Research Project co-funded by the European Commission Research Directorate-General 5th Framework Programme Environment and Sustainable Development Development of generic Earth Observation technologies Contract No. EVG1-CT-2000-00029

Final User Requirements Document by C. O MAHONY1, V. CUMMINS1, N. DWYER1 and N. CONNOLLY2 1Coastal & Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork 2European Science Foundation (Marine Board) http://marsais.ucc.ie/

NERSCNERSC

Partner Institutes: Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center (co-ordinator), Norway

ENST Bretagne, France

University of Hamburg Satellite Oceanography, Germany

IFREMER/Departement Oceanographie Spatiale, France

SAI-TDP Unit, Joint Research Centre, Italy

Southampton Oceanography Centre, University of Southampton, UK

Coastal & Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork, Ireland

National Centre for Marine Research, Greece

Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center (NERSC) Edvard Griegsvei 3A N-5059 Bergen, Norway Phone: + 47 55 29 72 88 Fax: + 47 55 20 00 50 E-mail: Johnny.Johannessen@nrsc.no

ENST Bretagne Image et Traitement de l'Information Technopole Brest-Iroise BP 832 29285 Brest Cedex, France Phone: +33 (0) 298 00 13 71 Fax: +33 (0) 298 00 10 98 E-mail. rene.garello@enstb.fr

University of Hamburg Institute of Oceanography Troplowitzstr. 7 22529 Hamburg Germany Phone: +49 (0) 40 42838 5430 Fax: +49 (0)40 42838 5713 E-mail: romeiser@ifm.uni-hamburg.de

IFREMER/Departement Oceanographie Spatiale BP 70 Technopole Brest Iroise 29280 Plouzane France Phone: + Fax : + E-mail: Bertrand.Chapron@ifremer.fr

JRC-ISIS-TDP Unit, TP 272 I-21020 Ispra (Va) Italy Phone: +39 0332 785105 Fax: +39 0332 785469 E-mail: dario.tarchi@jrc.it

School of Ocean and Earth Science University of Southampton Southampton Oceanography Centre European Way Southampton SO14 3ZH United Kingdom Phone: +44 (0) 2380-593438 Fax: +44 (0)2380-593059 E-mail: Ian.S.Robinson@soc.soton.ac.uk

Coastal & Marine Resources Centre University College Cork Haulbowline Naval Base Cobh Co. Cork Ireland Phone: +353-21-4703100 Fax: +353-21-4703132 E-mail: v.cummins@ucc.ie

National Centre for Marine Research Agios Kosmas Hellinikon 16604 Athens Greece Phone: +(301) 9946161 Fax: +(301) 9946162 E-mail: knittis@ncmr.gr

TITLE FINAL USER REQUIREMENTS DOCUMENT.

REPORT IDENTIFICATION MARSAIS Report No. 19

CLIENT EUROPEAN COMMISSION RESEARCH DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate I – Preserving the Ecosystem: environmental research

CONTRACT EVG1-CT-2000-00029

CLIENT REFERENCE Michel Schouppe Phone: +32 2 296 0618 Fax: +32 2 299 5755 E-mail: Michel.Schouppe@cec.eu.int

AVAILABILITY Open

INVESTIGATORS Valerie Cummins, Cathal O Mahony & Ned Dwyer

AUTHORISATION Bergen 2003 Johnny A. Johannessen Research Director

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Acronyms…………………………………………………………………. i Executive Summary……………………………………………………………… iii Chapter 1 – Introduction…………………………………………………………… 1

1.1 Background……………………………………………………………. 1 1.1.1 Current Uptake and Distribution of SAR Data……………………. 2 1.1.2 Category 1…………………………………………………………. 2 1.1.3 Category 2………………………………………………………… 3 1.1.4 The MARSAIS Project……………………………………………. 4 1.1.5 Objectives of the MARSAIS Project……………………………… 4 1.1.6 WP 2: Generation of Database……………………………………. 5 1.1.7 WP 3: SAR Ocean Imaging Modelling…………………………… 5 1.1.8 WP 4: Validation……………………………………………………5 1.1.9 WP 5: MARSAIS Toolkit Development………………………….. 6 1.1.10 WP 6: MARSAIS Exploitation and User Interface…………… 6 1.1.11 WP 7: MARSAIS Prototyping…………………………………. 6 1.1.12 MARSAIS Outputs……………………………………………. 7 1.1.13 The Need for End User Studies………………………………. 8 1.1.14 MARSAIS End User Requirements Study……………………. 9

References…………………………………………………………………………. 11 Chapter 2 – The Policy Context……………………………………………………. 12

2.1 Introduction and Objectives…………………………………………… 12 2.2 Methodology………………………………………………………….. 12 2.3 Policies………………………………………………………………… 12

2.3.1 GMES………………………………………………………… 12 2.3.2 INSPIRE……………………………………………………… 14 2.3.3 Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)………………. 14 2.3.4 Towards a Strategy to Protect and Conserve the Marine

Environment ………………………………………………… 15 2.3.5 Water Framework Directive (WFD)………………………… 15 2.3.6 International Conventions…………………………………… 16

2.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………… 17 References……………………………………………………………………….. 18 Chapter 3 – Review of End User Requirements Studies and Supporting

Programmes………………………………………………………... 20 3.1 Introduction and Objectives…………………………………………… 20 3.2 Methodology………………………………………………………….. 20 3.3 Results…………………………………………………………………. 23

3.3.1 ESA and GMES……………………………………………….. 23 3.3.1.1 Data User Programme…………………………………….. 23 3.3.1.2 Data User Element………………………………………… 24 3.3.1.3 Earth Observation Market Development………………….. 24

3.3.1.4 The Oxygen (O2) Project……………………………… 25 3.3.1.5 Treaty Enforcement Service Using Earth Observation…… 26 3.3.1.6 ESA Earthwatch GMES Services Element………………. 27 3.3.1.7 Coastal Zone Earth Watch Study…………………………. 27

3.3.2 EU Framework Programme…………………………………… 28 3.3.2.1 European Forum on the Use of EO for Environment

and Security……………………………………………….. 28 3.3.2.2 Earth Observation Data Policy and Europe……………….. 29 3.3.2.3 Integrated Coastal Analysis and Monitoring System……… 29 3.3.2.4 COASTMON……………………………………………… 30 3.3.2.5 Centre for Earth Observation Report…………………….. 31 3.3.2.6 European Global Ocean Observing System – EuroGOOS.. 31 3.3.2.7 Centre for Earth Observation Pathfinder Study…………… 32

3.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 33 References…………………………………………………………………………. 35 Chapter 4 – SAR Product and Service Review…………………………………… 37

4.1 Introduction and Objectives…………………………………………… 37 4.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………. 37 4.3 Results……………………………………………………………….. 38 4.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 96

Chapter 5 – SAR Project Review………………………………………………… 98

5.1 Introduction and Objectives………………………………………….. 98 5.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………. 98 5.3 Results………………………………………………………………… 99 5.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 130

Chapter 6 – Workshops and National Case Study……………………………….. 131

6.1 Introduction and Objectives………………………………………….. 131 6.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………. 131 6.3 Results………………………………………………………………… 131

6.3.1 Workshops………………………………………………………… 131 6.3.1.1 Hamburg Workshop………………………………………. 131 6.3.1.2 Cork Workshop…………………………………………… 132 6.3.1.3 Athens…………………………………………………….. 132 6.3.1.4 Svalbard Workshop……………………………………….. 132

6.3.2 National Case Study – Ireland…………………………………….. 133 6.3.2.1 An overview of EO end user demands in Ireland…………. 133 6.3.2.2 Identification of priority R+D issues………………………. 133 6.3.2.3 Issues that need to be addressed with specific reference

to EO data………………………………………………….. 134 6.3.2.4 Particular resource management themes identified from

consultation with Irish end users………………………….. 135 6.3.3 Sectoral Case Studies……………………………………………… 137

6.3.3.1 Sectoral Case Study: The Port Operators Perspective…….. 137

6.3.3.2 Sectoral Case Study: The Coastal Engineering Perspective.. 137 6.3.3.3 Sectoral Case Study: The Irish Naval Service Perspective… 138

6.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 139 6.4.1 Workshops………………………………………………………… 139 6.4.2 Irish Case Study…………………………………………………… 140

References…………………………………………………………………………. 141 Chapter 7 – User Profiles………………………………………………………… 142

7.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………... 142 7.2 Methodology…………………………………………………………. 142

7.2.1 Detailed User Profiles……………………………………………. 142 7.2.2 Development of Potential Users Database (PUD)………………. 143

7.3 Results………………………………………………………………… 145 7.3.1 Detailed User Profiles……………………………………………. 145 7.3.2 Results from the Potential Users Database (PUD)……………… 150

7.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 153 References………………………………………………………………………… 155 Chapter 8 –Contemporary and Desired Use of SAR Data Products……………… 156

8.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………… 156 8.2 Objectives…………………………………………………………….. 156 8.3 Methodology…………………………………………………………. 157

8.3.1 Questionnaire Development and Format…………………………. 157 8.3.2 Potential Users Database………………………………………… 159 8.3.3 Elimination of Bias and Quality Control…………………………. 160

8.4 Results of the CoU Survey…………………………………………… 161 8.4.1 Response to the MARSAIS CoU Survey………………………… 161 8.4.2 Users of SAR Data……………………………………………….. 161 8.4.3 Response from the MARSAIS Partner Countries………………… 163 8.4.4 Limiting Factors in the Use of SAR Data………………………… 165 8.4.5 Applications of SAR Data………………………………………… 166 8.4.6 Use of SAR Data………………………………………………….. 168

8.4.6.1 Geographic Coverage……………………………………… 169 8.4.6.2 SAR Product Type………………………………………… 171 8.4.6.3 Delivery Medium…………………………………………. 172 8.4.6.4 Latency of Delivery………………………………………. 173 8.4.6.5 Temporal Resolution………………………………………. 174 8.4.6.6 Forecast Period……………………………………………. 176 8.4.6.7 Synergy…………………………………………………… 177 8.4.6.8 Spatial Resolution………………………………………… 178

8.5 Discussion……………………………………………………………. 180 8.5.1 Use of SAR Data Products………………………………………. 180 8.5.2 Applications………………………………………………………. 182 8.5.3 Variables…………………………………………………………. 183 8.5.4 Critique of CoU Survey………………………………………….. 186

References……………………………………………………………………….. 188

Chapter 9 – Cost Benefit Scenarios for SAR Data………………………………. 191

9.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………… 191 9.2 Methodology………………………………………………………….. 191 9.3 Results………………………………………………………………… 192

9.3.1 Scenario 1 – Irish Coastguard oil spill monitoring……………….. 192 9.3.2 Scenario 2a – Oil spill response: The Whitegate coastal oil spill… 194 9.3.3 Scenario 2b – Oil spill response: The Prestige offshore oil spill…. 195 9.3.4 Scenario 3 - Analysis of current features in Irish waters…………. 198

9.4 Discussion…………………………………………………………….. 200 Chapter 10 – Conclusions and Recommendations………………………………… 201

10.1 Conclusions……………………………………………………………. 201 10.2 Recommendations…………………………………………………….. 204

. Appendix 1 – Members of the MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG)…………….. 206 Appendix 2 – MARSAIS Questionnaire…………………………………………. 207 Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………. 209

LIST OF ACRONYMS ALOS Advanced Land Observing Satellite AO Announcement of Opportunity ASAR Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar ASIAEX Asian Seas International Acoustics Experiment ATSR Along Track Scanning Radiometer AVHRR Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer CASI Compact Airborne Spectrographic Analyser C-CAP Coastal Change Analysis Project CCRS Canadian Centre for Remote Sensing CEO Centre for Earth Observation CFP Common Fisheries Policy CMRC Coastal and Marine Resources Centre CoU Context of Use DCMNR Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (Ireland) DE Distributing Entities DEM Digital Elevation Model DSM Digital Surface Model DUE Data User Element DUP Data User Programme EADS European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company ECW Enhanced Compressed Wavelet EEA European Environment Agency EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EO Earth Observation EOEP Earth Observation Envelope Programme EOMD Earth Observation Market Development EOPOLE Earth Observation Data Policy and Europe ESA European Space Agency ESDP European Spatial Development Perspective ESF European Science Foundation EUFOREO European Forum on the use of Earth Observation for Environment and

