Earth and Space Science (Jun 2024)

Quantifying Volumetric Scattering Bias in ICESat‐2 and Operation IceBridge Altimetry Over Greenland Firn and Aged Snow

  • Zachary Fair,
  • Mark Flanner,
  • Tom Neumann,
  • Carrie Vuyovich,
  • Benjamin Smith,
  • Adam Schneider

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1029/2022EA002479
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 11, no. 6
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

Abstract The Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite‐2 (ICESat‐2) mission has collected surface elevation measurements for over 5 years. ICESat‐2 carries an instrument that emits laser light at 532 nm, and ice and snow absorb weakly at this wavelength. Previous modeling studies found that melting snow could induce significant bias to altimetry signals, but there is no formal assessment on ICESat‐2 acquisitions during the melting season. We performed two case studies over the Greenland Ice Sheet to quantify bias in ICESat‐2 signals over snow: one to validate Airborne Topographic Mapper (ATM) data against Next Generation Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS‐NG) grain sizes, and a second to estimate ICESat‐2 bias relative to ATM. We used snow optical grain sizes derived from ATM and AVIRIS‐NG to attribute altimetry bias to snowpack properties. For the first case study, the mean and standard deviation of optical grain sizes were 340 ± 65 µm (AVIRIS‐NG) and 670 ± 420 µm (ATM). A mean altimetry bias of 4.81 ± 1.76 cm was found for ATM, with larger biases linked to increases in grain size. In the second case study, we found a mean grain size of 910 ± 381 µm and biases of 6.42 ± 1.77 cm (ICESat‐2) and 9.82 ± 0.97 cm (ATM). The grain sizes and densities needed to recreate biases with a model are uncommon in nature, so we propose that additional surface attributes must be considered to characterize ICESat‐2 bias over snow. The altimetry biases are within the accuracy requirements of the ICESat‐2 mission, but we cannot rule out more significant errors over coarse‐grained snow.

Keywords