Agclimate telecon 2013-12-03

From Federation of Earth Science Information Partners

Back to Ag & Climate Workspace
Agenda:

  1. Invited presentation (Brian Wee, NEON): Overview of NEON and relationship to LTAR (Rescheduled from Nov. 5 telecon, due to some technical difficulties with Webex)
  2. ESIP Jan. 2014 meeting (Scheduling conflict)
  3. Prioritize Cluster's 2014 effort
  • Inventory of relevant ESIP capabilities
  • Conduct "gap analysis" (e.g., needs of LTAR) that ESIP can fill
  • Mapping of ESIP capabilities to LTAR needs
  • Review of external ongoing work on climate effects on agriculture
  • Expand Cluster's foci to state orgs; Library of Congress; USDA/CCPO, others.
  • Differentiate between energy/climate and ag/climate Clusters

Participants: Arif A., Barry Weiss, Brian Wee, Erin R., Josh Lieberman, 2 others (?), Bill T.

Minutes:
1. Brian presented on NEON and its relationship to LTAR. Given this existing relationship, Brian provides a unique perspective on how our Cluster might best interact with LTAR.

  • Thanks, Brian!
  • In the 3rd slide (the flowchart one), towards the bottom is the interoperability box. As Brian indicated, that's where this Cluster and LTAR probably can best collaborate in a mutually beneficial way. Brian mentioned that NEON wants all measurements consistently done for all sites and that LTAR wants to follow this mode. In my discussions with Mark Walbridge of LTAR, they are definitely cognizant of the need for interoperability but just have not gotten to it yet.
  • Goals of LTAR are generally similar to those of NEON. 3 of the existing 10 LTAR sites are co-located with NEON sites.
  • In our Cluster's previous discussions, the other two likely broad areas of collaboration are data products and data archive.
  • Brian suggested leveraging the Earth Science Collaboratory (ESC).
  • Action: Bill to check with Chris Lynnes DONE Looks like ESC may not be quite ready for the kind of reuse we're discussing. There are some components but not yet an entire system that can be applied to, e.g., LTAR. Chris suggested some options, including RAMADDA.
  • Action: Bill to follow up with Jeff McWhirter on RAMADDA.
  • Barry indicated that both SMAP and OCO-2 should be of interest to NEON. Barry and Brian will follow up with each other.

2. ESIP Jan. 2014 meeting

  • Bill has a scheduling conflict and won't be attending the Jan. meeting.
  • We decided to skip this meeting, as far as a Cluster session is concerned.
  • We'll focus on doing some of the foundational tasks (See 2014 Cluster strategic plan) and work towards a session at the 2014 Summer Meeting.

3. Prioritize Cluster's 2014 effort

  • We didn't have time to talk much about this item. But, I think interoperability is a good place to start.