1. MOSAiC Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate Ad hoc Organizing Committee Matthew Shupe – U. of Colorado Klaus Dethloff – Alfred Wegener Inst. Ola Persson – U. of Colorado Michael Tjernström – Stockholm U. Science Plan Writing Team Sebastian Gerland, Jun Inoue, Craig Lee, Brice Loose, Alexander Makshtas, Wieslaw Maslowski, Walt Meier, Marcel Nicolaus, Dirk Notz, Ilka Peeken, Don Perovich, Julia Schmale, Timo Vihma, Jinping Zhao

2. Francis et al. 2009 Dukhovskoy et al. 2006 www.iarc.uaf.edu

3. The central Arctic is changing dramatically, characterized by major sea-ice decline & more younger ice. Do we know why? and (importantly) how? Courtesy J. Stroeve Arctic in Transition Sept. 2012 nsidc.org 1979-2000 median

4. We lack a system- and process-level understanding of change, due to a lack of observations! Potential emergence of new processes, tipping points Feedbacks with “globally significant consequences” (IPCC) Implications for regional and lower-latitude weather Implications for resource development, commerce, ecosystems, productivity, communities Implications of Change Francis et al. 2009 noaa.gov

5. Incoming solar radiation 200 W m 2 Reflected by clouds, aerosol & atmosphere 45 26 70 Reflected by surface Absorbed by atmosphere 59 Turbulence 3 3 Evapo- transpiration 3 3 257 231 237 20 133 Surface radiation Absorbed by surface reflected solar radiation 115 W m 2 back radiation emitted by atmosphere 30 Outgoing longwave radiation 183 W m 2 Absorbed by surface +98 +2 -100 2 ARCTIC ENERGY BUDGET (  > 65°N) Sea ice 96 Sea-Ice Energy Budget Persson et al. 2013 Decadal decline can be explained by ~1 W/m 2 excess. Kwok and Untersteiner 2011

6. Critical Model Shortcomings ~ 0 W m -2 ~-25 W m -2 ~-10 W m -2 Tjernström et al. 2008 Regional Climate Models evaluated against SHEBA radiative fluxes reveal major biases and spreads, especially under clouds. Such biases can have serious implications for sea-ice concentrations.

7. Critical Model Shortcomings Comparison of IPCC AR4 models of sea-surface salinity: Major differences suggest lack of consistency in important processes such as ocean mixing, dynamics, sea-ice processes, freshwater input, and/or others. Holland et al. 2007 Best estimate of actual field based on observations

8. Multi-year, coordinated, and comprehensive measurements, extending from the atmosphere through the sea-ice and into the ocean, are needed in the central Arctic Basin to provide a process-level understanding of the changing central Arctic climate system that will contribute towards improved modeling of Arctic climate and weather, and prediction of Arctic sea-ice concentrations. The MOSAiC Plan

9. What: 1)Deploy heavily instrumented, manned, ship-based, Arctic Ocean observatory for comprehensive, coordinated observations of the Arctic atmosphere, cryosphere, and ocean. 2)Network of spatial measurements to provide context and variability (buoys, gliders, UAVs, aircraft, ships, satellites, ice stations). 3)Coordinated modeling activities at many scales from process-study to regional climate models. The MOSAiC Plan

10. When: Start 2017-2018, covering multiple annual cycles if possible Where: Central Arctic Basin ice pack Who: Coordinated through IASC International participation (e.g. US, Germany, Sweden, France, Russia, Finland, Norway, Canada, Korea, Japan, China,….) International infrastructure Synchronized international funding September 2011 sea ice extent (courtesy NSIDC). Numerous drift tracks of stations suggest possible observatory tracks The MOSAiC Plan

11. Leading Science Question: “What are the causes and consequences of an evolving and diminished Arctic sea ice cover?” MOSAiC Science Drivers Sea-ice Lifecycle as a Theme. Use a sea-ice “Lagrangian” perspective, where ice processes integrate forcings from atmos and ocean.

