NASA Logo, National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

CMS Working Group Descriptions


Atmospheric Validation Working Group

The focus of the Atmospheric Validation Working Group is on the integration of atmospheric measurements and modeling to study carbon emissions using so-called "top-down" approaches. Current projects by the working group members range in scale from individual point sources to state or multi-state regions to hemispheric or global domains. The working group aims to facilitate communication between colleagues, to raise awareness of current work, to advance the state of the art of top-down methodologies, to identify community needs for observations, data synthesis and modeling, and to develop future research directions.

View Telecon Schedule & Recordings

Data/Data Management Working Group

The data working group will adopt protocols and workflows to make CMS data available to scientists and stakeholders over project and archival time frames.  The mode of operation will be to communicate and coordinate between both the domain (e.g., atmosphere, land, ocean) and derived (e.g., algorithm, uncertainty) working groups in CMS for appropriate data storage and accessibility to relevant carbon cycle research communities.  The data working group cross cuts all CMS working groups and will serve as a model of coordination and communication.  Initially, the data working group will respond to several needs and responsibilities:

  • Recruitment of CMS science team members with an appropriate cross-cut of scientific expertise and participation on other working groups
  • Identification of data and metadata formats needed for both stakeholders and scientists
  • Development of a short-term strategy for exposure of data products on the CMS website
  • Engage the CMS Science Team regarding their role in archival of final products at one (or more) NASA DAACs (the choice of archive(s) will be made by NASA HQ in consultation with ESDIS)

External Communications Working Group

The external communications working group continues from the CMS Phase 1 and 2a, where the focus of the working group was to create materials for the CMS website and to communicate the products, science, and impact that CMS has had during its existence. Going forward, the working group will focus on finding ways to broaden and strengthen the knowledge of CMS research and engagement with the broader Earth science community through communication products such as articles, websites and meetings. Through this engagement, we seek to ensure that the community understands the nature, quality, and utility of NASA CMS science information and data products, and that CMS scientists are responsive to these needs through ongoing research.

2013 External Communications Report: .pptx

Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) Working Group

Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) is a very broad concept guiding the application of monitoring technology to the needs of countries or entities for reporting and verifying greenhouse gas emissions. Credibility, cost-effectiveness, and compatibility are important features of global MRV efforts. Thus, the scope of this working group is broad and could involve linking with most if not all of the projects and other working groups that comprise NASA's CMS. Initially, the MRV WG will develop a broad-brush review of the CMS projects and their potential contribution to resolving some of the difficult issues that are encountered when designing MRV systems in various contexts around the world. After this review and subsequent interactions with others in the CMS community, the MRV WG can focus on one or a few of the most useful MRV-related tasks to support CMS.

Some wide-ranging MRV considerations that need additional focus in CMS have been identified.

  1. There is a need for more attention to the "R" of MRV. What are the reporting requirements globally or for different countries or regions? What are the targets for reducing GHGs? How do the reporting requirements affect the selection of appropriate monitoring technologies?
  2. There is a need for more attention to the "V" of MRV. This is a very complex topic politically at the national scale, and may not be very practical at the project scale, yet can be essential for assessing progress and assuring compliance. Which of the CMS technologies are appropriate for verification in different contexts?
  3. How will analysis and integration of data fit into CMS? To date, most funded projects are focused on specific monitoring technologies, yet MRV requires integration of different monitoring data often by using models or model-data integration. How can CMS evolve to enhance synthesis of data for MRV applications?
  4. What are options for applying different combinations of technologies for different countries or at different scales (e.g., projects or nations)? Different combinations are possible to deploy and are not likely to be the same in different contexts, yet there is a need for consistency in reporting. This could be a good link with the SilvaCarbon program, which is working with different tropical countries to support their MRV needs. Are there one or a few case studies to illustrate the use of CMS monitoring technology to different MRV applications?
  5. How can the CMS technologies help attribute observed GHG changes to anthropogenic vs. natural causes? This is one of the most important but difficult issues to address in operational MRV systems. The IPCC has not yet been able to provide guidance to countries about how to do this, other than to divide the world's land using a proxy of "managed" and "unmanaged" land.

Methane Working Group

The CMS Methane WG focuses on coordination and information-sharing between the CMS investigations targeting the processes that control atmospheric methane. WG topics include methane biogeochemistry, emission inventories, atmospheric observations, and inverse analyses to constrain sources.

Uncertainties/Algorithm Assessment/Inter-comparisons

coming soon...


Algorithm Assessment/Intercomparison Working Group

The primary motivations of the Algorithm Assessment/Intercomparison Working Group are to document activities and strategies for intercomparison activities and identify key gaps where further intercomparison efforts are warranted. The approach to date has consisted of soliciting CMS team input to survey questions and coordinating with Working Group members to document "best-practices" for intercomparison activities. The current activities of the Working Group are to complete the documentation of Phase II projects and continue domain-level discussions on effective strategies for intercomparison activities.

2013 Algorithm Assessment/Intercomparison Report: .pptx

Biomass-Flux Working Group

The Biomass-Flux working group seeks to integrate information about both land-atmosphere carbon fluxes and changes in biomass to improve estimation of both. The seven projects participating in this working group represent investigations at local, regional, and global scale. We have developed algorithms to predict and monitor fluxes and changes in biomass in response to fire, agriculture, land use change, and other disturbances. If funding can be sustained in the future, we are prepared to (1) define domains in space and time for which various projects overlap; (2) to cross-compare flux and biomass products as appropriate; and (3) to compare integrated fluxes with changes in biomass over time.

2013 Biomass-Flux Report: .pptx

Capability Risk Working Group

The charge for the Capability Risk Working group is to create a report of current and planned remote sensing capabilities used across the CMS, and their expected lifespans. Then, we are to identify missing parts or expected gaps to help with future planning. The approach is to gather existing tables of relevant missions, instruments, and lifespans, and update related tables through user input from CMS.

2013 Capability Risk Report: .pptx

Responsiveness Working Group (2012-2014)

2013 Responsiveness Report: .pdf

Uncertainty Working Group

The uncertainty working group continues from the prior cycle of CMS. For the most recent science team meeting in November 2013, we established a conceptual framework to describe the different approaches taken to quantifying uncertainty among CMS projects, and evaluated how Phase 2 2012 CMS projects fit into that framework. For the next science team meeting, we will work to bring the Phase 2 2013 projects into the framework. This will involve re-publicizing the survey framework, encouraging PIs to fill it out, and grouping projects. This work focuses on documentation of existing approaches to characterizing uncertainty within projects.

The next critical step is to move beyond documentation toward integration. Ideally, these concepts of uncertainty could allow the larger CMS effort a means to reconcile uncertainty estimates across projects. This work involves significant effort to compare and evaluate patterns of agreement and disagreement in uncertainties and estimates across projects.

It is likely beyond what any individual project can support as a sideline effort. However, to lay the groundwork for such comparisons, we propose to:

  1. Identify the projects that are already comparing products from different projects, and determine if practices for evaluation of different uncertainty estimates are already emerging.
  2. Identify possible linkages between projects where such comparisons might be possible, and begin sketching out the methodological approaches to compare and learn from the integration.

Our goal for the next science team meeting would be to present such comparison approaches to the larger team to lay the groundwork for potential focused comparison efforts.

2013 Uncertainty Report: .pptx

System Framework Working Group

no description provided