1. Remote Sensing Subgroup 2: Process-based modeling of carbon fluxes Remotely sensing measurements as inputs into terrestrial and marine process models that lead to carbon fluxes

2. How does remote sensing contribute to understanding North American carbon budget (critical knowledge gaps) To correctly determine the carbon budget, we need to have better information regarding –stand age –forest inventory accuracy –hydrology and topography interactions and wetlands –high resolution direct/indirect PAR (250m, sub-daily) These tools are under development, but are not ready for wide-spread use –Use of a biomass proxy (color) for CO2 in ocean –Determining air/sea CO2 fluxes (using winds)

3. Define example collaborations and/or inter-comparisons that may advance understanding of the North American carbon budget (integration and/or cal/val) Some of the remote sensing products currently in use –winds & SSTs & ocean color as inputs –soil moisture/temperature from AMSR –Need carbon input into coastal systems –MODIS LST, but gap is cloudiness –Using quickscat and passive microwave for phenology and freeze/thaw What do we mean by validation? Is there a common consensus? Current successful collaborations –SPECnet –AmeriFlux / MODIS collaborations MODIS ASCII subsets Albedo, LAI / fPAR, GPP validation Ripe for collaboration –Carbon flux from watershed to the coastal zone –Improving radiometric sensors at AmeriFlux sites Need top-down/bottom-up intercomparison then an integration of capabilities

4. Is access to aircraft and systematic remote sensing data adequate to address NACP needs? No –Cost AVIRIS is too expensive LANDSAT, although NA may be free soon Extensive LIDAR data can be expensive –LIDAR (forest inventory and extent) –What else can we use? Sub-kilometer data for LST, LAI, GPP, NPP, ocean bands Gridded High Resolution SST for full US coastal zone pCO2 and additional (e.g. carbonic acid) for surface water Additional biophysical data from field sites (e.g., AmeriFlux) in a standardized fashion –What is improving but not yet ready? Fire and burned area are becoming available Flux data (and ancillary data/biophysical data) are becoming more available; –data cube is under development Flask sample data are difficult to obtain in automated fashion (check CarbonTracker?) –Satellite continuity is important