NSF 07-137, Arctic Research in the United States, Volume 20, 2006

167 Pages·2006·6.16 MB·English

This document has been archived.
VOLUME 20 2006
A R C T I C R E S E A R C H
O F T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S
I N T E R A G E N C Y A R C T I C R E S E A R C H P O L I C Y C O M M I T T E E
About The journal Arctic Research of the United refereed for scientific content or merit since the
States is for people and organizations interested journal is not intended as a means of reporting
the in learning about U.S. Government-financed scientific research. Articles are generally invited
Arctic research activities. It is published by the and are reviewed by agency staffs and others as
Journal
National Science Foundation on behalf of the appropriate.
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee As indicated in the U.S. Arctic Research
(IARPC). The Interagency Committee was autho- Plan, research is defined differently by different
rized under the Arctic Research and Policy Act agencies. It may include basic and applied
(ARPA) of 1984 (PL 98-373) and established by research, monitoring efforts, and other information-
Executive Order 12501 (January 28, 1985). Publica- gathering activities. The definition of Arctic
tion of the journal has been approved by the according to the ARPA is “all United States and
Office of Management and Budget. foreign territory north of the Arctic Circle and
Arctic Research contains all United States territory north and west of the
• Reports on current and planned U.S. Govern- boundary formed by the Porcupine, Yukon, and
ment-sponsored research in the Arctic; Kuskokwim Rivers; all contiguous seas, including
• Reports of IARPC meetings; and the Arctic Ocean and the Beaufort, Bering, and
• Summaries of other current and planned Chukchi Seas; and the Aleutian chain.” Areas out-
Arctic research, including that of the State of side of the boundary are discussed in the journal
Alaska, local governments, the private sec- when considered relevant to the broader scope of
tor, and other nations. Arctic research.
Arctic Research is aimed at national and inter- Issues of the journal will report on Arctic
national audiences of government officials, scien- topics and activities. Included will be reports of
tists, engineers, educators, private and public conferences and workshops, university-based
groups, and residents of the Arctic. The emphasis research and activities of state and local govern-
is on summary and survey articles covering U.S. ments and public, private and resident organiza-
Government-sponsored or -funded research rather tions. Unsolicited nontechnical reports on
than on technical reports, and the articles are research and related activities are welcome.
intended to be comprehensible to a nontechnical Address correspondence to Office of Polar
audience. Although the articles go through the Programs, National Science Foundation, 4201
normal editorial process, manuscripts are not Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
Cover
Tom Douglas (left) and William Simpson (right) sampling snow at a pressure ridge on the sea ice near
Point Barrow, Alaska. The samples are analyzed for mercury, ions, and halogens. The work is part of a
project funded by the National Science Foundation’s Office of Polar Programs on the Arctic coastal
environment. Mercury is mainly deposited in the winter into the snowpack through complex chemical
reactions that require halogens, light, water vapor, and sea ice leads. (Photo by Matthew Sturm.)
VOLUME 20 2006
A R C T I C R E S E A R C H
O F T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S
INTERAGENCY ARCTIC RESEARCH Report from Federal Agencies for 2004–2005
POLICY COMMITTEE
This is a special double issue of Arctic Research of the United
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE States. It presents highlights and results of major fiscal year
2004 and 2005 Arctic research programs and selected projects of
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE the Federal agencies. For more information, you may contact the
agency staff representatives listed on page 163.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY National Science Foundation...................................................2
Department of the Interior...................................................... 15
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
The North Slope Science Initiative................................ 15
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Minerals Management Service ...................................... 19
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service................................................ 30
National Park Service.................................................... 42
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Bureau of Land Management......................................... 50
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Geological Survey.......................................................... 62
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Department of Defense.......................................................... 77
National Aeronautics and Space Administration................... 84
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Department of Commerce....................................................... 87
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Department of Agriculture ....................................................110
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Department of Energy...........................................................117
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET Department of Health and Human Services ..........................125
Smithsonian Institution.........................................................142
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
Environmental Protection Agency........................................147
Department of Transportation ..............................................155
Managing Editorial Committee Department of Homeland Security........................................156
Charles E. Myers—Editor Department of State ..............................................................161
John Haugh, Bureau of Land Management—Associate Editor
David W. Cate, Cold Regions Research and Engineering
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee Staff............163
Laboratory—Consulting Editor
Editing and production: Cold Regions Research and Figure Credits........................................................................164
Engineering Laboratory, Hanover, New Hampshire
1
National Science Foundation
National Science Foundation research is concerned with the entire Arctic region,
including Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Svalbard, the Arctic Ocean and adjacent seas,
the upper atmosphere, and near space. Research falls principally within eight major
scientific areas: atmosphere, ocean, biology, earth science, glaciology, social science,
engineering, and science education.
