NIST, NASA Launch Joint Effort to Develop New Climate Satellites
03 March 2010
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) have launched a joint effort to gather enhanced climate data from spaceborne climate observation instruments planned for a group of satellites now under development.
| One of the three CLARREO satellites, which will make observations of the energy the Earth absorbs from the sun and radiates back into space. Credit: NASA. Click to enlarge. |
The Climate Absolute Radiance and Refractivity Observatory (CLARREO) Mission includes a fleet of satellites tentatively scheduled for launch later this decade that will gather data for long-term climate projections. The CLARREO mission will provide an accurate climate record of the complete spectrum of energy that Earth reflects and radiates back into space, measurements that should provide a clearer understanding of the climate system.
NIST’s role will focus on the calibration of the instruments aboard CLARREO satellites, as well as on the accuracy that the sensors must meet. The measurements need to be characterized to far greater accuracy—from two to 10 times better, depending on the wavelength of light in question—and detector standards need to be developed for the far infrared region of the spectrum. NIST will also help NASA improve its own capabilities in instrument calibration. The collaboration was finalized in a Space Act Agreement on 4 Feb 2010.
CLARREO, led by NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Va., is now among NASA’s top-priority missions because of its high ranking by the National Research Council, which designated CLARREO one of its four “Tier One” missions when it evaluated proposals in 2007. NASA is allocating $270,000 for NIST’s contributions to the project this year.
The mission is part of a longer-term effort to establish global long-term climate records that are of high accuracy and traceable to the international system of units (SI). The CLARREO satellites and other instruments will be calibrated against international standards based on SI, so that observations from different times and locations can be compared usefully, creating a more reliable record of long-term climate trends.
Will the data collected over a decade or more be sufficient to convince the naysayers that the climate is changing too fast?
Can anybody accurately project future changes with 10+ years of real time data? Naysayers will certainly claim that 1+ million years of data is required.
Posted by: HarveyD | 03 March 2010 at 03:29 PM
.
With 1+ million years of data showing that Earth's natural climate cycles swing wildly (glaciers used to be over Ohio, "science" says - they disappeared pre SUV) Globalwarmists will still demand obedience to the faith and repentance.
How many "research" grants are issued to those who are not Globalwarmists?!? Of course the answer is close to zero. Government "research" yields government demanded results. It's all about the HUGE retirement plans, HUGE "research" incomes, and government control of people's lives. Follow the $$$$$$$. Repent and follow Algore!
.
Posted by: The Goracle | 03 March 2010 at 06:03 PM
These proposed new satellites are a refinement of the ERBE satellite.
Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi of NASA Langley, worked with the output of the Earth Radiation budget Experiment, ERBE, satellite. That was the first true 'climate satellite'. It was also the first genuine experiment that produced climate data. Rather than trying to use old weather reports, well beyond their degree of accuracy, for a a purpose for which they were never intended, as pseudo-climate records.
Dr. Miskolczi proposed an overall theory for the empirical effects, that he was seeing in ERBE data. His analysis led to his empirical findings of a situation dubbed 'Saturated Green House Gas Effect' for planets with a liquid Ocean of GHG liquids, like the Earth.
He showed that the Greenhouse in such situations is very leaky, unlike old theory, and that Energy considerations force substitutions of one GHG for another to maintain an energy equilibrium near the 'saturated' effect. Thus nature provides a negative feedback to drive temperature and GHGs back toward an equilibrium situation, minimizing deviations as certain GHGs temporarily expand, in the atmosphere.
His 21st century scientific work, using ERBE data, helped to refute the AGW thesis, rendering it harmless and benign. IOW, it disproves most of the CAGW hypothesis.
For this he was demeaned, prevented from further publication of scientific papers, and forced to resign from NASA Langley. The methods used against him are the same type of 'dirty tricks' as revealed in the Climategate emails, and used by similar or the same cast of characters, when his research findings ran counter to their AGW religious dogma.
Significantly, his thesis was augmented by the seminal Climate paper of 2009, the Lindzen-Choi ERBE analysis that confirmed the GHG Earth is very 'leaky', not behaving at all, like the CAGW hypotheses had theorized. Earth is radiating back to space any increase in the solar 'non-constant' inputs and energy and hence warming' is NOT building up in the atmosphere.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 04 March 2010 at 07:50 AM