Advertisement

Continental Water Storage Changes from GRACE Line-of-Sight Range Acceleration Measurements

  • Y. Chen
  • B. Schaffrin
  • C.K. Shum
Part of the International Association of Geodesy Symposia book series (IAG SYMPOSIA, volume 132)

Abstract

Spaceborne gravimetry such as GRACE provides a unique opportunity to observe basin-scale surface and subsurface global water storage changes with unprecedented accuracy and temporal and spatial coverages. The contemporary methodology to process GRACE data for hydrologic studies is in terms of monthly spherical harmonic geopotential solutions with a spatial resolution longer than 600–800,km (half-wavelength), after proper smoothing. Alternative methods include the direct processing of satellite-to-satellite K-Band Range (KBR) rate data and to estimate the localized gravity field, and the so-called mascon methods. In this study we estimate monthly continental water thickness changes over the Amazon Basin for one year (2003) by calculating in-situ Line-Of-Sight (LOS) gravity differences inferred by the GRACE KBR range acceleration. A regional inversion method based on Bayesian statistics is used to estimate water thickness changes from the LOS gravity difference observations. Power Spectral Density (PSD) comparison with the spherical harmonic monthly solutions at both 600 and 800 km resolutions indicates that the LOS gravity solution has more power at degree 13 or higher, implying that it is a viable technique for potentially enhancing spatial resolutions of GRACE solutions at these frequencies.

Keywords

Continentalwater storage GRACE lineof-sight gravity differences Amazon hydrology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

references

  1. Bettadpur, S. (2004), Level-2 gravity field product user handbook, GRACE 327–734, Center for Space Research, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  2. Han, S., C. Shum, and A. Braun (2005a), High-resolution continental water storage recovery from low-low satellite-to-satellite tracking. J. Geodyn., 39(1), 11–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Han, S., C. Shum, C. Jekeli, and D. Alsdorf (2005b), Improved estimation of terrestrial water storage changes from GRACE. Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L07302, doi:10.1029/2005GL022382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jekeli, C. (1981), Alternative methods to smooth the earth’s gravity field. Technical report #327, Geodetic Science, Ohio State University, Department of Geodetic Science and Surveying, 1958 Neil Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA.Google Scholar
  5. Rodell, M., J. Famiglietti (1999), Detectibility of variations in continental water storage from satellite observations of the time variable gravity field. Water Resour. Res., 35(9), 2705–2723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Rodell, M., J. Famiglietti (2001), An analysis of terrestrial water storage variations in Illinois with implications for the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE). Water Resour. Res., 37(5), 1327–1339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Rowlands, D., S. Luthcke, S. Klosko, F. Lemoine, D. Chinn, J. McCarthy, C. Cox, and O. Anderson (2005), Resolving mass flux at high spatial and temporal resolution using GRACE intersatellite measurements. Geophys. Res. Lett., 32, L04310, doi:10.1029/2004GL021908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Tapley, B., S. Bettadpur, M. Watkins, and C. Reigber (2004a), The gravity recovery and climate experiment: Mission overview and early results. Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L09607, doi:10.1029/2004GL019920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Tapley, B., S. Bettadpur, J. Ries, P. Thompson, and M. Watkins (2004b), GRACE measurements of mass variability in the earth system. Science, 305, 503–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Wahr, J., F. Molenaar, and F. Bryan (1998), Time variability of the earth’s gravity field: Hydrological and oceanic effects and their possible detection using GRACE. J. Geophys. Res., 103(B12), 30205–30229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Wahr, J., S. Swenson, V. Zlotnicki, and I. Velicogna (2004), Time variable gravity from GRACE: First results. Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, L11501, doi:10.1029/2004GL019779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Yuan D., and M. Watkins (2006), Recent Mascon solutions from GRACE, Proceedings of Hotine-Marussi Symposium, Wuhan, China.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Y. Chen
    • 1
  • B. Schaffrin
    • 1
  • C.K. Shum
    • 1
  1. 1.Geodetic Science School of Earth SciencesThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations