Search Results (3)

Users of remotely sensed Earth optical imagery are increasingly demanding a surface reflectance or surface temperature product instead of the top-of-atmosphere products that have been produced historically. Validating the accuracy of surface products remains a difficult task since it involves assessment across a range of atmospheric profiles, as well as many different land surface types. Thus, the standard approaches from the satellite calibration community do not apply, and new technologies need to be developed. The Big Multi-Agency Campaign (BigMAC) was developed to assess current technologies that might be used for the validation of surface products derived from satellite imagery, with emphasis on Landsat. Conducted in August 2021, in Brookings, SD, USA, a variety of measurement technologies were fielded and assessed for accuracy, precision, and deployability. Each technology exhibited its strengths and weaknesses. Handheld spectroradiometers are capable of surface reflectance measurements with accuracies within the 0.01–0.02 absolute reflectance units, but these are expensive to deploy. Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS)-based radiometers have the potential of making measurements with similar accuracy, but these are also difficult to deploy. Mirror-based empirical line methods showed improved accuracy potential, but their deployment also remains an issue. However, there are inexpensive radiometers designed for long-term autonomous use that exhibited good accuracy and precision, in addition to being easy to deploy. Thermal measurement technologies showed an accuracy potential in the 1–2 K range, and some easily deployable instruments are available. The results from the BigMAC indicate that there are technologies available today for conducting operational surface reflectance/temperature measurements, with strong potential for improvements in the future. Full article

The accuracy and precision of satellite sea surface temperature (SST) products in nearshore coastal waters are not well known, owing to a lack of in-situ data available for validation. It has been suggested that recreational watersports enthusiasts, who immerse themselves in nearshore coastal waters, be used as a platform to improve sampling and fill this gap. One tool that has been used worldwide by surfers is the Smartfin, which contains a temperature sensor integrated into a surfboard fin. If tools such as the Smartfin are to be considered for satellite validation work, they must be carefully evaluated against state-of-the-art techniques to quantify data quality. In this study, we developed a Simple Oceanographic floating Device (SOD), designed to float on the ocean surface, and deployed it during the 28th Atlantic Meridional Transect (AMT28) research cruise (September and October 2018). We attached a Smartfin to the underside of the SOD, which measured temperature at a depth of ∼0.1 m, in a manner consistent with how it collects data on a surfboard. Additional temperature sensors (an iButton and a TidbiT v2), shaded and positioned a depth of ∼1 m, were also attached to the SOD at some of the stations. Four laboratory comparisons of the SOD sensors (Smartfin, iButton and TidbiT v2) with an accurate temperature probe (±0.0043 K over a range of 273.15 to 323.15 K) were also conducted during the AMT28 voyage, over a temperature range of 290–309 K in a recirculating water bath. Mean differences ($\delta$), referenced to the temperature probe, were removed from the iButton ($\delta =0.292$ K) and a TidbiT v2 sensors ($\delta =0.089$ K), but not from the Smartfin, as it was found to be in excellent agreement with the temperature probe ($\delta =0.005$ K). The SOD was deployed for 20 min periods at 62 stations (predawn and noon) spanning 100 degrees latitude and a gradient in SST of 19 K. Simultaneous measurements of skin SST were collected using an Infrared Sea surface temperature Autonomous Radiometer (ISAR), a state-of-the-art instrument used for satellite validation. Additionally, we extracted simultaneous SST measurements, collected at slightly different depths, from an underway conductivity, temperature and depth (CTD) system. Over all 62 stations, the mean difference ($\delta$) and mean absolute difference ($ϵ$) between Smartfin and the underway CTD were −0.01 and 0.06 K respectively (similar results obtained from comparisons between Smartfin and iButton and Smartfin and TidbiT v2), and the $\delta$ and $ϵ$ between Smartfin and ISAR were 0.09 and 0.12 K respectively. In both comparisons, statistics varied between noon and predawn stations, with differences related to environmental variability (wind speed and sea-air temperature differences) and depth of sampling. Our results add confidence to the use of Smartfin as a citizen science tool for evaluating satellite SST data, and data collected using the SOD and ISAR were shown to be useful for quantifying near-surface temperature gradients. Full article

Nearshore coastal waters are among the most dynamic regions on the planet and difficult to sample from conventional oceanographic platforms. It has been suggested that environmental sampling of the nearshore could be improved by mobilising vast numbers of citizens who partake in marine recreational sports, like surfing. In this paper, we compared two approaches for measuring sea surface temperature (SST), an Essential Climate Variable, when surfing. One technique involved attaching a commercially-available miniature temperature logger (Onset UTBI-001 TidbiT v2) to the leash of the surfboard (tether connecting surfer and surfboard) and the second, attaching a surfboard fin (Smartfin) that contained an environmental sensor package. Between July 2017 and July 2018, 148 surfing sessions took place, 90 in the southwest UK and 58 in San Diego, California, USA. During these sessions, both Smartfin and leash sensors were deployed simultaneously. On the leash, two TidbiT v2 sensors were attached, one with (denoted LP) and one without (denoted LU) a protective boot, designed to shield the sensor from sunlight. The median temperature from each technique, during each surfing session, was extracted and compared along with independent water temperature data from a nearby pier and benthic logger, and matched with photosynthetically available radiation (PAR) data from satellite observations (used as a proxy for solar radiation during each surf). Results indicate a mean difference ( $\delta$ ) of 0.13 °C and mean absolute difference ( $ϵ$ ) of 0.14 °C between Smartfin and LU, and a $\delta$ of 0.04 °C and an $ϵ$ of 0.06 °C between Smartfin and LP. For UK measurements, we observed better agreement between methods ( $\delta =0.07$ °C and $ϵ=0.08$ °C between Smartfin and LU, and $\delta =0.00$ °C and $ϵ=0.03$ °C between Smartfin and LP) when compared with measurements in San Diego ( $\delta =0.22$ °C and $ϵ=0.23$ °C between Smartfin and LU, and $\delta =0.08$ °C and $ϵ=0.11$ °C between Smartfin and LP). Surfing SST data were found to agree well, in general, with independent temperature data from a nearby pier and benthic logger. Differences in SST between leash and Smartfin were found to correlate with PAR, both for the unprotected (LU) and protected (LP) TidbiT v2 sensors, explaining the regional differences in the comparison (PAR generally higher during US surfing sessions than UK sessions). Considering that the Smartfin is sheltered from ambient light by the surfboard, unlike the leash, results indicate the leash TidbiT v2 sensors warm with exposure to sunlight biasing the SST data positively, a result consistent with published tests on similar sensors in shallow waters. We matched all LU data collected prior to this study with satellite PAR products and corrected for solar heating. Results highlight the need to design temperature sensor packages that minimise exposure from solar heating when towed in the surface ocean. Full article