Breakout Summary Report
ARM/ASR User and PI Meeting
13 - 17 March 2017
High-Latitude Processes Working Group
14 March 2017
2:30 PM - 3:30 PM
65
Gijs de Boer
14 March 2017
2:30 PM - 3:30 PM
65
Gijs de Boer
Breakout Description
This was the inaugural breakout of the HLPWG. The meeting started a few minutes late due to spillover from the preceding Aerosol Processes WG meeting. Therefore, we skipped over introductory remarks and moved directly into the two presentations that were scheduled. These presentations, given by Dan Lubin and Matt Shupe, were designed to provide a "big picture" synthesis perspective for ARM/ASR activities in both hemispheres. Dan presented on the AWARE project and potential opportunities to work with this data set, and Matt presented results linking cloud observations from Barrow and Oliktok Point to those at other sites around the Arctic. After this, we had approximately 10 minutes of discussion to review the role of the working group and any important topics raised by WG members.Main Discussion
The limited discussion included several highlights:- One member suggested that there was a need to set WG priorities
- Another point was raised that one potential measurement priority could be routine measurements of ice particle properties in the Arctic using the tethered balloon system or UAS.
- Another comment was raised that we should take better advantage of the lidar systems at high latitudes, although there was not much follow up to this.
- There was discussion about the need to investigate the context of aerosol measurements, with a focus on comparison between Barrow and Oliktok Point.
- Another WG member raised the issue of high-latitude precipitation measurements and the need to improve these.
- There was some more substantial discussion about the need to engage the GCM and larger modeling communities. This included comments about the need to form direct relationships between people in the ASR/ARM WG and the modeling communities, as well as the desire for products that could be "handed off" between these two groups.
- Another comment supported the need for further distinguishing regional variability in the Arctic and also to think about larger-scale linkages to lower latitudes.
- Finally, a comment noted that it would be good to think about how these various comments and needs could be shaped into larger working group discussions, including potentially providing justification for smaller topical meetings.
Key Findings
The audience comprised a variety of interest areas. Roughly 2/3 considered themselves focused on the Arctic, while around 1/3 was focused on southern high latitudes (including Southern Ocean). Additionally, approximately 7/8 were interested in cloud processes, 1/4 in aerosol processes, 1/5 in surface processes, and around 1/10 in "other".Issues
There currently is no mailing list. We have the names and email addresses of those who used the sign-up sheet for the breakout.Needs
- A group mailing list- Better definition of the group's direction