Security EuroGOOS European Global Ocean Observing System FAQ Frequency Asked Question FEMA Federal Emergency Mapping Agency (US) FMC Fishery Monitoring Centre FTP File Transfer Protocol GDAL Geospatial Data Abstraction Library GIS Geographic Information System GMES Global Monitoring for Environment and Security GSE GMES Services Element GUI Graphical User Interface HABs Harmful Algal Blooms HELCOM Helsinki Convention

i

HF High Frequency HNDA High Natural Dispersion Area IAA Irish Aviation Authority ICAMS Integrated Coastal Analysis and Monitoring System ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management INS Irish Naval Service INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe ION IDL on the Net IR Infra Red IRCG Irish Coastguard IW Internal Wave MAG MARSAIS Advisory Group MARSAIS Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System MAST Marine Analysis System MERIS Medium Resolution Imaging Spectrometer MIS Marine Information Systems MODIS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer MUG MARSAIS Users Group NERSC Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center NHA Natural Heritage Area NGO Non-Governmental Organisation NOAA National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration NRT Near Real Time OMW Ocean Monitoring Workstation ODISSEO Open Distributed Information and Services for Earth Observation OSM Oil Spill Model PRS Position Reporting System PUD Potential Users Database RA Radar Altimeter RUDP Radarsat User Development Programme SAC Special Area of Conservation SAR Synthetic Aperture Radar SeaWiFS Sea Viewing Wide Field-of-View Sensor SLAR Side Looking Airborne Radar SME Small to Medium Enterprise SST Sea Surface Temperature TESEO Treaty Enforcement Service Using Earth Observation TIP Technical Implementation Plan TSM Total Suspended Matter TUBE TESEO Users Brainstorming Event UV Ultraviolet VAC Value Adding Company VHR Very High Resolution VTS Vessel Traffic System WFD Water Framework Directive

ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The potential utility of spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) systems has been known since the short-lived Seasat mission in 1978. However it was not until 1991, that other SAR systems, which emit microwave radiation and derive images from the backscattered signal – were launched. In the 1990s three SAR sensor systems for civilian use were launched (ERS-1, ERS-2 and Radarsat-1). The launch of the Envisat satellite in 2002 was the first satellite mission to include a new generation of SAR sensors, namely the Advanced SAR (ASAR). Additional new advanced SAR systems are due to be launched over the next number of years (e.g. Radarsat-2 and ALOS [Advanced Land Observing Satellite]) thus ensuring continued provision of advanced SAR data. A SAR antenna transmits radar pulses; the backscattered radar responses provide data on a particular object or phenomenon at the focus of the radar pulse. SAR data provides a synoptic view of the Earth’s surface. SAR data can be combined for potential synergy with in situ observations and other Earth Observation (EO) data. Most crucially, SAR has the advantage of being able to operate day and night and in all weather conditions. Over the last decade SAR data has increasingly been employed for a number of applications of specific relevance to the coastal and marine environment e.g. detection and monitoring of oil slicks, sea state, shallow water bathymetry, ship detection and fisheries management. In order to exploit the maximum potential of SAR data in the marine and coastal environment it is essential to understand the needs and requirements of coastal and marine end users and to incorporate this into the development of SAR products. With the launch of new satellites, such as Envisat, with wide swath (~500km) technology, multi-angle and multi-polarisation SAR sensors, SAR applications are on the threshold of a new era. This presents novel and unique opportunities for the international coastal and marine user community. If the operational capabilities of existing and near to launch SAR systems are not successfully demonstrated within the next few years, the opportunity to build a sustainable international user base in support of imaging SAR systems will be lost. Having reviewed the available literature, it has become clear that several efforts have been undertaken to analyse user requirements for EO data in general. However, little has been done to identify the specific requirements for SAR data products in the coastal and marine environment. Thus, a key objective of the EU 5th Framework Project, Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System (MARSAIS), is to ensure progress on the development of SAR derived products and services. This objective is achieved through the implementation of a multi-faceted end user requirement work package. Elements of the work package include: a review of policy relevant to SAR data and EO data in general (Chapter 2); literature review of previous user studies (Chapter 3); review of products and services (Chapter 4); project review (Chapter 5); consultation with MARSAIS User Group (MUG) and MARSAIS Advisory

iii

Group (MAG), and end user workshops (Chapter 6); user profiles (Chapter 7); contemporary and desired use of SAR data products (Chapter 8); cost benefit analysis (Chapter 9); conclusions and recommendations (Chapter 10). The culmination of this research is presented in this document, which will be useful to scientists involved in developing tools and algorithms for SAR data (including the MARSAIS project consortium), policy makers concerned with the distribution of SAR data, value adding commercial entities, and coastal and marine area managers interested in learning more about applications of SAR data in their environment. The importance of user requirements is recognised in the current policy framework for EO data. One of the most significant policies to emerge in the last couple of years is Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES). GMES provides an opportunity to develop enhanced operational oceanographic observational capabilities within the EU. GMES contributes to the objectives of MARSAIS and other SAR research projects by providing the policy framework necessary for the development of SAR data in an operational environment. This research found that the issues preventing the wider uptake of EO data to emerge from various end user requirements studies in the last ten years have remained largely unchanged (e.g. cost, accessibility, resolution). This questions the success of end user studies in raising awareness of user requirements among decision makers and the research community. Either the message from end users is not getting through to data suppliers, policy makers and software developers, or EO technology has yet to reach a level of sophistication that can fulfil the needs of a wide end user community. In reality, it is possible that both points are valid. While some policy makers would be reticent to hear that what we need is more research, this remains true in the development of marine and coastal applications for SAR data. At the current point in time, it is imperative to obtain a balance between promoting what is presently available (without falsely raising user expectations), and building on existing technologies to make SAR data more attractive to end users in the long term. There are a number of commercially viable companies in the marketplace providing SAR derived services and products for the coastal and marine end user community. However, insecurity of the SAR commercial product market, high costs and practical problems with satellite imagery are perceived as obstacles to the success of small to medium enterprises (SMEs) entering into and operating within this sector. It is notable that products developed through the Earth Observation Market Development (EOMD) initiative by ESA, e.g. routeclimate.com by ARGOSS, appear to be commercially successful. It cannot be said that this is the explicit reason for the success of such products but it does demonstrate the valuable contribution that such an initiative can supply to Value-Adding Companies (VACs) and SMEs. A similar initiative that would build upon and complement the range of EO products and tools successfully developed through the European Commission 5th and 6th Framework research programmes should be considered.

iv

Commercial products and services are generally available in two formats – information or software. For example, data is either highly processed in the form of a sophisticated product which directly lends itself to the decision making process; or software is provided to enable the end user to apply further interpretation or processing techniques. There appears to be a gap in the market for the further development of SMEs to provide training and educational services for SAR data. By targeting the user community with training products it would be possible to increase proficiency and in turn to increase the market and demand for SAR products and services. There also appears to be a gap in the market in the provision of generic services or products for coastal and marine data. Companies currently tend to focus on particular singular applications. There is a need to optimise all of the SAR research currently underway within the EU by ensuring that adequate opportunities exist for the exchange of dialogue on scientific achievement between the many research projects focusing on SAR. Opportunities for communication between scientists should be supported by the likes of the European Commission, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Science Foundation (ESF). This is important for building on progress to date and for avoiding duplication. As well as the need for communication among peers, the importance of two-way dialogue between scientists and end users cannot be underestimated. End user workshops provide an excellent forum to bring the needs of the end users to the attention of scientists who do not have direct or frequent contact with coastal and marine area managers. On the other hand, end users are provided with an opportunity to learn about the potential of SAR data from experts in the field, who are to hand to answer specific technical questions. In general, researchers have a detailed knowledge of a special area of interest, whereas policy makers and decision makers working in the coastal zone need to have a broader perspective and understanding of many issues. This difference will result in different types of user profiles. Researchers may require access to raw data, whereas decision makers and policy makers may need interpreted data (i.e. information). The need to consider all levels of end users, from experts to non-experts, is an important prerequisite for the exploitation of SAR derived products or services. Overall, end users express plausible and tangible requirements for SAR data, which indicates a general level of understanding of what SAR data can offer in the coastal and marine environment. This can be attributed to the success of projects aimed at raising awareness among the end user community in recent years. This also suggests that these efforts should be sustained as progress is made in SAR based research. End users have a strong preference for the use of SAR imagery in the examination of current features, shallow water bathymetry and pollution incidents. Lower levels of interest exist for the use of SAR data in relation to features such as internal waves, wind and waves. Trends in demand are likely to be influenced by the availability of sophisticated products. For example, relatively sophisticated SAR data products currently

v

exist for oil spill detection and shallow water bathymetry. A gap exists in the availability of mature/post processed end user orientated SAR products for other marine application areas. In a choice between cost, capability and capacity, cost was cited as the most significant limiting factor in the use of SAR imagery in the marine and coastal end user community. The issue of cost relates to both the price of the data and the associated pricing scheme. The former can be prohibitively expensive and the latter can appear convoluted, particularly to the inexperienced SAR data user. Capability (training and skills) and capacity (infrastructure) also influence the use of SAR data. The level of expertise of an end user will greatly influence their capability to access and utilise SAR imagery. Users need to consider the cost of improving capacity and capability (investment in hardware and employing or training individuals to interpret SAR data) against the increased cost of purchasing processed data. Specific demands of end users include the following: greater availability of processed imagery; improved provision of coastal data over data pertaining to the open ocean; delivery of data via networks; more frequent temporal coverage; and synergy between SAR data and other EO data formats. Key Recommendations SAR data products should be developed with the level of expertise of the end user in mind. Tools should be adapted for use by non-specialists and easy access to SAR data should be provided. The promotion of SAR data products for the marine and coastal environment should be focused on concrete examples where efficiency, availability and affordability can be demonstrated. Solving current environmental problems often requires more than one algorithm or model. The potential for combining multiple tools to produce more generic products should be promoted to improve marketability. Combining slick detection and wind retrieval algorithms for improved wind estimates is one example. Future efforts should be directed towards increasing awareness of the potential of SAR data for particular sectors identified within MARSAIS which under utilise SAR data at present, including marine transport, mineral extraction and energy production. Many organisations lack in-house capacity and capability to interpret SAR imagery. This coincides with a gap in the marketplace for interpretive, value adding services; particularly in relation to less mature application areas, such as those related to wind fields and sea state. Support should be provided for SMEs willing to maximise new opportunities to exploit SAR data in the coastal and marine environment. As an example,

vi

some end users are not interested in SAR data, but rather in the information that can be provided via thematic maps to aid decision making. Particular attention should be paid to specific demands of end users which include the following: greater availability of processed imagery; improved provision of coastal data over data pertaining to the open ocean; delivery of data via networks; more frequent temporal coverage; and synergy between SAR data and other EO data formats. SAR data providers, including ESA, should continue to take steps towards the simplification of pricing schemes to ensure the maximum uptake of SAR products by potential end users, in particular by first time and non-expert end users. The results of this survey should not be considered in isolation. It is important to bear in mind that the future of coastal area management involves the use of EO based technologies in integrated management systems, where EO products will be integrated into intelligent systems capable of assimilating different types of data to produce what is requested by resource managers. The above recommendations are of relevance to the GMES Services Element programme which focuses upon the delivery of policy-relevant services to end users, primarily (but not exclusively) from EO services. It is recommended that the results of this survey be disseminated to appropriate audiences in ESA and the EU.

vii

CHAPTER 1 –INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) is an active microwave sensor i.e. a type of remote sensor that illuminates the ground with its own energy, then records a portion of the energy reflected or backscattered to the instrument (for a full explanation on the properties of SAR see [1,2]). SAR is sunlight independent and is also cloud independent [3,4], thus permitting day and night and all weather imaging [1]. Some typical SAR applications in ocean areas include detection and location of oil spills, characterisation of bathymetric features in shallow water, and monitoring of oceanic current features [5]. These capabilities have also led to the systematic use of SAR images in operational surveillance associated with marine coastal pollution control, seabed mapping, and fisheries [3,6]. For a detailed overview on the use of SAR data in the coastal and marine environment, it is advisable to consult the Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Coastal and Marine Applications of SAR, held in Svalbard, Norway 8th-12th September 2003. The Proceedings will appear in ESA Publication Series SP-365. After the brief mission of Seasat in 1978, the next orbiting SAR sensor to be launched was on ERS-1 in 1991. Since then, ERS-2, Radarsat-1, JERS-1 and more recently Envisat have guaranteed 12 years of continuous SAR acquisitions (Table 1.1). During this period, there has been continued research and development investment in order to derive geophysical information products from SAR data. There is now a well-matured understanding of what information, relevant to the marine environment, can be derived from SAR data. Tools and algorithms for information extraction have been defined and developed and a small number of companies are generating tailor made commercial products. Nevertheless, the uptake of SAR data and derived information products appears to be much smaller than would be expected given the potential uses of SAR derived products. One of the goals of the MARSAIS project is to identify what issues are of most concern to existing and potential SAR users and what is restricting the use of these systems.

