Climate Adaptation Science Investigator (CASI) Working Group: Key Activities and Objectives at NASA

Goddard Space Flight Center

Molly E Brown1, Cynthia Rosenzweig2 and Mark Carroll1

1NASA Goddard Space Flight Center2NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies/Columbia University

June 8, 2012

Projected warming (ºF) by NASA center, 2080s minus 1980s averaged across 16 GCMs under the A1B emissions scenario

1

Outline

2

• CASI Overview

• Downscaling climate models

• Goddard’s changing climate

• CASI Goddard Specific Research Activities

CASI Mission

Advance and apply NASA’s scientific expertise and products to develop climate adaptation strategies that support NASA’s overall mission by minimizing risks to each center’s operations, physical assets, and personnel

September 2009 fires at JPL

Winter 2009-2010 cold event at KSC 3

NASA PIs are funded by Earth Science Division through call for proposalsat Centers; Community call for research to support adaptation at Centers

CASI Center Participants

NASA Center Team Members

Ames Max Loewenstein

Dryden Thomas Mace

Goddard Molly Brown

Jet Propulsion Lab William Patzert

Kennedy Raymond Wheeler

Langley Russell De Young

Marshall Gary Jedlovec

Stennis William Graham

Wallops Tiffany Moisan

Science staff from other centers and facilities are invited to participate in the activities as well

4

PIs are funded by the Earth Science Division through a call for proposals submitted to the centers. CASI Lead: Cynthia Rosenzweig

CASI Products and Tasks• Downscale center-specific

climate hazard information

• Conduct research customized to each centers needs

• Partner with infrastructure, environmental management and master planning point-of-contacts at respective centers, in order to disseminate climate science knowledge tailored to center-specific adaptation solutions

NASA GISS produces GCM projections for each center. This projection scenario is for Stennis SC in Poplarville, MS

5

CASI Products and Tasks (2)• Provide support for adaptation

workshops, telephone and video conferences – KSC, May 17-20, 2010 – ARC, February 1-4, 2011

• Host collaborative information system

• Inventory center’s existing climate and impact data and research activities

• Develop or support target research initiatives

6Aerial view of Ames Research CenterM. Fellows, 2011

Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Change Risks

Regional Workshops

• Workshop process follows the 8-step

adaptation assessment framework developed by GISS scientists and used in New York City

• Plenary sessions – Presentations by scientists on global and

regional climate change

– Introduction to impacts and adaptation strategies

• Breakout sessions – Participants apply the adaptation steps to

Centers and their regions

– Groups based on key systems• Built, Natural Resources, and Human Capital

Climate model-derived information

Adaptation Assessment Steps developed by the New York City Panel on Climate Change (NPCC)

7NPCC report available on at http://www.nyas.org/

Downscaling

8

Downscaling Techniques and Products

9

• Statistical downscaling produces finer-scale features than Global Climate Models (GCMs) using historical relationships between large and small spatial scales

-Direct use of monthly time series of T and P for impact models-For daily projections at station level, we use modified delta method and random sampling

-Reference: Bias-Correction Spatial-Disaggregation http://gdo-dcp.ucllnl.org/downscaled_cmip3_projections/ (BCSD; Maurer, et al. 2007, based on Wood et al. 2002, 2004, and Maurer 2007)

• Dynamical downscaling is achieved by running a climate model driven by GCM outputs at high resolution over a small spatial domain

-Changes in frequency and duration of key extremes-Changes in (intra-annual) variability

-Reference: Regional Climate Model (RCM) simulations from the North American Regional Climate Change Assessment Program archive (NARCCAP; Mearns et al. 2009, EOS)

Climate Hazard InformationProcess used to develop climate risk factors

•Projection Range, based on 16 GCMs and 3 SRES scenarios•Time slice experiments based on single GCM gridbox, delta method approach•Key thresholds

-Number of days below 32 ˚F(launch criteria)-Number of days above 90 ˚F(energy and health applications)-Number of intense precipitation events (e.g., .5 in./day; water and drainage infrastructure)

•Qualitative projections

10

Flooding from Hurricane Katrina, 2005

RCM Annual Precipitation (in/day) 1990-1999

11RCMs NCEP Reanalysis-driven, December 1979-November 2000

Dynamical downscaling

NARR – Annual P (inches/day) 1990 - 1999

NCEPcrcm – Annual P (inches/day) 1990 - 1999

NCEPmm5i– Annual P (inches/day) 1990 - 1999

NCEPrcm3– Annual P (inches/day) 1990 - 1999

NCEPwrfg – Annual P (inches/day) 1990 - 1999

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2

RCMs driven by ‘perfect’ boundary conditions differ substantially from observations, and from each other.