12. o How do ongoing changes in the Arctic ice-ocean- atmosphere system impact heat and mass transfers of importance to climate and ecosystems? o What are the processes and feedbacks affecting sea-ice cover, atmosphere-ocean stratification and energy budgets in the Arctic? o What is the effect of an ice-reduced Arctic on biological productivity and what are the consequences of this on other components of the system? o How do interfacial exchange rates, biology and chemistry couple to regulate the major elemental cycles? o How do the different scales of spatial and temporal heterogeneity in the atmosphere, ice and ocean interact to impact the linkages or feedbacks within the system? MOSAiC Science Questions

13. Process-study vs. climatology Process perspective suited to parameterization evaluation & development Requires complex measurements to characterize interdependent processes Distributed measurements for spatial variability & context on key parameters Process Perspective Ocean Sea-ice Atmosphere

14. Measurements Micro- meteorology gases, aerosols, clouds & precip. atmospheric profiling, BL, & dynamics leads & ocean surface ocean state, profiling, & dynamics aircraft + UASs ocean and ice bio/chem buoys, AUVs, gliders ice profiling, thermodynamics, mass budgets surface energy budget

15. Transpolar Drift track Objectives: Observe full sea-ice “life cycle,” starting in new ice. Trajectory that will last for at least (more than) 1 year Observe an understudied region Challenges: Central Arctic is isolated First year ice will be difficult 2011 Planning the Drift Track

16. Arctic climate system has memory. Sea-ice integrates energy budgets. Processes vary over the annual cycle. Important to understand all phases of the sea-ice life cycle: Formation > growth > transport/deformation > melt/decay/export Past observations biased towards summer (warm, easy); Relatively little understanding of winter processes. Full Annual Cycle Perovich et al. 2008 Persson et al. 2002

17. Previous experiences within the Arctic ice pack: Russian drifting stations SHEBA Shorter-term campaigns Many disciplinary obs. Some inter-disciplinary obs. Each of these has key limitations: Length of time Comprehensiveness Spatial context Not in the “new” Arctic Russian drifting station SHEBA Building off the Past

18. Central Model Role Models play critical roles: Identify important measurements, processes Guide drift track Integrate process information Provide spatial context Linkage w/ lower latitudes

19. Model considerations: Hierarchy of model activities: process, regional, global Regional model intercomparison project Model “testbed” > Critical data for parameterization evaluation & development Strong ties with WWRP Year of Polar Prediction (YOPP) Central Model Role

20. A Recognized Need MOSAiC concept is specifically recognized as important: IARPC Arctic Research Plan 2013-2017 US Arctic Observing Network Coordination Workshop 2012 DOE US-EU Workshop on Climate Challenges and Observations 2012 NASA Arctic Boreal Zone Workshop 2012 WWRP Polar Predictability Program, Implementation Plan 2012 IASC endorsement 2012 And clearly addresses specific needs: US SEARCH 5-year goals (sea-ice), 2012 US AON Status Report (atmos/ocean/sea-ice), 2009 US National Ocean Policy (sea-ice), 2012 US Navy Arctic Roadmap (coupled modeling, sea-ice), 2009 NOAA Arctic Vision & Strategy (sea-ice forecasting, science), 2011 “Improve the understanding of atmosphere, sea-ice, and ocean system interactions through a combination of enhanced observations and process- based modeling studies.” US SEARCH 5-Year Goals

21. Thanks! MOSAiC into the Future Tentative MOSAiC Schedule  Develop Science Plan – spring-summer 2013  Writing workshop – 29-30 May 2013, Potsdam  Implementation Workshop and Plan – spring2014  MOSAiC Open Science Meeting – likely 2014  Start serious funding discussions: 2013>  Logistics planning 2013>  Preparatory modeling & instrument development 2013>  Field deployment September 2017?, 2018? www.mosaicobservatory.org