Table 1.1. Overview of past, present and near future SAR imaging radar satellites. SPACEBORNE SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR SYSTEMS

SATELLITE AGENCY SENSOR TYPE LAUNCH STATUS

ERS-1 ESA C-Band VV 1991 Not-operating since 1996

JERS-1 NASDA L-Band HH 1992 Operation terminated

ERS-2 ESA C-Band VV 1995 Operating RADARSAT-1 CSA/NASA C-Band HH 1996 Operating

ENVISAT ESA C-Band VV/HH 2002 Operating RADARSAT-2 CSA/NASA C-Band VV/HH

and polarimmetry 2005 Scheduled for

launch in 2005 ALOS NASDA L-Band HH 2004 Scheduled for

launch in summer of 2004

1

Simultaneous flight operations of three calibrated, spaceborne SARs (Envisat, Radarsat-2 and Japanese ALOS [Table 1.1]) will become a reality by 2005. All three will employ wide swath (~500km) technology, multi-angle and multi-polarisation SAR sensors. This will place SAR applications on the threshold of a new era, presenting novel and unique opportunities for the international marine user community. It is imperative to increase use of existing SAR data and to determine if there are specific technical or commercial shortcomings in its exploitation in order to gain maximum benefit from upcoming SAR missions. If the operational capabilities of existing and near to launch SAR systems are not successfully demonstrated within the next few years, the opportunity to build a sustainable international user base in support of imaging SAR systems will be lost. International collaboration will be required in order to harmonise and improve data access and to define and develop a set of geophysical products that are comparable across the world’s differing marine regions. Such initiatives will be essential in order to build an international user base that can become familiar with a standard set of SAR derived coastal and marine environmental products and a standardised method for accessing these products. This will help to make SAR data an asset for operational coastal and marine monitoring. The goal of MARSAIS is to a large extent defined and advocated in light of this objective. 1.1.1 Current Uptake and Distribution of SAR Data The conditions of data distribution for ERS SAR and Envisat ASAR data are directly related to category use as defined by the ERS and Envisat Data Policy. For this purpose two different categories of use are in place:

• Category 1: Research and applications development use in support of the mission objectives, including research on long term issues of Earth system science, research and development in preparation for future operational use, certification of receiving stations as part of the ESA functions, and ESA internal use

• Category 2: All other uses, which do not fall into Category 1, including

operational and commercial use.

[7] 1.1.2 Category 1 ESA distributes SAR data for research purposes through its Category 1 projects and Announcement of Opportunity (AO) programme. European Space Agency (ESA) EO supported projects represent the user community dealing with research and application development use. ESA distributes approximately 30,000 SAR high rate data per year - 60% are raw data and the majority of the remaining 40% are precision image (PRI) products.

2

The ESA EO Principal Investigator Portal contains information on past and ongoing Category 1 projects [7]. The portal allows users to search the research database using variables such as study area (e.g. Europe, Indian Ocean), instrument (e.g. Envisat ASAR), application domain (e.g. oceanography, coastal zones, ice) and principal investigator. The portal is relevant to scientists, industry and members of the user community who want to understand how EO could help in meeting their information needs. ESA currently supports approximately 670 projects through its Envisat Category 1, 29% of which focus on oceanography (20%) and coastal monitoring (9%). 1.1.3 Category 2 The commercial distribution of SAR data is undertaken by two Distributing Entities (DEs), namely EMMA represented by Eurimage (consortium includes ASI, Astrium Gmbh, DLR, Infoterra, QinetiQ and Telespazio) and SARCOM represented by SPOT Image (consortium includes Radarsat International, NPA, KSAT, Metria, NLR and Geoserve). Current SAR Data Sales: The main services offered by DEs focus on offshore exploration (including oil seepage), marine surveillance e.g. for oil and vessels, digital elevation model (DEM) generation, subsidence and associated risk management and cartography. Recent trends have demonstrated a strong demand for archived ERS SAR data (70% of total commercial sales in 2001 and 90% in 2002). Typically, the archived data is used for data heavy applications that require a long time series of data e.g. oil seepage investigations by hydrocarbon companies. Trends indicate that raw data is the strongest selling format at present; raw format data offers more flexibility in terms of developing a value-adding product. Alternatively it may be that raw data sells in greater amounts because it is cheaper than data in PRI format. It is expected that future trends will see an increase in the purchase of Envisat ASAR data as it becomes more accessible. Initial difficulties experienced with the ESA ground segment has meant the uptake of Envisat ASAR data has not been optimum to date. However, where organisations have established their own ground station this is a problem they can avoid e.g. KSS at Tromso. In the future, it is likely that more ground stations will be established to exploit more Near Real Time (NRT) applications. Due to the fact that ERS and Envisat operate at different frequencies the transition from the use of ERS SAR to Envisat ASAR will be more problematic in relation to some applications than others.

3

Envisat Applications: Envisat data is more applicable to monitoring activities and NRT applications, e.g. oil spill applications as potential NRT applications for Envisat. There are variations in the uptake of SAR data for the focus applications of MARSAIS, i.e. wind, waves, current features and internal waves and oil spill/slick. For some applications that do not require NRT data, the data acquired can be used to build up a valuable database e.g. vessel routing. This approach is demonstrated successfully by the services/products provided by companies such as ARGOSS. Generic Services In many cases it may be the case that developments in one application (e.g. wind) will be used to enhance present applications (e.g. oil spill monitoring) as opposed to becoming a wholly separate application. The development of generic services/products can provide greater scope to satisfy the requirements for a number of applications. In some instances certain applications will be more mature than others, but may be refined into the future. In the case of winds, it is well documented how SAR can be used to extract wind information but associated difficulties remain, e.g. the wide swath mode is not ideal for extracting wind and the alternative strip mode has to be used. 1.1.4 The MARSAIS Project The MARSAIS project (Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System) is funded under the EU Fifth Framework Programme (FP5). The project began in January 2001 and is due to be completed in January 2004. The project consortium consists of eight partner institutes:

- Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center; Norway (Co-ordinator). - Coastal and Marine Resources Centre; University College Cork, Ireland. - ENST Bretagne; France. - IFREMER; France. - Joint Research Centre; Italy. - National Centre for Marine Research; Greece. - Southampton Oceanography Centre; United Kingdom. - University of Hamburg; Germany.

The main components of the MARSAIS prototype are shown in Figure 1.1. 1.1.5 Objectives of the MARSAIS Project To design and implement a prototype generic Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System (MARSAIS) with sufficient product accuracy and optimum resolution for specific application(s) in the coastal and marine environment.

4

Figure 1.1. Main components of the MARSAIS project. The following tasks were undertaken to develop the MARSAIS project (each partner institute has a specific responsibility for individual tasks): 1.1.6 WP 2: Generation of Database - A web enabled database of multi-source satellite data was implemented in IDL on the Net (ION). The MARSAIS database is a consistent and user friendly database of multi-satellite and multi-sensor data, coupled with dedicated in-situ data fields from European shelf seas and the Mediterranean Sea (see Table 1.2). 1.1.7 WP 3: SAR Ocean Imaging Modelling - State-of-the-art SAR analyses and interpretation system for:

• Sea state estimates including high resolution (1-10km) near surface wind field maps (wind speed, direction), directional wave spectra and high-resolution wave field maps (amplitude, wavelength, direction).

• Current feature estimates including surface current gradients, converging and diverging current systems, and mesoscale eddies.

• Internal waves. • Monitoring of pollution incidents: slick estimates including determination and

classification of low scattering areas into presence of natural film, oil spill, and seepage.

• Synergetic use of SAR data, alongside optical and infrared data from satellites in marine monitoring systems as well as additional sources of imagery. MARSAIS developed an interactive toolkit for comparative analysis of multi-source satellite data (radar, visual and IR)

1.1.8 WP 4: Validation - A measure of accuracy was established for all SAR analytical tools. To validate products derived from SAR data, comparison was made with independent data sets in order to check all methods and products and to provide guidance to users on how to conduct future validation.

5

1.1.9 WP 5: MARSAIS Toolkit Development - An integrated toolkit was developed and implemented in IDL. The MARSAIS Toolkit contains a series of SAR ocean retrieval algorithms and ocean interaction models, incorporating a set of general-purpose image processing techniques and a limited number of test and validation data sets (see Table 1.2). The toolkit demonstrates different geophysical parameters that can be derived from SAR data alone or from synergy with other EO data types, models and in situ data. 1.1.10 WP 6: MARSAIS Exploitation and User Interface - The MARSAIS Users Group (MUG) and the MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG)1 (the members of the MAG are listed in Appendix 1) assisted in the development and refinement of MARSAIS tools and associated products. User and MAG feedback was evaluated and incorporated into product development where appropriate. 1.1.11 WP 7: MARSAIS Prototyping - The MARSAIS prototype contains products, data sources, algorithms and models, validation information, introductory and didactic material for SAR data and other EO data. The prototype enables users to evaluate the capabilities of the SAR ocean interaction models and algorithms to deliver useful products for specific applications in the coastal and marine area (see Table 1.2). In this way, the applications of EO based technologies will be promoted, thus making them more widely understood in accordance with the Research, Technological and Demonstration (RTD) priorities of the Fifth Framework Programme.

1 The MARSAIS Users Group (MUG) refers to potential end users who attended end user workshops, contact with these key end users was maintained throughout the duration of the project. The MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG) is composed of a group of experts who act as external consultants throughout the lifespan of the MARSAIS project providing feedback and recommendations where appropriate.

6

1.1.12 MARSAIS Outputs The fundamental outputs originating from the MARSAIS project can be considered in terms of direct and indirect outputs. The details of these outputs are summarised in Tables 1.2 and 1.3. Table 1.2. Description and access information for direct outputs from MARSAIS.

Output Description/Content Access

MARSAIS Toolkit

(1) Imaging radar ocean currents models, including new algorithms for the detection of fronts and internal waves. (2) ENVIWAVE algorithm for sea state retrievals and CMOD algorithms for wind speed retrieval. (3) Oil slick signature analysis. (4) Oil spill model (OSM) allowing users to simulate the movement, spreading and aging of the oil particles in 3-D. (5) An interactive tool for synergy analysis of SAR and other satellite imagery.

The MARSAIS Toolkit is available as a CD-ROM (restricted access). For more information on the MARSAIS Toolkit please consult the MARSAIS Final Report (MARSAIS Deliverable No. D19).

MARSAIS Prototype

Using the algorithms and models from the toolkit the MARSAIS Prototype contains online examples of demonstration products developed for; wind, waves, currents, internal waves oil spill. Examples of synergy between SAR data and other EO data are also presented. The prototype web site contains didactic material and additional content in the form of fact sheets on each of the focus applications of MARSAIS. The prototype is applicable to a wide range of end users, e.g. students, scientists, researchers and experts.

The MARSAIS prototype is open to the public and can be accessed at http://www.nersc.no/~marsais/prototype.

7

MARSAIS Database

The MARSAIS Database contains 61 satellite images from different SAR sensors. The images provide examples of the following features: wind (16 images), waves (12), currents (21), internal waves (5) and oil slicks (19). These features are also depicted in a number of visual and IR images, which are combined with the SAR images in synergy studies.

