Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice

The CryoSat-2 radar altimeter and ICESat-2 laser altimeter can provide complimentary measurements of the freeboard and thickness of Arctic sea ice. However, both sensors face significant challenges for accurately measuring the ice freeboard when the sea ice is melting in summer months. Here, we used...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dawson, Geoffrey, Landy, Jack
Format: Text
Language:English
Published: 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-31
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-31/
id ftcopernicus:oai:publications.copernicus.org:egusphere108827
record_format openpolar
spelling ftcopernicus:oai:publications.copernicus.org:egusphere108827 2023-05-15T15:00:32+02:00 Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice Dawson, Geoffrey Landy, Jack 2023-01-19 application/pdf https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-31 https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-31/ eng eng doi:10.5194/egusphere-2023-31 https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-31/ eISSN: Text 2023 ftcopernicus https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-31 2023-01-23T17:22:41Z The CryoSat-2 radar altimeter and ICESat-2 laser altimeter can provide complimentary measurements of the freeboard and thickness of Arctic sea ice. However, both sensors face significant challenges for accurately measuring the ice freeboard when the sea ice is melting in summer months. Here, we used crossover points between CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 to compare elevation retrievals over summer sea ice between 2018–2021. We focused on the electromagnetic (EM) bias documented in CryoSat-2 measurements, associated with surface melt ponds over summer sea ice which cause the radar altimeter to underestimate elevation. The laser altimeter of ICESat-2 is not susceptible to this bias, but has other biases associated with melt ponds. So, we compared the elevation difference and reflectance statistics between the two satellites. We found that CryoSat-2 underestimated elevation compared to ICESat-2 by a median difference of 2.4 cm and by a median absolute deviation of 5.3 cm, while the differences between individual ICESat-2 beams and CryoSat-2 ranged between 1–3.5 cm. Spatial and temporal patterns of the bias were compared to surface roughness information derived from the ICESat-2 elevation data, the ICESat-2 photon rate (surface reflectivity), the CryoSat-2 backscatter and melt pond fraction derived from Seintnel-3 OLCI data. We found good agreement between theoretical predictions of the CryoSat-2 EM melt pond bias and our new observations; however, at typical roughness <0.1 m the experimentally measured bias was larger (5–10 cm) compared to biases resulting from the theoretical simulations (0–5 cm). This intercomparison will be valuable for interpreting and improving the summer sea ice freeboard retrievals from both altimeters. Text Arctic Sea ice Copernicus Publications: E-Journals Arctic
institution Open Polar
collection Copernicus Publications: E-Journals
op_collection_id ftcopernicus
language English
description The CryoSat-2 radar altimeter and ICESat-2 laser altimeter can provide complimentary measurements of the freeboard and thickness of Arctic sea ice. However, both sensors face significant challenges for accurately measuring the ice freeboard when the sea ice is melting in summer months. Here, we used crossover points between CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 to compare elevation retrievals over summer sea ice between 2018–2021. We focused on the electromagnetic (EM) bias documented in CryoSat-2 measurements, associated with surface melt ponds over summer sea ice which cause the radar altimeter to underestimate elevation. The laser altimeter of ICESat-2 is not susceptible to this bias, but has other biases associated with melt ponds. So, we compared the elevation difference and reflectance statistics between the two satellites. We found that CryoSat-2 underestimated elevation compared to ICESat-2 by a median difference of 2.4 cm and by a median absolute deviation of 5.3 cm, while the differences between individual ICESat-2 beams and CryoSat-2 ranged between 1–3.5 cm. Spatial and temporal patterns of the bias were compared to surface roughness information derived from the ICESat-2 elevation data, the ICESat-2 photon rate (surface reflectivity), the CryoSat-2 backscatter and melt pond fraction derived from Seintnel-3 OLCI data. We found good agreement between theoretical predictions of the CryoSat-2 EM melt pond bias and our new observations; however, at typical roughness <0.1 m the experimentally measured bias was larger (5–10 cm) compared to biases resulting from the theoretical simulations (0–5 cm). This intercomparison will be valuable for interpreting and improving the summer sea ice freeboard retrievals from both altimeters.
format Text
author Dawson, Geoffrey
Landy, Jack
spellingShingle Dawson, Geoffrey
Landy, Jack
Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice
author_facet Dawson, Geoffrey
Landy, Jack
author_sort Dawson, Geoffrey
title Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice
title_short Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice
title_full Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice
title_fullStr Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice
title_full_unstemmed Comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 over Arctic summer sea ice
title_sort comparing elevation and backscatter retrievals from cryosat-2 and icesat-2 over arctic summer sea ice
publishDate 2023
url https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-31
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-31/
geographic Arctic
geographic_facet Arctic
genre Arctic
Sea ice
genre_facet Arctic
Sea ice
op_source eISSN:
op_relation doi:10.5194/egusphere-2023-31
https://egusphere.copernicus.org/preprints/2023/egusphere-2023-31/
op_doi https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-31
_version_ 1766332621361512448