Observations

Driver dataset: NCEP Reanalysis

RCMS used:CRCMMM5iRCM3WRFg

From NARCCAP50 km resolution

BCSD

CGCM3-crcm – Annual dt (˚F)CGCM3-rcm3 – Annual dt (˚F)GFDL-rcm3 – Annual dt (˚F)

HADCM3-hrm3 – Annual dt (˚F) CCSM-wrfg– Annual dt (˚F)

3.5 4 4.5 5 5 3.5 4 4.5 5 3.5 4 4.5 5

3.5 4 4.5 5 5 3.5 4 4.5 5 3.5 4 4.5 5

RCM Projections Mean Annual Changes

Dynamical downscaling

SRES A2 2050s minus 1980s annual temperature (˚F)

Both the RCMs and GCMs contribute to the large range of projected temperature increases

12

Driving GCMs:HADCM3CCSMGFDL GCGCM3

RCMS used:HRM3WRFgRCM3CRCM

RCM Projections% change # days with >.5 in precipitation

SRES A2-driven 2050s divided by 1980s GCM hindcast-driven13

Dynamical downscaling

%Change CCSMcrcm (>0.5”) %Change CCSMmm5i- (>0.5”) %Change CCSMwrfg (>0.5”)

%Change GFDLrcm3 (>0.5”) %Change CGCM3rcm3 (>0.5”) %Change CGCMcrcm (>0.5”)

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30

Most GCM-RCM pairings show large increases in the frequency of stakeholder-relevant intense precipitation events

Driving GCMs:CCSMGFDL CGCM3

RCMS used:MM5iWRFgRCM3CRCM

Future and baseline RCMs driven by GCMs

From NARCCAP50 km resolution

NASA Goddard Projections

14

General GSFC Climate

15

Scientific data collected over the past century reveal that the climate at Goddard Space Flight Center and its surrounding region is changing. Climate models project that these changes are likely to continue in the future, threatening the natural and built systems at the center.  The climate at Goddard Space Flight Center and its surrounding region is best described as humid subtropical.

• Average temperatures in the area range from 32.6 °F in January to 76.9 °F in July. • Annual precipitation is 43.7 inches and precipitation is relatively evenly distributed throughout the year.

Local climate hazards that impact the center include heavy downpours and coastal storms.

Mid-Atlantic Region

16

Total Change (%)

Annual average change (%)

Population(millions)

19% 0.7%

Income (billion 95$)

116% 4.1%

Per capitaIncome (95$)

82% 2.9%

Jobs (millions)

55% 2.0%

Farm jobs(thousands)

-42% -1.5%Piedmont Coastal

Plain 1979 - 1999

Maryland’s Sea Level Rise Vulnerability

Wallops is taking this seriously!

Maryland Climate Action Plan, 2008

Mean precipitation and temperature

18

Since 1895, the region’s climate has become slightly warmer (+0.5°C) and significantly wetter (+10%), but the interannual variability is much larger than the trend in both statistics. Polsky et al 2000 Climate Research

Mean climate change projections

19

Baseline climate and mean annual climate change projections for Goddard Space Flight Center

Temperature and precipitation projections reflect a 30-year average centered on the specified decade. The baseline for temperature and precipitation is 1971-2000. Temperature and precipitation data are for Beltsville, MD. Temperatures are rounded to the nearest half degree and precipitation projections to the nearest 5%. Shown are the central range (middle 67% of values from model-based probabilities) across the GCMs and GHG emissions scenarios. Data are from the NOAA National Climatic Data Center.

Extreme temperature projections

20

The baseline data for temperature are for the most complete set of years centered around the 1980s at the weather station. The central range (middle 67% of values from model-based probabilities) across the GCMs and GHG emissions scenarios is shown.

CASI Center-Specific Activities

‘Given the potential impacts of climate and climate change on Goddard Space Flight Center, it is important to incorporate climate risks into planning. This process includes considering both adaptation and mitigation strategies.’