Access to the MARSAIS Database is restricted to MARSAIS consortium.

Table 1.3. Description and access information for indirect outputs from MARSAIS.

Output Description Access

MARSAIS

Services

MARSAIS has developed potential interpretation services that could be further developed by SMEs. By consolidating and further refining the scientific understanding of what SAR data can offer, MARSAIS will help to create favourable market development conditions.

The Technical Implementation Plan (TIP) plan outlines the potential means to exploit the outputs of MARSAIS.

1.1.13 The Need for End User Studies A widespread vision for enhanced coastal and marine management involves the use of EO based technologies in integrated monitoring systems. Earth Observation data products are effective resource tools for coastal managers, particularly in bridging the gap between terrestrial and marine data sets and providing a synoptic view of both environments [8,9]. However, decisions on the development and nature of resource management strategies are seldom directly founded on scientific results derived from advances in EO technology. The effectiveness of EO data as a coastal and marine management tool has not as yet been fully utilised. The EO community must develop instruments, missions, algorithms and models, while also making further efforts to communicate with managers and make products more attractive, relevant and applicable to end users. The difference between technically oriented use of information technology and publicly oriented information technology must be considered. These two categories will be relevant to different types of end user. Improvement of access by end users to data and databases at appropriate levels must be considered. In order to understand these and other issues of importance to end users, end user studies can be undertaken to identify end

8

users as well as their needs and requirements. Typical questions that should be considered are:

• Who are the users?

• What is known about them?

• How should their preferences be incorporated into the design process?

1.1.14 MARSAIS End User Requirements Study Work package six (WP6) of the MARSAIS project, undertaken by the Coastal and Marine Resources Centre (CMRC) University College Cork, is dedicated to the exploitation of MARSAIS derived products and end user requirements assessment. The aim of WP6 is to ensure that user driven MARSAIS products are developed and effectively exploited. The work package on user requirements was carried out throughout the duration of the project. Potential end users of SAR data in the coastal and marine environment are those involved in industries and activities such as: offshore oil and gas; wind and wave energy sitings; coastal fisheries; environmental protection and preservation; aquaculture; tourism and public health; mineral extraction; defence; pollution management; climate prediction; research and development; marine engineering; dredging; coastal protection; ship-routeing and port operations. Potential end users exist within the academic, commercial and governmental sectors. By identifying potential end users of SAR data, the MARSAIS project aimed to:

• Identify and understand the data and information needs of end users of SAR data

in the coastal and marine environment;

• Develop dialogue between MARSAIS Toolkit developers and potential users;

• Ensure that user driven MARSAIS products were developed and effectively

exploited;

• Ensure that the final product delivered critical parameters at appropriate

resolutions for usage; and

• Ensure that the final product is presented with an appropriate user-friendly

interface. The objectives of WP6 were achieved through:

• A review of policy relevant to SAR data and EO data in general (Chapter 2); • A literature review of previous user studies (Chapter 3); • A review of products and services (Chapter 4); • A project review (Chapter 5);

9

• Consultation with MUG and MAG, and end user workshops (Chapter 6); • User profiles (Chapter 7); • Context of Use survey - Contemporary and desired use of SAR data products

(Chapter 8); • Cost benefit analysis (Chapter 9); • Conclusions and recommendations (Chapter 10).

This report presents the work conducted throughout WP6.

Figure 1.2. Envisat ASAR image (acquired 28th April 2003) showing an area of 100km swath width centred over the islands of Gozo, Comino and Malta located in the Mediterranean Sea. The different black patterns surrounding the island are due to the presence of sea currents. Source: http://www.esa.int/export/esa.

10

REFERENCES 1. Curlander JC & McDonough RN. (1991) Synthetic Aperture Radar Systems and Signal Processing. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York. 2. Campbell JB. (1996) Introduction to Remote Sensing. Taylor & Francis, London. 622pp. 3. Johannessen JA, Garello R, Chapron B, Romeiser R, Pavlakis P, Robinson I, Connolly N, Nittis K, Hamre T, Ufermann S, Alpers W, Espedal H, Furevik B, Cummins V & Tarchi D. (2001) Marine SAR analysis and interpretation system – MARSAIS. Special Issue of Annals of Telecommunications, Vol. 56, No. 11-12, pp 655-660. 4. Wu S, Liu A, Leonard G & Pichel WG. (2000) Ocean Feature Monitoring with Wide Swath Synthetic Aperture Radar. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp 122-129. 5. Robinson IS. (1994) Satellite Oceanography. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester. 6. Johannessen JA, Hamre T, Garello R, Romeiser R, Kern S, Chapron B, Robinson I, Ufermann S, Cummins V, Connolly N, Nittis K, Perivoliotis L & Tarchi D. (2002) Marine SAR Analyses and Interpretation System – MARSAIS. Proceedings of the 3rd EuroGOOS Conference. 7. ESA – Earth Observation Principal Investigator Portal http://eopi.esa.int 8.Jolly GW, Mangin A, Cauneau F, Calatuyud M, Barale V, Snaith SM, Rud O, Ishii M, Gade M, Redondo JM & Platinov A. (1999) The Clean Seas Project – Final Report. Contact Number: ENV4-CT96-0334, European Commission. 9. King SD & Green DR (2001) Redefining the Limits of the Coastal Zone: Bridging the Gap Between Land and Sea Using Remote Sensing, GIS, and the Internet. GeoCoast Vol. 2, No. 1, pp 1-15.

11

CHAPTER 2- THE POLICY CONTEXT

2.1 Introduction and Objectives The scope for the utilisation of EO data, including SAR data, to monitor the coastal and marine environment is set out in a number of EU documents. There is a noticeable emphasis on the need to assess, analyse and involve end users in many aspects of existing policies. This chapter aims to demonstrate how the MARSAIS concept meets the requirements of various policies and contributes in a tangible fashion to the data demands set out by these polices. 2.2 Methodology Policies relevant to the management of the coastal and marine environment are examined in this chapter in the context of MARSAIS. In each case the policy is discussed in terms of the key information requirements for the coastal and marine environment and the potential for satisfying such requirements using SAR data. 2.3 Policies 2.3.1 GMES One of the most relevant and topical policies at present is Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES). GMES is a joint initiative of the European Commission and the European Space Agency (ESA), designed to place knowledge supporting technologies at the service of better environmental management and security [1]. By achieving this objective, GMES will provide the information on environment and security needed to support and implement European policy within a wider global context [2]. With the coming of simultaneous flight operations of three calibrated, spaceborne SARs (Envisat, Radarsat-2, Japanese ALOS), employing wide swath (~500km) technology, multi-frequency and multi-polarisation SAR application will be on the threshold of a new era, presenting novel and unique opportunities for the international coastal and marine user community. The concurrent development of SAR technology across the globe indicates the potential of SAR for the implementation of GMES. The SAR derived products (some of which are key in MARSAIS) of relevance in the context of GMES include:

• High resolution coastal wind field; • Wave field characterisation (spectrum, significant wave height, dominant

wavelength and propagation direction); • Current fronts (location of fronts, gradient, shear-to-convergence ratio, river run-

off); • Location and frequency of internal wave (IW) generation;

12

• Oil spill detection; • Natural film classification; • Shallow water bathymetry (inversion of current-bottom topography interaction,

near shore bathymetry from wave refraction); • Mixed layer depth characterisation (using signals of IW propagation); • Ship detection.

Some of these products are currently assimilated in ocean model predictions while others are used for model comparison and validation. GMES adopts a user driven approach, the requirements of which will underpin all aspects of GMES [1]. A GMES workshop on user perspectives was held in Stockholm 2001 [3] and a number of conclusions emanating from the workshop are of direct relevance to the MARSAIS consortium and the future of products developed from MARSAIS. Some of the conclusions include:

• Users need guarantees on reliability, periodicity, continuity and cost effectiveness of data supply;

• Users need to be assured that data accessibility and distribution will be easy and

that there are sensible acquisition and archiving policies;

• Interaction between end users and the scientific community is necessary and productive at several stages in the process of developing the end to end systems which are needed;

• GMES management must ensure that potential end users are regularly informed

of the possibilities offered by technological advances. Within GMES the demands for information across various policy areas come from a variety of user groups e.g. policy makers, agencies responsible for policy implementation and enforcement, the service and research sectors, the commercial sector and from the public domain [2]. The term user has numerous connotations and it is imperative to recognise that the needs of different users vary and their requirements and needs cannot always be delivered in a standardised homogenous manner. Commitment to user needs is a central tenet to the GMES initiative, but this commitment is also evident in the policies that GMES is attempting to serve. Specific policy in relation to the coastal and marine environment (and of relevance to GMES) is developed at international, national and regional level and involves the European Commission, agencies of the European Union (e.g. European Environment Agency [EEA]), inter-governmental organisations (e.g. ESA) and international organisations (EuroGOOS).

13

2.3.2 INSPIRE The EU Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe (INSPIRE) initiative aims to make available relevant, harmonised and high quality geographic information to support the formulation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of Community policies [4]. As with GMES, the INSPIRE initiative has a strong end user component. The principles used to improve access to spatial information in Europe are as follows:

• It should be easy to discover what geographic coverages are available, what uses they fit and how they can be acquired;

• Geographic data should become easy to understand and interpret because it can be

visualised within the appropriate context in a user-friendly way. The need for improved accessibility to, and delivery of, pertinent data is crucial to any management regime. The INSPIRE policy will ultimately have implications for the way spatial data, including EO data, are collected, shared and distributed. 2.3.3 Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) Improvements in availability, sensor range and resolution of EO data (both airborne and satellite) provide a practical and valuable tool for Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM). A vision for enhanced coastal zone management involves the use of EO based technologies in integrated management systems, where EO products will be more and more integrated into intelligent systems capable of assimilating and manipulating different types of data to produce what is requested by environmental, coastal and ocean resource managers. The EU Demonstration Programme on ICZM highlighted the lack of awareness amongst ICZM practitioners of many technologies, data and information available to them. However, the level of use of EO data in ICZM is increasing, which indicates that there is a greater awareness of EO data in the so-called user community. The pressures facing the coastal and marine environment are well documented and effects include the depletion of fisheries, erosion, pollution events, transport and maritime traffic intensity, storm events, navigation concerns and habitat loss [5, 6]. Thus, there is a growing need for better monitoring and management [5,6,7]. The challenge to effectively deal with these pressures and to improve the coastal environment is set out in a communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Integrated Coastal Zone Management: A Strategy for Europe. The ICZM Recommendation identifies the information requirements of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), which include adequate systems for monitoring and disseminating information to the public about their coastal zone. These systems should collect and provide information in appropriate and compatible formats to decision makers at national, regional and local levels to facilitate integrated management [8].

14

Remote sensing observations play a valuable role in this context and ICZM can benefit from the dissemination of information derived from the processing of EO data [9,10]. The use of SAR in monitoring and managing some of the activities outlined above (notably sea state [e.g. surface waves, high-resolution wind fields, surface current strength and variability] and identification and location of pollutant material including toxic algae bloom, oil spill pollution and hydrocarbon seepage) is successfully demonstrated in MARSAIS [7]. 2.3.4 Towards a Strategy to Protect and Conserve the Marine Environment The marine strategy communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Towards a strategy to protect and conserve the marine environment [11] aims to create an integrated policy for marine protection in Europe. The marine environment is subject to threats not dissimilar to those encountered in the coastal environment [6, 12]. The communication also identifies the existing gaps in knowledge and information that hamper the creation of effective and efficient policy [13]. The response to this knowledge/information gap is set out in Objective 14 of the communication, which states the need to improve the knowledge base on which marine protection policy is based [11,13] Specific information gaps outlined in the marine strategy to which SAR can contribute include the need for more reliable and accurate data for marine fisheries management and the need for more information on the illicit oil discharges from ships. The communication identifies frequent violation of regulations aimed at preventing illegal discharges of oil at sea. While certain marine conventions such as HELCOM and the Bonn Agreement have collected substantial information of illegal oil discharges from ships, the information required for European seas as a whole is incomplete and not fully representative. This gap in knowledge can be improved with the utilisation of SAR data, both on its own and in synergy with other data sets e.g. the POSEIDON system in the Aegean Sea [14]. 2.3.5 Water Framework Directive (WFD) The EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) came into force in December 2000, establishing a new framework for Community action in the field of water policy. The WFD takes a holistic approach, addressing inland surface waters, estuarine and coastal waters and groundwater. A 15-year period is allowed to each Member State, by which time the State must ensure compliance. Objectives of the Directive include:

• Protection and enhancement of the status of aquatic ecosystems (and terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands directly dependent on aquatic ecosystems);

• Provision for enhanced protection and improvement of the aquatic environment

by reducing/phasing out of discharges, emissions and losses of priority substances;

• Protection of territorial and marine waters, and

15

• Establishment of a register of protected areas e.g. areas designated for protection

of habitats or species. The suggested modes of monitoring as outlined in the WFD [15] will rely to some extent on EO technology. The monitoring modes are as follows:

• Surveillance – supplement and validate risk assessments and detect and attribute underlying long term changes in the environment;

• Operational – focused on ecosystems at risk of failing to meet environmental

objectives;

• Investigative – to research cause and effect when the above monitoring types fail to do so, or when accidental pollution occurs;

• Protected area – to verify that specific conservation targets are being met.