The NSF supports a formal Arctic research pro- Funding (thousands)
gram within the Office of Polar Programs (OPP). FY 04 FY 05
Other divisions and programs throughout NSF, Arctic Res. and Policy Support 90 94
primarily in the Directorate for Geosciences and Arctic Res. Supp. and Logistics 36,565 35,047
Arctic Res. and Education 250 320
the Division of Environmental Biology in the Direc-
Arctic System Science Program 20,250 20,250
torate for Biological Sciences, support research in
Arctic Social Sciences 2,455 2,415
and on the Arctic as part of their overall funding. Cyberinfrastructure and Sensors 1,240 924
Most research grants are awarded on the basis of Information and Advisory Serv. 90 90
unsolicited proposals and are merit reviewed. Arctic Natural Sciences 12,258 12,900
Arctic Research Commission 1,556 1,190
The following sections present highlights of
Funds Reprog. to Coast Guard 0 2,400
several major programs and selected projects. A
OPP Total 74,753 75,630
complete listing of NSF-funded Arctic projects Non-OPP 26,000* 26,000*
can be obtained from the Office of Polar Programs, Grand Total 100,753 101,630
National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA 22230. * Estimated
Arctic System Science chemical, biological, and social processes of the
Arctic system that interact with the total earth
The Arctic System and the ARCSS Program system and thus contribute to, or are influenced
The Arctic is a complex system consisting of by, global change. ARCSS works towards advanc-
physical, biological, and social components that ing the scientific understanding needed to predict
interact across a wide range of temporal and spa- environmental change on a decade-to-centuries
tial scales. Sea ice, ice sheets, and permafrost are time scale and to inform policymakers on the
key features that distinguish the Arctic from lower anticipated impacts of changing climate on
latitude systems. The Arctic system behaves in humans and societal support systems. The pro-
ways that are not fully understood, and it has gram is coordinated, managed, and supported
demonstrated the capacity for rapid, amplified, and financially by the OPP, with contributions from
unpredictable change with global implications. other NSF directorates and other Federal agencies
Because of the Arctic’s pivotal role in the earth’s where appropriate. NSF/ARCSS has been success-
climate, it is critical—perhaps even urgent—that ful at establishing partnerships with other Federal
we understand this system in light of abundant agencies, especially with NASA and NOAA on
evidence that a set of linked and pervasive changes projects dealing with Arctic climate and ocean pro-
are underway. What do these changes mean for cesses and modeling research. ARCSS research
the future of both the Arctic and the earth? To continues to contribute to the U.S. Global Change
address this question, ARCSS research focuses Research Program.
on understanding the fundamental characteristics, The ARCSS program adapts its structure and
dynamics, and controlling principles of the Arctic goals to the progress of its research. This adapta-
system through integration and synthesis of tion is achieved through various mechanisms,
knowledge from past and ongoing studies. including a scientific committee erected by the
In 1989 the NSF established the Arctic System research community, that provides a community
Science (ARCSS) program, an interdisciplinary perspective on the overall coordination and inte-
program that strives to understand the physical, gration of ARCSS. To ensure community participa-
2
tion, ARCSS has used various methods to develop of the program, strives to develop more extensive
new ideas and set priorities, including workshops connections to a broader array of disciplines for
and open meetings. Recently the program has new ideas, and devotes considerable attention to
sought to improve its facilitation of dialogue in the fostering ARCSS research efforts during their full
research community and improve the exchange of life cycle from inception of ideas through archival
ideas between the program and its constituents. of data, synthesis of results, and communication
As outlined below, ARCSS is exploring new modes of scientific knowledge to the research community
of pursuing its science and of interacting with the and the public.
