Search for: All records

Abstract Snow and ice topography impact and are impacted by fluxes of mass, energy, and momentum in Arctic sea ice. We measured the topography on approximately a 0.5 km²drifting parcel of Arctic sea ice on 42 separate days from 18 October 2019 to 9 May 2020 via Terrestrial Laser Scanning (TLS). These data are aligned into an ice-fixed, lagrangian reference frame such that topographic changes (e.g., snow accumulation) can be observed for time periods of up to six months. Usingin-situmeasurements, we have validated the vertical accuracy of the alignment to ± 0.011 m. This data collection and processing workflow is the culmination of several prior measurement campaigns and may be generally applied for repeat TLS measurements on drifting sea ice. We present a description of the data, a software package written to process and align these data, and the philosophy of the data processing. These data can be used to investigate snow accumulation and redistribution, ice dynamics, surface roughness, and they can provide valuable context for co-located measurements. 

Light transmission through a sea ice cover has strong implications for the heat content of the upper ocean, the magnitude of bottom and lateral ice melt, and primary productivity in the ocean. Light transmittance in the vicinity of the Multidisciplinary Drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) Central Observatory was estimated by driving a two-stream radiative transfer model with physical property observations. Data include point and transect observations of snow depth, surface scattering layer thickness, ice thickness, and pond depth. The temporal evolution of light transmittance at specific sites and the spatial variability along transect lines were computed. Ponds transmitted 4–6 times as much solar energy per unit area as bare ice. On July 25, ponds covered about 18% of the area and contributed roughly 50% of the sunlight transmitted through the ice cover. Approximating the transmittance along a transect line using average values for the physical properties will always result in lower light transmittance than finding the average light transmittance using the full distribution of points. Transmitted solar energy calculated using the standard five ice thickness categories and three surface types used in the Los Alamos sea ice model CICE, the sea ice component of many weather and climate models, was only about 1 W m−2 less than using all the points along the transect. This minor difference suggests that the important processes and resulting feedbacks relating to solar transmittance can be represented in models that use five or more categories of ice thickness distributions. 

Precise measurements of Arctic sea ice mass balance are necessary to understand the rapidly changing sea ice cover and its representation in climate models. During the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition, we made repeat point measurements of snow and ice thickness on primarily level first- and second-year ice (FYI, SYI) using ablation stakes and ice thickness gauges. This technique enabled us to distinguish surface and bottom (basal) melt and characterize the importance of oceanic versus atmospheric forcing. We also evaluated the time series of ice growth and melt in the context of other MOSAiC observations and historical mass balance observations from the Surface Heat Budget of the Arctic (SHEBA) campaign and the North Pole Environmental Observatory (NPEO). Despite similar freezing degree days, average ice growth at MOSAiC was greater on FYI (1.67 m) and SYI (1.23 m) than at SHEBA (1.45 m, 0.53 m), due in part to initially thinner ice and snow conditions on MOSAiC. Our estimates of effective snow thermal conductivity, which agree with SHEBA results and other MOSAiC observations, are unlikely to explain the difference. On MOSAiC, FYI grew more and faster than SYI, demonstrating a feedback loop that acts to increase ice production after multi-year ice loss. Surface melt on MOSAiC (mean of 0.50 m) was greater than at NPEO (0.18 m), with considerable spatial variability that correlated with surface albedo variability. Basal melt was relatively small (mean of 0.12 m), and higher than NPEO observations (0.07 m). Finally, we present observations showing that false bottoms reduced basal melt rates in some FYI cases, in agreement with other observations at MOSAiC. These detailed mass balance observations will allow further investigation into connections between the carefully observed surface energy budget, ocean heat fluxes, sea ice, and ecosystem at MOSAiC and during other campaigns. 

Abstract Comparing helicopter‐borne surface temperature maps in winter and optical orthomosaics in summer from the year‐long Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate expedition, we find a strong geometric correlation between warm anomalies in winter and melt pond location the following summer. Warm anomalies are associated with thinner snow and ice, that is, surface depression and refrozen leads, that allow for water accumulation during melt. Warm surface temperature anomalies in January were 0.3–2.5 K warmer on sea ice that later formed melt ponds. A one‐dimensional steady‐state thermodynamic model shows that the observed surface temperature differences are in line with the observed ice thickness and snow depth. We demonstrate the potential of seasonal prediction of summer melt pond location and coverage from winter surface temperature observations. A threshold‐based classification achieves a correct classification for 41% of the melt ponds. 