SAR provides the potential to contribute to the monitoring effort required by the WFD in the coastal and marine environment, particularly as a component of an operational system encompassing a variety of other monitoring techniques. 2.3.6 International Conventions Marine pollution is a key focus area for a number of marine conventions and agreements e.g. MARPOL Convention, Helsinki Convention (HELCOM), Bonn Agreement, Barcelona Convention and the OSPAR Convention, to which the EU is a signatory. The use of SAR for oil slick detection and oil spill prediction is well documented [16,17,18]. HELCOM activities use satellite and airborne SAR surveillance to enforce regulations on illegal discharges of oil to the sea.

16

2.4 Discussion Of the policies reviewed, the involvement of end users and the assessment of their requirements is a common cross cutting theme e.g. GMES, Water Framework Directive, EU Recommendation on ICZM. A number of policies refer to EO data as a peripheral element of the policy implementation, e.g. the use of EO data for monitoring water quality in the WFD. On the other hand, GMES is directly focused towards improving the observational capacity from satellites and using satellite-based data for ground-based policy. Therefore, GMES in itself is a strategic tool in the implementation of a whole range of European policies. Total GMES funding is expected to reach €400 million by 2008 [19]. This represents a significant statement of intent in achieving the objectives of GMES and signifies the current importance of EO data in environmental monitoring and security. MARSAIS can support policy requirements by making available services and products that meet the growing need for better monitoring and management of the coastal and marine environment. The generic capability of the MARSAIS Toolkit makes it a potentially effective product to meet a number of policy demands, where knowledge of parameters such as wind, waves, oil spill and current is a requisite for effective management. The implementation and use of MARSAIS will ensure better provision of scientific results into new or existing applications to serve policy requirements and improve the exploitation of EO data for coastal and marine monitoring and management. It should be noted that this policy review is not a complete review of all the policies that can potentially use EO data in their implementation. There are numerous other policies that will have a significant impact on the need for EO data to underpin their informational requirements e.g. Habitats Directive, European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), Common Fisheries Policy (CFP).

17

REFERENCES 1. European Commission & ESA. (2001) A European Approach to Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES): Towards Meeting User Needs, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels. 2. Building an Information Capacity for Environmental Protection and Security (BICEPS) Digest of the Draft Final Report: User Needs. http://www.gmes-cca.co.uk/DOCUMENTS/BICEPS%20DIGEST%20USER%20NEEDS%200310.pdf 3. Liljelund LE. (2001) Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES) Workshop ‘The Users Perspective’- The Chairman’s Report, Stockholm. 4. Harris R & Browning R. (2003) Data Policy Assessment for GMES – Interim Report, University College London. 5. Connolly N, Buchanan C, O’Connell M, Cronin M, O’Mahony C, Kay D & Buckley S. (2001) Assessment of Human Activity in the Coastal Zone. Maritime Ireland/Wales INTERREG Report No.9. 126pp. 6. Huber ME, Duce RA, Bewers JM, Insull D, Jeftic L & Keckes S. (2003) Priority problems facing the global marine and coastal environment and recommended approaches to their solution. Ocean & Coastal Management, Vol. 46, pp.479-485. 7. Johannessen JA, Garello R, Chapron B, Romeiser R, Pavlakis P, Robinson I, Connolly N, Nittis K, Hamre T, Ufermann S, Perivoliotis L, Alpers W, Kern S & Cummins V. (2002) Marine SAR Analyses and Interpretation System – MARSAIS, Proceedings of the 3rd EuroGOOS Conference, Athens. 8. European Commission. (2002) Recommendation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the implementation of Integrated Coastal Zone Management in Europe (2002/413/EC), European Commission, Brussels. 9. Doody JP, Pamplin CF, Gilbert C & Bridge L. (1998) Thematic Study F: Information Required for Integrated Coastal Zone Management. European Union Demonstration Programme on Integrated Management in Coastal Zones. Study contract reference number 3050/STU/9700186. 71pp. 10. Lehfeldt R & Barthel V. (2003) Information requirements to support Integrated Coastal Zone Management. Proceedings of 3rd GMES Forum, Athens. 11. European Commission. (2002) Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Towards a strategy to protect and conserve the marine environment (2002/539/EC), European Commission, Brussels. 12. GESAMP. (2001) A Sea of Troubles. GESAMP Reports and Studies No. 70 35 pp.

18

13. Wyatt BK, Briggs DJ, Ryder P & de Hoog C. (2003) BICEPS: Building an Information Capacity for Environmental Protection and Security – First Interim Report, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, UK. 14. Nittis K. (2003) Marine Information Products for the Greek Seas, Proceedings of 3rd GMES Forum, Athens. 15. European Commission. (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, European Commission, Brussels. 16. Sherwin TJ, Matthews JP & Kennedy F. (1997) Effluent Slicks in the Menai Strait: a comparison of ERS-1 SAR signatures and model predictions. Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 264-268. 17. Samad R & Mansor S. (2002) Detection of oil spill pollution using RADARSAT SAR imagery. Proceedings of the 23th Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, Kathmandu. 18. Navas I, Prats P, Broquetas A, Charron S, Cabioch F & Jezequel R. (2002) Development of an airborne multisensor system for maritime pollution survey, Proceedings of 3rd R & D Forum on High-density Oil Spill Response. Brest. 19. ESA. (2003) Global Monitoring for Environment and Security. Earth Observation Quarterly, No. 71.

19

CHAPTER 3- REVIEW OF END USER REQUIREMENTS STUDIES AND SUPPORTING PROGRAMMES

3.1 Introduction and Objectives Since the mid 1990s, in support of ongoing and planned programmes, several assessments of user requirements for EO data have been undertaken. However, little has been done to identify the specific requirements for Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data. To date, studies have involved large numbers of potential end users including, but not restricted to, users of coastal and marine EO data. In order to take advantage of this work, these studies were identified to investigate their relevance to MARSAIS. 3.2 Methodology A comprehensive trawl of ESA and EU programmes and projects, in support of end user requirements, was undertaken in the period covering the last ten years (Table 3.1). Figure 3.1 shows the timeframe associated with these programmes and studies reviewed and Figure 3.2 presents this information in relation to the issues addressed by each programme/study. Within ESA the primary relevant programmes are the Data User Programme (DUP), the Data User Element (DUE) and the Earth Observation Market Development (EOMD). Other ESA initiatives include the Oxygen (O2) Project and Treaty Enforcement Service Using Earth Observation (TESEO). Joint EU/ESA initiatives under GMES will also be presented with a focus on projects that are included in the GMES Services Element (GSE) programme. Within the EU Framework Programme both 4th and 5th Framework projects examined the role of end users in the EO sector and assessed, to the different degrees of complexity, the user requirements for EO data. Table 3.1. Summary of programmes and studies selected for review. ESA 4th and 5th Framework Other DUP/DUE EUFOREO CEO Pathfinder Study EOMD EOPOLE CEO Report Oxygen (O2) Project ICAMS EuroGOOS TESEO COASTMON GMES Service Element ESA Coastal Zone Study

20

Figure3.1. Time line showing studies and reports examined in the review.

O2 project begins Launch of DUE & EO Market Development (Phase 2) EUFOREO complete

2003

EUFOREO (EU 5FP) start TESEO start GMES Services Element start

2001

EOPOLE (EU 4FP) start COASTMON & ICAMS complete EuroGOOS Report

1999

COASTMON (EU 4FP) start ICAMS (EU 4FP) start ESA Coastal Zone EarthWatchStudy

CEO Pathfinder Study

TESEO finishes 2002

EOPOLE complete EO Market Development (Phase 1)

2000

Launch of Data User Programme by ESA

1998

1997

1996

1995

21

Figure 3.2. Time line showing issues identified in reviewed reports and studies.

ct type.

of EO data.

ata arine

Issues identified in the EUFOREO report include cost (particularly if large amounts of imagery are required), potential end users of EO data within the marine research and operational sectors can be further increased and archiving and knowledge retention in relation to older sensors.

2003

ICAMS identified the unrealised potential of EO din the coastal and menvironment due to insufficient integration between data types, poor access to data, costly, complex and hardware intensive environments for data visualisation and analysis.

1999

1998

From the ESA report issues identified include temporal resolution, data and product type, and concerns that the optimum use of airborne and spaceborne EO data in the coastal environment was not being achieved.

1997

The CEO Pathfinder report identified accuracy and re-visit times as potential problems in the use

TESEO identified the key role of user and user feedback in the EO sector. Data archiving, data access and cost were issues identified.

2002

The findings of the EOPOLE project cited cost (actual pricing and ancillary costs such as training and processing), capacity and capability building and data archiving.

2000

Issues emerging from theusers perspective of the DUPinclude cost, outputs andprodu

1996

2001

1995

22

3.3 Results 3.3.1 ESA and GMES 3.3.1.1 Data User Programme (1996 – Ongoing) The Data User Programme2 is an initiative of ESA which aims to support the services industry, research sector and user (mainly institutional) communities to bridge the gap that exists between research at the level of pilot projects and the operational and sustainable provision of information services based on EO [1]. The ultimate objective of the programme is for DUP projects to eventually lead to the establishment of self-sustaining operational services provided by industrial entities. A number of projects have been initiated under the DUP. All DUP funded projects must:

• Respond to identified end user needs;

• Commit identified end users as active partners of the project. The projects enable users to participate in the demonstration of EO products and services developed to their needs. A number of DUP projects involve the use of SAR (both ASAR and ERS SAR) but there are no projects focusing on the applications demonstrated in MARSAIS3. Two DUP projects involve the use of SAR for shallow water bathymetry applications. A third project involves the use of SAR for ice mapping. Issues emerging from the users perspective of the DUP include cost, outputs and product types:

• The issue of high data cost was cited as a weakness of EO technology [2]. • To ensure the sustainable success of the EO sector it is essential that users are

confident in the accessibility, reliability and cost effectiveness of any EO product or service. The promotion of EO should be focussed on concrete examples where efficiency, information and potential savings can be demonstrated [2].

Within the DUP the user is seen as the focal point of attention. Bringing more users in close contact with EO data will help the EO sector to achieve sustainability. 2 It should be pointed out that the DUP is currently subscribed by Belgium, Italy, Netherlands and Switzerland. 3 MARSAIS focused on a number of applications for SAR data use including pollution (oil spill) incidents, current features, waves, wind and internal waves.