broader scientific community with the intent of
engaging as many people as possible in a respon- Shelf–Basin Interactions
sive planning process. A current example of a process-oriented ARCSS
The guiding question for ARCSS at present is: research activity is the Shelf–Basin Interactions
What do changes in the Arctic system imply for (SBI) project, established to improve understand-
the future? ing of the role of the large continental shelf seas off
Planning is focused on three science questions: Alaska in marine productivity and the exchange of
•How do the interconnected social, physical, water, nutrients, heat, and energy with the perma-
chemical, and biological systems of the Arctic nently ice-covered central Arctic basins. Through
operate and interact to define and drive the integrated field and modeling efforts, the SBI project
Arctic system (broadly defined)? is investigating the effects of global change on
•How does the Arctic system interact with the production, cycling, and shelf-slope exchange of
larger earth system? biogenic matter, both seasonally and spatially. To
•What is the trajectory of the Arctic system this end, there are five study objectives deemed
and the implications of that trajectory in the both timely and essential to an improved under-
years and decades to come? standing of the effects of global change on pro-
An important assumption underlying these ques- ductivity as it contributes to shelf–basin inter-
tions is that many changes in the global climate actions within the Arctic Ocean ecosystem:
system affect the Arctic system. Changes in the •Understanding the roles of physical processes
Arctic may, in turn, have impacts on the global in the transport and modification of water and
system. biogenic materials across the shelf and into
To address these questions ARCSS must: the interior basin;
•Advance from a component understanding to •Identifying mesoscale oceanographic features
a system understanding of the Arctic; that support locally elevated concentrations
•Understand the behavior of the Arctic system, of benthic and pelagic biota;
past, present, and future; •Quantifying upper ocean (water column and
•Understand the role of the Arctic as a compo- sea ice) primary productivity in relation to the
nent of the global system; and biomass and diversity of benthic and pelagic
•Include society as an integral part of the primary and secondary consumers;
Arctic system. •Assessing the relative importance of top-
In recent years ARCSS focused on several dis- down as compared to bottom-up controls
ciplinary components: Ocean/Atmosphere/Ice over pelagic–benthic coupling, biotic com-
Interactions; Land/Atmosphere/Ice Interactions; plexity, and carbon partitioning among differ-
Human Dimensions of the Arctic System, and ent trophic levels; and
Paleoenvironmental Arctic Sciences (PARCS), •Assessing food web changes consequent to
under which research activities were developed. the impacts of changing ice cover and hydro-
(PARCS proposals were considered within the graphic parameters on remineralization of
Earth System History competition at NSF.) This organic matter, recycling efficiency, and bio-
disciplinary focus was necessary to build commu- geochemical fluxes.
nities and knowledge bases for these disciplines. The SBI project has finished most of its field
However, once that was achieved, the structure of activities and is now analyzing the results of its
the program began to evolve to one more amena- work and producing scientific summary docu-
ble to its goal of understanding the Arctic as a ments. It is anticipated that it would eventually
system. Thus, most of these components have participate in a final phase in which SBI results are
now been replaced by a more proactive ARCSS incorporated with other similar results and related
committee that guides the system-level thinking to the functioning of the Arctic system.
3
Arctic freshwater system and its interactions
with the polar ocean and subpolar seas. The 22
projects constituting the effort are not only
engaged in field research on Arctic freshwater
systems, but they have also begun formulating a
series of united research perspectives and project
outputs. The strategy has been to foster mecha-
nisms to achieve a project synthesis by uniting
available water system data streams, process
studies, and modeling. The goals are to reveal
processes, linkages, and causes of variability
in the Arctic terrestrial, atmosphere, and upper-
ocean hydrologic cycle through an integrated set
of research activities focused on three science
questions: Is the Arctic freshwater cycle intensify-
ing; if so, why; and what are the implications?