Repeated transects have become the backbone of spatially distributed ice and snow thickness measurements crucial for understanding of ice mass balance. Here we detail the transects at the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) 2019–2020, which represent the first such measurements collected across an entire season. Compared with similar historical transects, the snow at MOSAiC was thin (mean depths of approximately 0.1–0.3 m), while the sea ice was relatively thick first-year ice (FYI) and second-year ice (SYI). SYI was of two distinct types: relatively thin level ice formed from surfaces with extensive melt pond cover, and relatively thick deformed ice. On level SYI, spatial signatures of refrozen melt ponds remained detectable in January. At the beginning of winter the thinnest ice also had the thinnest snow, with winter growth rates of thin ice (0.33 m month−1 for FYI, 0.24 m month−1 for previously ponded SYI) exceeding that of thick ice (0.2 m month−1). By January, FYI already had a greater modal ice thickness (1.1 m) than previously ponded SYI (0.9 m). By February, modal thickness of all SYI and FYI became indistinguishable at about 1.4 m. The largest modal thicknesses were measured in May at 1.7 m. Transects included deformed ice, where largest volumes of snow accumulated by April. The remaining snow on level ice exhibited typical spatial heterogeneity in the form of snow dunes. Spatial correlation length scales for snow and sea ice ranged from 20 to 40 m or 60 to 90 m, depending on the sampling direction, which suggests that the known anisotropy of snow dunes also manifests in spatial patterns in sea ice thickness. The diverse snow and ice thickness data obtained from the MOSAiC transects represent an invaluable resource for model and remote sensing product development. 

Abstract Snow depth on sea ice is an Essential Climate Variable and a major source of uncertainty in satellite altimetry‐derived sea ice thickness. During winter of the MOSAiC Expedition, the “KuKa” dual‐frequency, fully polarized Ku‐ and Ka‐band radar was deployed in “stare” nadir‐looking mode to investigate the possibility of combining these two frequencies to retrieve snow depth. Three approaches were investigated: dual‐frequency, dual‐polarization and waveform shape, and compared to independent snow depth measurements. Novel dual‐polarization approaches yieldedr²values up to 0.77. Mean snow depths agreed within 1 cm, even for data sub‐banded to CryoSat‐2 SIRAL and SARAL AltiKa bandwidths. Snow depths from co‐polarized dual‐frequency approaches were at least a factor of four too small and had ar²0.15 or lower.r²for waveform shape techniques reached 0.72 but depths were underestimated. Snow depth retrievals using polarimetric information or waveform shape may therefore be possible from airborne/satellite radar altimeters. 

Abstract The sub-kilometre scale distribution of snow depth on Arctic sea ice impacts atmosphere-ice fluxes of energy and mass, and is of importance for satellite estimates of sea-ice thickness from both radar and lidar altimeters. While information about the mean of this distribution is increasingly available from modelling and remote sensing, the full distribution cannot yet be resolved. We analyse 33 539 snow depth measurements from 499 transects taken at Soviet drifting stations between 1955 and 1991 and derive a simple statistical distribution for snow depth over multi-year ice as a function of only the mean snow depth. We then evaluate this snow depth distribution against snow depth transects that span first-year ice to multiyear ice from the MOSAiC, SHEBA and AMSR-Ice field campaigns. Because the distribution can be generated using only the mean snow depth, it can be used in the downscaling of several existing snow depth products for use in flux modelling and altimetry studies. 

Abstract Snow plays an essential role in the Arctic as the interface between the sea ice and the atmosphere. Optical properties, thermal conductivity and mass distribution are critical to understanding the complex Arctic sea ice system’s energy balance and mass distribution. By conducting measurements from October 2019 to September 2020 on the Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition, we have produced a dataset capturing the year-long evolution of the physical properties of the snow and surface scattering layer, a highly porous surface layer on Arctic sea ice that evolves due to preferential melt at the ice grain boundaries. The dataset includes measurements of snow during MOSAiC. Measurements included profiles of depth, density, temperature, snow water equivalent, penetration resistance, stable water isotope, salinity and microcomputer tomography samples. Most snowpit sites were visited and measured weekly to capture the temporal evolution of the physical properties of snow. The compiled dataset includes 576 snowpits and describes snow conditions during the MOSAiC expedition. 

Melt ponds on sea ice play an important role in the Arctic climate system. Their presence alters the partitioning of solar radiation: decreasing reflection, increasing absorption and transmission to the ice and ocean, and enhancing melt. The spatiotemporal properties of melt ponds thus modify ice albedo feedbacks and the mass balance of Arctic sea ice. The Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition presented a valuable opportunity to investigate the seasonal evolution of melt ponds through a rich array of atmosphere-ice-ocean measurements across spatial and temporal scales. In this study, we characterize the seasonal behavior and variability in the snow, surface scattering layer, and melt ponds from spring melt to autumn freeze-up using in situ surveys and auxiliary observations. We compare the results to satellite retrievals and output from two models: the Community Earth System Model (CESM2) and the Marginal Ice Zone Modeling and Assimilation System (MIZMAS). During the melt season, the maximum pond coverage and depth were 21% and 22 ± 13 cm, respectively, with distribution and depth corresponding to surface roughness and ice thickness. Compared to observations, both models overestimate melt pond coverage in summer, with maximum values of approximately 41% (MIZMAS) and 51% (CESM2). This overestimation has important implications for accurately simulating albedo feedbacks. During the observed freeze-up, weather events, including rain on snow, caused high-frequency variability in snow depth, while pond coverage and depth remained relatively constant until continuous freezing ensued. Both models accurately simulate the abrupt cessation of melt ponds during freeze-up, but the dates of freeze-up differ. MIZMAS accurately simulates the observed date of freeze-up, while CESM2 simulates freeze-up one-to-two weeks earlier. This work demonstrates areas that warrant future observation-model synthesis for improving the representation of sea-ice processes and properties, which can aid accurate simulations of albedo feedbacks in a warming climate.