23

3.3.1.2 Data User Element (2003 –2007) The Data User Element (DUE) is a follow on initiative from the DUP and will provide the continuity for the activities conducted under the DUP. The DUE will operate from 2003 to 2007. During the preparation of the second period of the DUP, consultations indicated that a majority of Member States would like to see DUP activities integrated within the Earth Observation Envelope Programme (EOEP) [3]. The type of activities to be carried out will provide the bridge between primarily scientific and methodological investigations conducted within Announcement of Opportunity (AO) projects and the more commercially oriented activities to be performed under market development, already an elemental part of the EOEP. A major benefit will be that a single programmatic approach can be pursued for both the product and service development and market development activities [3]. 3.3.1.3 Earth Observation Market Development (2000 – 2007)4 While the purpose of the DUP is to concentrate on EO applications at the development stage and developing user confidence in the potential services that the EO sector can offer, the Earth Observation Market Development (EOMD) programme focuses more on the marketing and business stage of EO applications. The EOMD is a form of programmatic support providing impetus to the value adding companies (VACs) involved in the EO service industry. EOMD activities can be categorised by thematic area or by demand segment. The thematic area describes the general application area where services may be applied and includes: agriculture and forestry; fishing information; geological mapping; hydrology; land cover mapping and change detection; land surface motion; mapping, charting and topography; marine and coastal monitoring and marine environment. The demand segment describes the business or market sector that the services are directed to and includes: agriculture and forestry; civil and geo-technical engineering; coastal management and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) monitoring; environmental monitoring; insurance and commodities; maritime transport; offshore engineering; oil, gas and minerals extraction industry and security. EOMD projects of relevance to MARSAIS include, SAR-based oil spill and fishing vessel detection services for government authorities, EO exploitation in the sector of Marine Information Systems (MIS) and Marketing of fishing vessel monitoring services to national Fishery Monitoring Centres (FMCs) all of which involve the use of SAR data and are within the marine and coastal monitoring thematic area. Within the marine environment thematic area there are also a number of EOMD projects relevant to MARSAIS, including Envisat monitoring and forecasting services for the 4 Phase 1 of the EOMD began in 2000 and operated for an initial period of three years. The second phase runs from 2003 to 2007.

24

offshore industry, Wave climate market development, Near real time (NRT) sea-surface winds from SAR data and Envisat data for operational wave analysis. The Wave climate market development project led to the development of two commercial ocean-climate products, wave-climate.com and route-climate.com by ARGOSS (see Chapter 4 for further details). 3.3.1.4 The Oxygen (O2) Project (2003 – 2007) Despite the success of Europe in scientific advances using EO technology, EO technology has failed, according to ESA, to evolve into a mature and self-sustainable operational or commercial activity [4]. The O2 Project (O2 = open and operational) aims to provide a new perspective for EO data, which will provide an open, integrated, transparent and end user friendly infrastructure in support of the scientific, public and commercial sectors [5]. In order to maintain political and financial support for the space sector, it is essential that all parties concerned successfully demonstrate the range of services that space can offer society. To arrive at this point, it is necessary to change current policy regarding data distribution and the technical means of access to space information. The O2 Project rests on three pillars, which will progress concurrently over the duration of the project.

• Pillar S – Developing services Much effort has been invested in developing services through ESA initiatives, GMES and the EU Framework Programmes. The activities initiated through these instruments will receive increased support in order to generate rapidly representative forerunners of operational services. Access to new data sources will allow an improvement in the services provided and/or enable new services [4]

• Pillar C – Providing access to current data sources

It is evident from a number of end user assessment reports [6, 7, 8] that the issue of accessibility to EO data was a concern for end users. Information regarding data availability, project results and applications is currently accessible in a piecemeal manner and to a limited number of beneficiaries. Subsequently, only a limited community, knowing what to look for and where to look, are in a position to collect and compile relevant EO information. Easier and timely access to large quantities of primary data is a prerequisite for delivering effective services [4]. The objective of this phase is therefore to offer fast and economic access to data from the largest possible range of satellites to the value adding service industry [4].

• Pillar N – Integrating upcoming EO national projects in Europe.

With respect to upcoming EO missions e.g. TerraSAR X, it is intended to have in place a data distribution mechanism common to all these missions, including

25

processing, archiving and distribution [4]. In addition, it is envisaged to have developed a set of institutional and commercial services including, but not limited to, a response to GMES requirements.

3.3.1.5 Treaty Enforcement Service Using Earth Observation (2001 – 2002) The Treaty Enforcement Service Using Earth Observation (TESEO) is another ESA initiative that demonstrated the potential value of EO technology for providing support to the implementation of international environmental treaties of European interest e.g. MARPOL 73/78 Convention for the prevention of pollution from ships [9]. TESEO projects were considered as preparatory studies for future GMES services and provided a significant contribution to the EUFOREO activities [6]. In addition, TESEO constituted a platform for formulating the basis for future products and services to be developed in the DUP. TESEO focused on four thematic strands: wetlands; climate change; desertification and marine pollution [10]. Over the course of the project, three TESEO Users Brainstorming Events (TUBEs) took place in November 2001, June 2002 and January 2003. These events were intended to bring together individuals involved in the implementation of environmental conventions with ESA representatives, to achieve a better understanding of the requirements needed to support the implementation of the conventions. Additionally, TUBE facilitated an opportunity for ESA and the project teams to have consultations with a broad spectrum of end users (including Convention secretariats, international developing agencies, national administrations and policy makers). Key findings from the series of TUBE events of relevance to MARSAIS can be summarised as follows:

• TESEO was advantageous to the user community in that it allowed direct involvement in defining requirements and providing feedback on the role of EO [11];

• Data archiving and data access were quoted as possible weaknesses in the EO

sector, particularly in developing countries [11];

• The end user community consists of distinctly different types of end user, which have very different needs [12];

• Cost was cited as an issue considered particularly inhibitive to the use of EO for

developing countries. A stark example used to emphasise this conclusion was in Mongolia where it would be cheaper to kill 2 million animals than to use EO for grazing management.

26

3.3.1.6 ESA Earthwatch GMES Services Element (2001 – 2006) The Earthwatch GMES Services Element (GSE) is an ESA programme wholly dedicated to GMES. GSE will deliver policy-relevant services to end users, primarily (but not exclusively) from EO sources. GSE is a key element of GMES, because it will enable end users to become key players in the move from present generation EO satellites to future European systems that will deliver vital information on global environment and security. Within GSE, a number of projects have been initiated which focus on specific services. Four projects (Coastwatch, ROSES, ICEMON and Northern View) are of direct relevance to MARSAIS in that they examine the potential use of SAR data, and other data sources, for application in the marine and coastal environment. Each project contains a user component within the work outline. Each project is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5. 3.3.1.7 Coastal Zone Earth Watch Study (1997) The Coastal Zone Earth Watch report by ESA [13] outlined the issues that would benefit from the acquisition of EO data for the operational community in the coastal zone. ESA surveyed experts from several organisations, held two workshops on the topic of remote sensing in the coastal environment, and received approximately 60 replies to a detailed questionnaire. The main characteristics of the coastal zone of Europe, which would benefit from the use of EO data, were summarised. The main questions raised by respondents and attendees included:

• Can the required satellite data be required in a timely fashion?

• Are the data in a convenient form?

• Are users making the most of airborne, coastal and satellite remote sensing data?

• Is there a need for a concerted approach to in situ and satellite studies in regions of interest?

Specific user needs for measurement reporting in the 1 day to 1-week range was predominant, though there was also an interest in multi-year time series at yearly averages. Sea surface fields were requested as 1-10km fields, while the coastal features and bio-geochemical parameters are needed at a 500m or higher resolution.

27

3.3.2 EU Framework Programme 3.3.2.1 European Forum on the use of EO for Environment and Security (2001 – 2003) The European Forum on the use of Earth Observation for Environment and Security (EUFOREO) is a Thematic Network (TN) funded under the EU 5th Framework Programme for Research and Technology Development. The mission of EUFOREO was to set up a European forum linking representatives of the major space agencies, research centres, service providers, manufacturers and end users at both national and European levels. The purpose was to create optimal conditions for efficient policies about environment and security, through the use of EO data to assist in the building of the GMES Action Plan. A key publication to emerge from EUFOREO was a report entitled Matching demand and supply for EO data and information. Three main areas of application – land, air and climate, oceans and lakes were examined and 21 hindering factors to the use of EO data and information were identified. These factors concerned user attitudes, awareness of products and technology, fitness-for-purpose, obtain ability and quality. For the marine sector specific findings centred on the issues of cost, access to data, the perceived esoteric nature of EO data, formats and archiving. Specific conclusions pertaining to the marine sector are:

• Due to the geographic scale of the marine sector end users are required to utilise more images. If cost is an issue then the issue of financing the data becomes more acute [6];

• While many end users within the marine research and operational sectors have

prior knowledge of EO data and potential applications, other theoretical (potential) end users of EO derived products are not exposed to these opportunities (also a key issue raised in the O2 project [4]). By transferring the expertise held within the scientific community into applications in the coastal and marine environment, the end user benefits fully from the uses of SAR data [6];

• The presence of experts in an operational programme can often work against

attempts to involve end users. Experts in the scientific field are often concerned with improving precision whereas an end user may find the output completely satisfactory for their needs. An end user may pick up on the opinions of the expert;

• Concern was raised by the more experienced end users that data obtained from

now obsolete sensors may be lost when the knowledge base connected with those sensors is not satisfactorily archived [6].

28

Despite the identification of these hindering factors, EO data and information were identified as having enormous potential for both research and policy support [6, 7] but are not optimised for routine applications in policy and environmental management. 3.3.2.2 Earth Observation Data Policy and Europe (1999 –2000) A 4th Framework project under the Environment and Climate Programme, Earth Observation Data Policy and Europe (EOPOLE) aimed, as one of its key objectives, to review and co-ordinate relevant European national research in EO data policy with a strong user perspective. EOPOLE acknowledged the diversity of individuals and organisations that are termed end users. Policy makers need to consider complex composition of the end user community when formulating policies for different EO applications. In terms of policy the key user issues emerging from the EOPOLE project were, pricing, archiving and legal repercussions for the EO sector with regard to new sensor technologies.

• The issue of cost as a barrier to the use of EO data was raised within the EOPOLE project. However, attention was given to the importance of costs not only in terms of the actual cost of the data but the associated costs of training staff, data processing and other ancillary costs [14].

• It was felt that much capacity building was needed to enable users to benefit fully

from the potential of EO data and its applications. This is particularly relevant to SAR data, which is often perceived as difficult to interpret and a highly specialised field [15].

• EO data may retain its value long after the associated mission or life span of the

sensor has ended. However, without an adequate archiving policy much of this value may be lost. Quite often, archiving and data management are only funded for the lifetime of a specific EO mission or perhaps a short period thereafter [14]. It is also important to consider that any archiving policy put in place must ensure that the data remains accessible to the end user community. Otherwise the data will still be effectively “lost” as it is inaccessible to those who should benefit from its use. Additionally, the expertise associated with older data sets may also be lost if their full benefits are not realised and maximised.

3.3.2.3 Integrated Coastal Analysis and Monitoring System (1997 – 1999) The 4th Framework project - Integrated Coastal Analysis and Monitoring System (ICAMS) sought to remove the barriers to effective use of EO technology by the coastal user community. At the time of the project it was felt the promise of EO data and technology as a tool for the monitoring and management of coastal environments was not realised.

29

The suggested reasons for this included: poor targeting of users of water quality information; poor access to data; insufficient integration with other data types and costly, complex and hardware intensive environments for data visualisation and analysis. End user feedback collated by each of three partners (insert footnote) during the project specifically focused on the data and technology requirements. Analysis of the feedback revealed the following information on end user data and technology requirements:

• Ireland Data requirements – Sea Surface Temperature (SST) and chlorophyll maps. Ability to derived maps of algal blooms and toxin distribution. Data at 1km resolution for bay and offshore areas and higher resolution in harbour areas. Optimum delivery of data would be on daily or weekly basis, as well as interest in time-series data [16].

Technology requirements – The ability to access data via the Internet and GIS compatibility for the local analysis of data. Interest in advanced warning and forecast systems, which require modelling capability.

• Adriatic

Data requirements - Chlorophyll concentration, dissolved organic matter, transparency/secchi depth and SST. Primary productivity and turbidity index. The ability to obtain data every 2-3 days was desirable. Interest in data at 1km resolution to complement higher resolution local data [16].

Technology requirements – Ability to access data via fax and the Internet. Capability for PC-based data analysis and interest in using ICAMS analysis tools [16].

• Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Data requirements - Chlorophyll, SST and sediment at 1km resolution and higher. Access to archives of time-series data. Land-use and inland water quality data [16].