These questions span traditional land–ocean–
atmosphere communities and have brought
diverse communities into active cross-disciplinary
dialogue.
Researchers retrieving Freshwater Cycle Integration Study Two avenues of investigation have been pur-
a CTD (conductivity, The first exercise in a new mode of ARCSS sued. One aims to synthesize existing quantitative
temperature, depth research, the Freshwater Cycle Integration Study, information to construct a comprehensive fresh-
profiler) rosette on the
was developed as a thematic interdisciplinary water budget linking fluxes and stocks through
USCGC Healy during the
approach that addressed a major part of the Arctic all major domains of the pan-Arctic system: atmo-
Shelf–Basin Interaction
system. This research addresses the physical, sphere, land, ocean, and sea ice. The articulation
(SBI) study of the north-
ern Bering Sea in 2005. chemical, and biogeochemical character of the of such a budget has highlighted several chal-
Scientist taking
an ocean temperature and
salinity profile at the side
of a lead during
field work.
4
lenges in establishing the “fundamentals” of the edge at sea, and was open to all disciplines. Six
Arctic water system and has identified critical projects were supported on subjects including
existing unknowns in data coverage, spatial and bowhead whales and the marine ecosystem, car-
Scientists on the Lena temporal harmony, and consistency across mea- bon interconnections, organic carbon and eroding
River in Siberia. After surement campaigns. It has also shown the need coastlines, halomethane gas exchange, synthesis
sampling the river at for coherent strategies to address the subtleties and scaling, and the deposition and fate of mercury.
approximately 71°N, they associated with the inherent variability of the Arc- Although it was not through any active steering
disembarked at the village
tic hydrological system. A second direction is the or design, most of these projects focused their
of Kyusyur to meet with
attempt to establish the consistency of changes field activities in Barrow, Alaska, and this circum-
the local hydrologist
across observational studies of paleo, historic, stance provided excellent opportunities for close
responsible for making
Lena River discharge and contemporary water systems with simulated collaboration with one another and with scientists
measurements. The Lena behaviors generated by Arctic and earth system from other agencies, as well as for outreach to the
River, roughly equal in models. This will allow us to assess our system community. Although widely divergent in disci-
discharge to the Missis- understanding of observed changes and search pline and approach, these projects are working
sippi, has been monitored
for the attribution of such changes. To make these closely together and finding unexpected synergies
daily since 1936. Its
efforts relevant to the policy community, a new in their research.
discharge has increased
emphasis is on the implications and impacts of
substantially over the past
several decades, likely Arctic system change, specifically on ecosystems, Human Dimensions of the Arctic System
in response to global on climate, and on humans living both in and out- Human Dimensions of the Arctic System
warming. side of the Arctic. (HARC) has been a collaborative effort with the
Arctic Social Sciences Program to integrate natural
and social sciences research that demonstrates
the interactions of climate and human develop-
ment with the use of natural resources. Arctic
Native peoples have sustained themselves
through hunting, fishing, whaling, and wage
employment. The continued sustainability of their
culture and regional development could be affected
by global environmental changes that affect vege-
tation and marine productivity, year-round sea ice
maintenance, and construction and land use prac-
tices. Research at the interface between natural
and social sciences will increase policymakers’
understanding of regional natural and social
systems and build linkages among communities
in the Arctic. Those linkages will enhance the
knowledge base necessary for examining policy
choices and risk assessments within the context
of global and regional climate changes. This effort
is still being fostered actively in ARCSS; the goal
Study of the Northern Alaskan Coastal System is not to establish a social science sub-program,
Lying at the intersection of the land, ocean, and but rather to make social science a part of the
atmosphere, and the locus of much human activity, fabric of all ARCSS research. ARCSS has support-
the coast is a critical interface in the Arctic system ed the HARC effort by funding several large col-
and was considered to be an ideal test bed for laborative projects. An example can be found in
tackling the kinds of complex scientific issues a large project funded in 2004 called The Intersec-
required to develop a true systems approach to tion Between Climate Change, Water Resources
Arctic research. In early 2004, NSF released an and Humans in the Arctic. In this project, research-
announcement of opportunity for a Study of the ers in natural science, engineering, and social sci-
Northern Alaska Coastal System, a second effort ence are linking hydrological, cultural, and engi-
towards system-wide research, this time with a neering studies in the Seward Peninsula of Alaska
regional approach. The announcement defined the with the goal of understanding the vital role that
coastal system very broadly, as the region extend- fresh water plays in the lives of humans in the
ing from the Brooks Range in Alaska to the ice Arctic.