21

Regulatory Drivers• Executive Order 13423, Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and

Transportation Management, requires federal agencies to lead by example in advancing the nation’s energy security and environmental performance.

• Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance, establishes an integrated strategy towards sustainability in the Federal Government, and requires new plans and actions by each facility.

• Executive Order 13508, Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, creates an action plan to restore clean water, recover habitat, sustain fish and wildlife, and conserve land and increase public access in the Chesapeake Bay.

• Section 438 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 establishes strict stormwater runoff requirements for federal facilities to “develop and redevelop applicable facilities in a manner that maintains or restores stormwater runoff to the maximum extent technically feasible.”

• Chesapeake Bay Urban Tree Canopy Goals, as part of the Chesapeake Bay Executive Council’s Expanded Riparian Forest Buffer Goals of 2003.

22Short-term goals must be connected to long-term plans!

Goddard Space Flight Center Engagement

• Working with Environmental Management Division, Code 250, and the Facilities Management Division, Code 220, we are planning a two-day workshop in September 2012 at Goddard. Objectives are to:– Improve storm water management under increasing

precipitation extremes and tight regulations due to clean up of Chesapeake Bay

– Planning for increased energy costs due to rising temperatures and increased energy demand in the region

• The Outcome of the workshops will be to:– Develop a storm water management plan that is integrated into

facilities planning, and respond to short-term regulatory drivers

– Re-structure the utility master plan to include energy so that it can incorporate climate data and projections

23

Storm Water Management

• Goddard has old stormwater systems, which include catchment ponds, that was originally built in the 1950s

• It must reduce its impervious surfaces by 10% over the next five years

• Installation of rain gardens and removing roads/parking lots is the way forward

24

Energy plan and Climate Change

• The current energy plan at Goddard focuses on reducing use while boosting efficiency

• We will work with the Energy Manager at Goddard to incorporate the likely impacts of temperatures into the plan

• Technology focused mitigation strategies, such as moving large computer CPU arrays into self-contained containers to reduce cooling expenses for larger spaces will be explored

25

Regional Federal Partners

• Baltimore Washington Partners for Forest Stewardship (BWPFS) are a key partner for climate research

• 12 Federal, State and Local government agencies work together to improve forest management, incorporating an area of contiguous managed landscape of nearly 47 square miles.

• See http://bwforestpartners.org

• The BWPFS partners are seeking to:– expand tree canopy cover, – conserve and improve wildlife

habitat, – reduce nutrient and sediment

pollution to the Chesapeake Bay,

– promote coordinated land management and collaborative scientific research,

– pursue green building technologies and climate change action strategies, and

– offer environmental education opportunities to the public.Wavyleaf basketgrass

Photo courtesy of Kerrie Kyde, MD DNR

Invasive Species

• Non-native invasive species of plants and animals cause environmental and economic damage to communities throughout the United States.

• Estimated costs for controlling these invasives ranges between $100 and $200 billion per year

• Ecologists and resource managers spend time and other resources in the identification and control of invasives in their management areas that could otherwise be utilized for enhancement and maintenance projects.

• Using MaxENT model, we can use satellite remote sensing to find areas where invasives are likely to be found and respond

27Urban Forest Ecosystems in Maryland

Wavyleaf Basketgrass

Wavyleaf Basketgrass is a stoloniferous grass that covers the forest floor, crowds out native herbaceous plants, and negatively alters the habitats of plants and animals in that ecosystem.

MERRA PRISM and WorldClim

Probability maps from MaxENTLow vs high resolution inputs

Using soils, slope, aspect, leaf area index, precipitation, and temperature as inputs into MaxENT model fit

National Academy of SciencesWorkshop on Urban Forests

• NAS’s Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate is planning a workshop on the current state of the science used to quantify the environmental benefits (or ecosystem services) of urban forests

• Urban Forestry Steering Committee has been selected, BWPFS chair Gary Allen, Center for Chesapeake Communities, will be the committee chair

• Workshop will be held within a year• A formal report from the workshop will be published

by NAS

30Urban Forest Ecosystems in Maryland

Workshop Conceptual Diagram

• Climate Adaptation Science Investigator (CASI) Working Group was established to better cope with climate change on each NASA Center

• Program of climate modeling and downscaling was carried out for each center, to ensure all NASA facilities had appropriate information on climate change

32

Summary