Technology requirements - Stand alone ICAMS archive and analysis systems for local use. PC based data analysis [16].

Overall, ICAMS found that many coastal and marine end users were interested in:

• Coastline mapping from high resolution data • Wind data • Current data • Meteorological data

3.3.2.4 COASTMON (1997 – 1999) COASTMON–Metocean and Coastal Zone Monitoring in Harbour Regions Using Satellite Radar was a EU 4th Framework project under the Environment and Climate Programme (1994-1999). COASTMON explored methods for the use of SAR and other

30

new satellite data and their integration with GIS to aid coastal zone management (CZM) and to improve the use of satellite observations within the user community. The COASTMON user requirements study demonstrated:

• That weather forecasting services, local coastal and harbour authorities with responsibilities for ship traffic, pollution control, fisheries and aquaculture would benefit from acquisition of satellite data. The study concluded that in many circumstances the aforementioned beneficiaries of EO data may not be able to interpret the data in raw format and aid with interpretation would be required [17];

• At the time of publication, clear gaps existed between the user’s information

needs and information that was currently available [17]. 3.3.2.5 Centre for Earth Observation Report (1999) The 1999 Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) report on the Characterisation of Inland and Coastal Waters with Space Sensors [19] summarised general end user needs as requiring the following:

• Near real time (NRT) information delivery through the Internet;

• Long term record for risk assessment;

• Easy access and information directly usable by the decision maker;

• Wide coverage and high level of detail. On reviewing available literature on user requirements, the study identified that parameters relating to water quality would have the highest priority. This involved primarily optical and infrared satellite data and related algorithms. Algorithms for wave height, tidal range/sea level/water level, winds and currents are of general relevance to coastal waters. The report concluded that SAR is important for oil spill monitoring and they also considered the use of SAR in deriving bathymetric measurements, as bathymetry is one of the most frequently cited user requirements. At the time of publication a number of products were already available with regard to SST, primary productivity, algal bloom monitoring, bathymetry, oil spill detection, chlorophyll and ocean colour. 3.3.2.6 European Global Ocean Observing System – EuroGOOS (1999) In 1999 EuroGOOS published a report on the operational marine data requirements across Europe [20, 21]. An open-ended survey was conducted in Denmark, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and the UK. EuroGOOS surveyed the role of EO data and

31

information in coastal and ocean resource management with a view to better understand how this challenge could be met. Points of relevance from the EuroGOOS report include:

• A definition of the typical EuroGOOS customer does not exist. Data products must be designed and targeted at each potential user community or market sector [20].

• In terms of specific data requirements only 20% of users require raw

observational data on average; but this will vary with topic. Most organisations and ocean data users require data products which have a spatial horizontal resolution of the order of 1km, temporal resolution of the order of 6hr, data variable accuracy of the order of 1%, with an almost equal interest at all geographical scales from estuarine to oceanic [19].

• 15% of respondents identified remote sensing as a major application of their own

work, and the nine most commonly requested variables by all respondents included characteristics of surface fields of currents, waves, temperature, wind and salinity, repectively [21].

3.3.2.7 Centre for Earth Observation Pathfinder Study (1995) A detailed user requirements analysis document was produced by the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) in December 1995 [18]. The study surveyed ten coastal application areas: water quality/pollution; coastal protection; nature conservation; global change; observatories; ports and marinas; urbanisation; tourism and leisure; offshore structures and fishing and aquaculture. Over 560 users were surveyed, most of whom were not familiar with the types of data that can be derived from remote sensing satellites. Many applications require data and surveys for a particular area; these data are generally gathered at a local level, by commercial companies undertaking in situ sampling. Where parameters can be derived from satellites, accuracy and re-visit times were cited as potential problems. Most important user data requirements identified:

• Wave data • Physio-chemical parameters of sea water

Very important user data requirements:

• Sea surface temperature (SST) Important user data requirements:

• Chlorophyll • Sediment

32

3.4 Discussion It is evident that the emphasis on user requirements in the EO sector has intensified over the last decade, moving from a largely technological focus, where end user requirements were not prominent, to a user driven focus that aims to optimally use the technology now available. While this is to be welcomed, the issues preventing the wider uptake of EO data to emerge from the various end user studies in the last ten years have remained largely unchanged. This questions the success of end user studies in raising awareness of user requirements among decision makers and the research community. For example, over the last decade issues that have been raised repeatedly include prohibitive costs and pricing mechanisms, the limited accessibility of EO data and the need for increased capacity building. For some reason, either the message from end users is not getting through to data suppliers and software developers, or EO technology has yet to reach a level of sophistication that can fulfil the needs of a wide end user community. In reality, it is possible that both points are valid. Issues such as cost and access to data can be addressed by data suppliers and policy makers. Therefore, data suppliers and policy makers should be targeted and informed of the potential cost benefits of opening up the SAR data market by meeting end user needs. Future research projects should ensure that key findings are disseminated directly to those who can have an impact on this matter. Innovative ways of raising awareness of end user needs should be examined to ensure that these important messages are translated into effective action. The question of why end user requirements in relation to technological progress do not appear to have been addressed in the last ten years is slightly more complex. Algorithms for the interpretation of SAR imagery are still subject to active research. Solutions in the form of services and products to end-users are still not widely available. While some policy makers would be reticent to hear that what we need is more research, this remains true in the development of certain coastal and marine applications for SAR data. At the current point in time, it is imperative to obtain a balance between promoting what is presently available (without falsely raising user expectations), and building on existing technologies to make SAR data more attractive to end users in the long term. This will involve basic research on algorithms and models, in addition to investment in sophisticated sensors that can provide the coverage and resolutions demanded by coastal and marine area managers. The launch of Envisat is significant progress in this regard. Similarly, the last ten years have shown substantial progress in the scientific research needed to improve the interpretation of SAR satellite images. This progress is documented in the proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Coastal and Marine Applications of SAR held in Svalbard (Proceedings to appear in ESA Publication Series SP-365). As a research project, MARSAIS also has a positive role to play. For the first time, a generic toolkit will be assembled, with the potential to underpin commercial products or services that can take SAR data into the marketplace of coastal and marine end users. Finally, it is encouraging to see the success of recent programmes that have proven to be effective in the successful commercialisation of EO products; products derived through the EOMD programme (e.g. routeclimate.com by ARGOSS), demonstrate the value of such VAC

33

supporting initiatives. It would be beneficial to develop a similar initiative that would build upon and complement the range of EO products and tools developed through the European Commission 5th and 6th Framework research programmes. Such an initiative could investigate the commercial potential for the outputs of research.

34

REFERENCES 1. ESA. (2001) Data User Programme II period, Appendix 1: Statement of Work and Technical Specification – EEM-AEP/DUP/CFP2001, ESA, Frascati. 2. ESA. (2002) Data User Programme – Users Symposium Sumamry Report – DUPT-UCAB-EOAD-RP-02-0001, ESA, Frascati. 3. Seifert FM, Paganini M, Volden E & Arino O. (2002) The Data User Element within ESA’s Earth Observation Envelope Program EOEP-2. In: Tagungsband 19. DFD-Nutxerseminar (eds S Dech, H Mehl & G Strunz ): 7-16. DLR, Wessling. 4. ESA. (2003) O2 Supplement – A New Perspective for Earth Observation: The Oxygen (O2) Project, ESA, Frascati. 5. ESA – Earth Observation Programme Board. (2003) Oxygen Project–The Implementation Plan for the Period 2003-2005, ESA/PB-EO, Paris. 6. Briggs DJ, Boxall S & Soulakellis N. (2001) Matching Demand and Supply for Earth Observation Data and Information. A report of a study undertaken as part of the EUFOREO Thematic Network. 7. Briggs DJ, Boxall S & Soulakellis N. (2001) EUFOREO study: Matching demand and supply for Earth Observation data and information – The use of EO data for policy support and environmental applications in the EU. In: Workshop Proceedings of European earth observation research and applications on the environment (eds P Bauer, S Boxall, D Briggs, T Businaro, R Casale, S Condé, M Cornaert, J Hyyppa, R Päivinen, M Schouppe, C Simmer, N Soulakellis and L Wald), pp. 35 –41, European Commission, Brussels. 8. Cummins V, O’Mahony C & Connolly N. (2002) Working Document on End user Requirements for the MARSAIS Project, CMRC, Cork. 9. ESA. (2001) TESEO – General studies on Treaty Enforcement Service Using Earth Observation. A presentation made at the 1st TUBE meeting, ESA. 10. ESA. (2001) TESEO – Appendix 1 – Statement of Work for the study Treaty Enforcement Services Using Earth Observation, ESA. 11. ESA. (2003) TUBE 3 –Workshop Conclusions, ESA. 12. ESA. (2002) TUBE 2 –Workshop Conclusions, ESA. 13. ESA. (1997) Coastal Zone Earthwatch Study: Macro Economic Analysis of Candidate Earth Watch Fields. Report of a project undertaken by ACRI, ESA.

35

14. Harris R, et al. (2000) Earth Observation Data Policy and Europe (EOPOLE): Final Report – ENV4-CT98-0760. 15. Downey I, Archer D, Perryman A, Williams J, Looyen W, Oostdijk A, Noorbergen H, van der Kamp A, Sandford T, Stephenson J & Stephenson R. (1998) RAPIDS – Enabling Local User Access to remote sensing: recent experiences from Indonesia, Presented at ESA Euro-Asian Space Week, Singapore. 16. Tsontos VM, Kiefer DA & Latham JS. (2002) The ICAMS Project – Development of an operational monitoring and decision support tool for integrated coastal area management. Proceedings of the 1st Coastal Zone Asia Pacific Conference, Bangkok. 17. Jenkins A, Sandven S, Korsbakken E, Hamre T, Pettersson LH, Mastenbroek K, Wensink H, Reistad M, Connolly N & O’Leary E. (1997) COASTMON report No.1 (Draft) – COASTMON WP1: Identification of gaps between current monitoring technology and user requirements, NERSC, Bergen. 18. Centre for Earth Observation. (1995) Pathfinder Study on the Coastal Zone: Final Report. ACRI, under contract to CEO. ACR-CEO-FR. 152pp. 19. Durand D, Pozdnyakov D, Sandven S, Cauneau F, Wald L, Jacob A, Kloster K & Miles M. (1999) Characterisation of Inland and Coastal Waters with Space Sensors, A study for the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO). Study contract reference number 1409-1998-06F1ED ISP NO. 20. Fischer J & Flemming NC. (2001) Operational Oceanography: Data Requirements Survey, EuroGOOS Publication No.12, Southampton Oceanography Centre, Southampton. 21. Flemming NC. (2001) The EuroGOOS Analysis of the Need for Operational Ocean Remote Sensing. From: Operational Ocean Observations from Space. EuroGOOS Publication No.16, pp. 6-12.

36

CHAPTER 4 - SAR PRODUCT AND SERVICE REVIEW

4.1 Introduction and Objectives The current availability of commercial SAR products and services for coastal and marine end users are of direct relevance to the MARSAIS project. It is envisaged that lessons can be learned in relation to the level of sophistication of current products and services; gaps that exist on the market; and the extent to which state-of-the-art technologies are currently employed. This chapter focuses on commercial companies and their respective products and services in the coastal and marine environment. The role of education and training is also examined. 4.2 Methodology Products and services are described for each company. Products are analysed in terms of data used, output, system requirements and price. A brief description of the product outlining its functionality and capabilities is also provided. The information on commercial products has been largely sourced from correspondence with company representatives and reviews of their websites, supplemented with information from the European Space Industry Directory (http://www.esidirectory.org) and published literature. The pricing information presented in the review is accurate at the time of writing but it should be borne in mind that companies will often negotiate a price based on the extent of the customers needs, training, post-purchase maintenance, on site visits and provision of upgrades. Thus, the quoted costs are indicative but should not be considered definitive. In some instances, the products described are not solely for use in the coastal and marine environment but may be adapted for coastal and marine applications or for land-ocean interaction studies. It is also necessary to point out that products, which use SAR as a component, are considered as well as those that are wholly derived from SAR data. Within the commercial marketplace a number of products are capable of handling radar and optical imagery; this will give the product a wider target audience and make the product more applicable to a greater number of people. Observations that emerged from the review of commercial SAR products are discussed at the end of the chapter. By examining the current availability of commercial SAR products, the MARSAIS consortium could best decide how the tools developed in MARSAIS can be promoted and exploited.