5
Synthesis in ARCSS Although it was not widely called synthesis
ARCSS has long supported the idea of inte- then, the process of synthesizing the community's
grating research results across components collective knowledge of the Arctic system really
through a Synthesis, Integration and Modeling began at an ARCSS All-Hands Workshop, with
Studies (SIMS) effort. This activity is now achiev- more than 300 ARCSS researchers participating. It
ing renewed prominence in the program. As continued formally with the Big Sky Synthesis
ARCSS ventures into its first program-wide syn- Retreat (Big Sky, Montana) of a few dozen scien-
thesis, the program is expanding on the existing tists in August 2003. The retreat’s goals were to
data-oriented SIMS effort to synthesize knowl- analyze and then synthesize available knowledge
edge of how the Arctic system works, with a major into a system perspective of the Arctic. Scientists
emphasis on understanding the linkages between from a variety of disciplines investigating many
parts of the system and better articulation of the components of the Arctic system attended, and
implications for the future. “Synthesis,” as ARCSS most called it a tremendous learning experience in
has employed it, is essentially the juxtaposition of the form of an opportunity to discuss commonali-
disparate ideas, facts, or data to gain unexpected ties and linkages among researchers who rarely
insight. In essence it is the pursuit of surprise by cross paths. Discussions centered on the interwo-
design. ven complexity of recent Arctic change, how this
Schematic of the Arctic
system, showing the areas
of current ARCSS
synthesis activity.
6
The “ARCSS Wheel,” a
schematic illustration of
how ideas may be fostered
in the community, com-
bined to form consensus-
based interdisciplinary
research priorities that
the NSF may use in its
announcements of oppor-
tunity. The central concept
is the sharing and
managing of information
throughout the cycle of fabric of change is tied to the larger global system, and that the implications could be wide-ranging
inquiry, from conception
how it will unfold in coming years, and what the and substantial for humans.
of idea to publication and
implications for humans may be. This assembly of An important product from the retreat was a
interpretation of research
expertise led to the realization that Arctic change paper (EOS, Vol. 86, No. 34, 23 August 2005, p.
results, informing the
public and policy makers, is pervasive, widespread, and dramatic, and hence 309–316) describing the motivation for the synthe-
as well as feeding further to the “Big Sky Question,” “Is the Arctic system sis approach, as well as new insights from discus-
idea development. moving to a new state outside the envelope of the sions at the Big Sky gathering. Numerous other
natural glacial–interglacial cycle?” Throughout questions were raised at the retreat too; some
the week, the participants worked together, offer- were pursued in a second retreat a year later, and
ing their own expertise and perspectives, to give a group funded to synthesize the results of the
their best determination of whether the Arctic is paleoenvironmental efforts in ARCSS is examining
moving toward a new state. By the end of the others.
week, participants reached near-unanimous agree- To engage the larger community in this effort,
ment that the Arctic is likely moving outside the ARCSS held a special competition called Synthe-
envelope of past experience, and possibly toward sis of Arctic System Science (SASS) in 2005, solic-
a new state, and that we do not yet understand iting proposals to consider the Arctic as a system.
