms of data or hydraulic characteristics (rain, vegetation, ice cover, scale of water body, etc.) • Are the minimum mission requirements defined: must be done vs. possible goals.

32. Tuesday Questions?

33. Wednesday Welcome! SWOT Hydrology Workshop September 15-17, 2008 sponsored by: CNES, JPL, NASA, and OSU’s Climate, Water, & Carbon Program

34. Wednesday Monday • Introductions • Morning: How SWOT works • Afternoon: SWOT for various geographic regions • Break-out Sessions: Arctic, mid-latitudes, tropics Yesterday • Morning: SWOT for hydrodynamics, water cycle • Afternoon: SWOT for water resources • Break-out Sessions: applications and models Today • Morning: the next steps needed in mission design

35. Monday’s Discussions • Feedback and thoughts on the mission design? • the orbit and temporal revisits? • spatial sampling and height accuracies? • Feedback and thoughts on h, dh/dx, dh/dt, and area to get Q and S? • is there a desired accuracy on Q and S? • swapping space for time; measurements throughout basin but at differing times • Feedback and thoughts on mission science questions? • surface water for terrestrial branch of the water cycle • geographical coverage and importance of Arctic, mid-latitudes and tropics

36. Tuesday’s Discussions • Feedback and thoughts on water cycle modeling requirements? • exactly how will SWOT make a difference in these models? • how are lakes incorporated? • Feedback and thoughts on hydrodynamic modeling requirements? • is there a problem with only having weekly measurements? • keep in mind that SWOT is not a “flood chasing” machine • Feedback and thoughts on applications? • how do we connect SWOT with water resource managers throughout the world?

37. Lets make progress on these? • Are the science questions worded and prioritized? • Are the science requirements defined in terms of spatial and temporal resolutions and in terms of height and slope accuracies? • Are the science requirements also defined in terms of data or hydraulic characteristics (rain, vegetation, ice cover, scale of water body, etc.) • Are the minimum mission requirements defined: must be done vs. possible goals.

38. Wednesday Questions?