the implications for the Arctic, the global climate There were nine successful projects supporting 44
system, or human society. Participants also agreed investigators to explore various aspects of the
that a state change could include major surprises system. A supplemental activity will engage these
and non-linear responses of Arctic components various projects in seeking synergies among their
7
efforts and identifying how well their collective Cryospheric Sciences
results describe the system. Research in the cryospheric sciences focuses
ARCSS will likely continue to support efforts on the history and dynamics of all naturally occur-
that synthesize knowledge of how the Arctic ring forms of snow and ice, including seasonal
system works (including a focus on the linkages snow, glaciers, sea ice, permafrost, and the Green-
between parts of the system) and better articula- land ice sheet. The program also supports studies
tion of the implications for the future. In general of glacial geology.
the program is trying to concentrate on under- A significant focus of glacial field research con-
standing the relations among the components of tinues to be the collection of observations suffi-
the system and leaving the detailed studies at the cient to develop theory and predictive models of
subcomponent level to other, more disciplinary glacial dynamics and mass balance, as well as the
programs. ARCSS will also continue to conduct subsequent validation of those models. Observa-
field research to address key questions but will tions of Helheim Glacier, in East Greenland, indi-
use its ongoing synthesis to help identify the cate rapid retreat associated with thinning of the
problems of highest priority to be pursued in the glacier and acceleration of its seaward velocity.
field. Lagged acceleration of tributary glaciers is also
occurring. Comparison of these data with theory
Engaging the Community suggests that the acceleration and thinning are,
ARCSS is both a program that funds research predominantly, responses to the calving and
projects and a process to plan for future directions retreat of the glacier front, rather than to thermal
of its science. In the latter mode, it has moved melting during summer. The potential for enhanced
deliberately away from a hierarchical array of com- calving and retreat associated with a thinner gla-
mittees that developed disciplinary projects, to cier suggests that an important positive feedback
experimenting with new ways of bringing ideas mechanism is at work. In related studies of Bench
into the program. Most recently the program has Glacier, in the Chugach Mountains of Alaska,
engaged the community directly using electronic associations between the horizontal motion of the
discussion groups. Thus, immediately after the glacier and excess pressure at the base of the gla-
most recent competition results were released, an cier suggest that increased subglacial connectivity
open meeting was held with the community (an “e- of the water flow may result initially in increased
town meeting”) in which over 60 people discussed velocity, but that rapid drainage then leads to
the results and considered directions of ARCSS increased friction and slower velocity for the gla-
synthesis. Other mechanisms will include spon- cier. Observations of Breiðamerkurjökull, Iceland,
sored Communities of Practice that will develop following liquid precipitation events support these
new ideas. The intent is that these communities suggestions. Two neighboring sections of the
will generate science ideas, and as they mature glacier sat on rough bedrock and smoother till,
and are combined with other ideas, they will respectively. Excess pressure at the bed dimin-
progress through a series of steps to feed into ished following the precipitation and initial drain-
mature interdisciplinary research priorities that age events, allowing the ice over rough bedrock
NSF may draw upon to develop new announce- to settle back onto the bottom features, the water
ments of opportunity. This approach is very much connectivity to diminish, and the ice velocity to
in keeping with NSF’s goal of listening to the com- decrease. Over the smoother till, connectivity was
munity in order to respond quickly in developing maintained, even after the initial drainage event,
research priorities, but it also allows these ideas to and high ice velocities persisted. The fact that
be focused to meet ARCSS goals. ARCSS will con- high velocity leads to further bed erosion again
tinue to explore new ways of engaging as many suggests significant potential feedback mecha-
people as possible in its research agenda. nisms on the glacier’s dynamics.
Arctic Natural Sciences Atmospheric Sciences
Research in the atmospheric sciences focuses
Arctic Natural Sciences (ANS) provides core on stratospheric and tropospheric processes, cli-
support for disciplinary research addressing Arc- mate, and meteorology. Upper atmosphere and
tic processes in the areas of cryospheric sciences, space physics concerns include auroral studies,
atmospheric sciences, ocean sciences, earth sci- atmospheric dynamics and chemistry, and mag-
ences, and biological sciences. netosphere–ionosphere coupling. These efforts
8