37

4.3 Results Table 4.1 provides the reader with a quick find index of the companies reviewed and their main applications. The applications are categorised in accordance with those considered in MARSAIS: wind, waves, pollution incidents, internal waves and current features. The category of “Software” is used to cater for companies who develop SAR software for generic applications and processing, which are not restricted to those applications of interest in MARSAIS. The “Other” category refers to applications such as land use mapping (agriculture and forestry), surveillance, vessel detection, geology, etc. The “Training” category refers to an example of such a service provided by an SME working in this area, which is included in the review.

Table 4.1. Index of companies offering commercial SAR products and services. Company Name Country Application Areas Page No.

Noetix Research Inc. Canada Ice/Other 40

InfoSAR Ltd. UK Software 44

Satlantic Inc. Canada Other/Wind/Wave/Pollution

Incidents 46

GAMMA AG Switzerland Software/Other 48

Veridian Corp. USA Other 51

NPA Group UK Other 53

Kongsberg Satellite Services

Norway Other 55

Sarmap Switzerland Software/Other 56

SEA Group Ltd. UK Other 58

User System Inc.

USA Software/Other 60

BOOST Technologies France Wind/Wave/Current

Features/Pollution Incidents 62

Satellite Observing Systems

UK Wind/Wave 65

ARGOSS Netherlands Wind/Wave/Shallow water

bathymetry/Other 68

Atlantis Scientific Inc. Canada Software/Other 72

Alaska SAR Facility USA Other 75

PCI Geomatics Canada5 Software/Other 78

Seaconsult Marine Research Ltd.

Canada Wind/Wave/Current Features/Pollution Incidents/Other 81

5 Companies that have offices worldwide are listed in the country where their head office is located.

38

GAF AG Germany Software/Other 83

Oceanor Norway Wind/Wave 85

Météomer France Wind/Wave 88

Altamira Information Spain Other 90

Vexcel UK UK Ice 92

Fleximage France Training 94

39

Company Name: Noetix Research Inc. Details: 403-265 Carling Avenue Ottawa, ON K1S 2E1 Canada http://www.noetix.on.ca/ Founded in 1988 Number of staff: n/a

Company Description: Noetix Research Inc. specialises in remote sensing and geographic

information systems (GIS) for marine and land applications. The company has expertise in project management, software and systems engineering and remote sensing applications.

Product: Marine Analysis SysTem (MAST). . Data Used: NOAA AVHRR, Radarsat and SSMI. Output: Variety of outputs but primarily parameters associated with ice. System Requirements: MAST runs under Solaris 7.0 and PCI Geomatica Version 8.0. Application: Ice (motion and concentration) and SST. Availability: MAST costs US $5,000. Additional Information: The development costs of MAST received partial funding from the Radarsat

User Development Programme (RUDP) but the majority of the funding originated from the Canadian Ice Service and the Canadian Centre for Remote Sensing (CCRS).

Product Description The Marine Analysis System (MAST) allows detailed scientific analysis to be performed on satellite data acquired over ice and ocean environments. MAST can handle data from different sensors and can produce a variety of output products. The system contains modules to: Track ice motion from two images (Ice tracking algorithm); Extract ice concentrations from SSMI/I data (Ice concentration algorithm); and Derive Sea Surface Temperature (SST) from AVHRR and mask out clouds (SST

algorithm).

40

The Ice tracking algorithm utilises Radarsat data to generate an ice motion product. MAST products can be used to solve ice analysis problems, verify ice motion models, generate value added products (e.g. convergence and divergence zones within an ice pack) and as inputs to ice climatology models. Usability MAST allows for detailed scientific analysis and is therefore more applicable to

expert/experienced users rather than beginners or non-technical users.

Target Users/Sectors Individuals in any ice related field of employment or research. Product: IceXpert. . Data Used: Radarsat. Output: System Requirements: Software runs on PC under Microsoft Windows 3.1 or 95. Application: Ice (Interpretative training tool). Availability: IceXpert has a number of modules each module is available at a cost of US$250. Additional Information: Product Description IceXpert is a computer based training system for interpreting sea ice information from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery. The system consists of a number of modules:

• SAR Interpretation - ice interpretation of RADARSAT imagery. • Visual Ice Recognition - ice recognition as one would see from a ship or

reconnaissance aircraft. • NOAA AVHRR - ice interpretation using AVHRR imagery. • DMSO OLS - ice interpretation using OLS imagery. • Ice Physics - physics of sea ice

Usability The individual modules are directed toward operational ice analysts and is an entry level educational resource. Individuals can utilise the system at their own pace in a non-supervisory manner.

41

Target Users/Sectors The system is directed towards personnel operating within the sea ice forecasting, marine navigation in ice and offshore exploration and development sectors.

Product: Auto Tracker. Data Used: Radarsat. Output: Image products and ASCII output. Vector field overlain on the imagery or as an

ASCII text file for independent analysis of ice motion displacement. System Requirements: Solaris Operating System and PCI EASI/PACE. Application: Ice (motion tracking). Availability: US $7,000. Additional Information: AutoTracker was developed within the same RUDP project as MAST.

ImageWorks is used by AutoTracker for viewing the output products.

Product Description Auto Tracker is a fully autonomous production system for tracking sea ice motion from time sequential Radarsat imagery. The AutoTracker system can perform detection, preprocessing, tracking, and product generation without human intervention.

For automatic detection/preprocessing a background process detects new images received in an inbound directory and initiates processing. For the tracking function, the tracking algorithm has five stages of processing:

• Zoom-out - Degrade spatial resolution for efficient processing; • Initialise - Find initial matching points evenly spread over the image; • Pass 1 - Find more matches using initial matches to assist search then perform

error detection; • Pass 2 - Continue finding more matches with less stringent matching criteria

then perform error correction; • Zoom-in - Increase positional accuracy of matches by systematically

searching finer spatial resolution image layers up to the original image resolution.

Usability

42

Although the AutoTracker system is automated it is a specialised tool. Target Users/Sectors AutoTracker is a specialised product developed for the Canadian Ice Service for high volume processing of EO data. The system can be used by personnel operating within the sea ice sector for research or operational purposes.

43

Company: InfoSAR Ltd. Details: Roscoe House

62 Roscoe Street Liverpool L1 9DW UK http://www.infosar.co.uk Founded in 2002 Number of staff: 2

Company Description: InfoSAR Ltd. is a small company specialising in providing

consultancy, training and software in SAR and related techniques. Ongoing research has led to a range of optimised image-understanding algorithms, developed with staff from Infosar Ltd. and individuals within the academic sector.

The company has experience in covering image formation including auto focus and signal-based motion compensation, despeckling and segmentation, image understanding, and application-specific processing. InfoSAR Ltd. also work with end users who need to integrate SAR data into their remote sensing applications.

Product: InfoPack 1.0. Data Used: SIR-C and ERS. Output: InfoSAR file format, (based on the Unidata NetCDF file format). Images can be

viewed using OpenEV. System Requirements: Microsoft Windows 2000/XP or Linux. Application: Generic. Availability: Free trial available to download or by CD. The cost for one licence for any O/S

is €8,300, the price increases for subsequent licences. An unlimited licence is priced at €33,000. For academic customers these prices are €5,800 and €25,000 respectively.

Additional Information: The InfoSAR format has been incorporated into the Geospatial Data Abstraction

Library (GDAL).

44

Product Description InfoPACK allows users to extract information from remote sensing imagery. The algorithms implemented are particularly suited to SAR images, but InfoPACK can also be utilised for optical images. Routines within InfoPACK include: intensity segmentation (single image; multi-temporal; multi-polarisation); speckle reduction; texture segmentation; segmentation post processing; classification edge detection; point target detection (CFAR-based) and large area change detection. InfoPACK is GIS compatible, the InfoSAR format allows for a single image to be stored in a file along with geographic information. This single image may be comprised of several layers of images. InfoPACK also supports multilayer complex data. The InfoSAR format has been incorporated into the Geospatial Data Abstraction Library (GDAL). GDAL is a translator library for raster geospatial data formats; at present, approximately 40 file formats are supported. If the user’s file format is supported by GDAL, then all InfoPACK routines will work on the data directly without any conversion. Full read and write support is provided with GDAL for Erdas Imagine files. InfoPACK routines will work directly with IMG files. Export facilities from InfoSAR to IMG format are provided through the graphical user interface (GUI) or using the gdal_translate utility. Usability The processing functions of the InfoPACK software would suggest some knowledge of SAR processing would benefit the end user. However, the product appears to be well developed in terms of user support and help options. Target Users/Sectors InfoPACK is SAR processing software and can therefore be utilised within a number of sectors of activity. Results of an in house customer survey conducted by InfoSAR Ltd. in 2002 show users to be from academic, government and commercial categories. However, the survey results do not give any indication of the level of technical expertise of the user.

45

Company: Satlantic Inc. Details: Richmond Terminal, Pier 9

3481 North Marginal Road Halifax, Nova Scotia B3K 5X8 Canada http://www.satlantic.com Founded in 1990

Number of staff: n/a Company Description: Satlantic Inc. design, manufacture and sell a wide range of

precision sensors and systems for the study of the marine environment. In addition, they also offer sophisticated instrument integration, large-scale ocean observatory design, and data extraction tools that enable real-time operational decision-making.

Product: Ocean Monitoring Workstation (OMW). Data Used: Radarsat, ERS-1 and ERS-2. Output: Hard copy or digital (ASCII or NATO OTH Gold format). System Requirements: Microsoft Windows PC NT or UNIX workstations. Application: Wave, wind, pollution monitoring and vessel detection. Availability: OMW is priced at ~ US $30,000. Additional Information: Development is underway to prepare the OMW for Envisat and Radarsat-2.

Product Description The Ocean Monitoring Workstation (OMW) focuses on remote ocean monitoring solutions; the OMW contains separate modules for vessel detection at sea, oil spill monitoring, ocean wave monitoring and ocean wind monitoring. The OMW was developed for operational maritime end users and was designed to provide clear, concise, and timely marine surveillance information from EO satellites. Output products can be faxed or e-mailed to an operational user, or exported to other monitoring and forecasting systems.

46

Another feature of the OMW is the ability to operate it over a network at a remote location close to a satellite ground station. By analysing the imagery at source, the OMW can ensure a reduced time lag period from raw data to end user information. Usability The OMW is an off-the-shelf, expert system and was developed for operational maritime end users. The workstation gives a user the tools necessary to process and analyse imagery in either interactive or unattended modes. The simple interface allows quick operator input as well as access to the raw imagery and data products. Target Users/Sectors The OMW has individual toolkits for vessel detection at sea, oil spill monitoring, ocean environmental (wind and wave) and is relevant to individuals within research, environmental protection, mineral extraction, engineering, defence (fisheries patrol, search and rescue) and transport sectors.

47

Company: GAMMA Remote Sensing Research and Consulting AG Details: Thunstrasse 130

CH-3074 Muri / Bern Switzerland http://www.gamma-rs.ch Founded in 1995 Number of staff: n/a

Company Description: The objective of GAMMA is to conduct research studies and to

provide consulting, value adding and processing services in the field of microwave remote sensing. Work areas include signal processing, microwave signature interpretation, retrieval algorithm development, and modelling activities. In addition, GAMMA provides licenses for its user-friendly and high quality SAR processing software packages, which are in use at a number of leading research institutes.

Product: Software packages: MSP, ISP, DIFF & GEO and LAT. Data Used: ERS-1/2, JERS-1, SIR-C, SEASAT, Radarsat. Output: Raster images generated in SUN raster or BMP format. System Requirements: Software is written in ANSI-C and can be installed on different UNIX

workstations and on PC platforms with LINUX, NT or Solaris 8 operation systems.

Application: Generic. Availability: Prices are CHF21,000 (binary) and CHF31,500 (source) for MSP, ISP and DIFF

& GEO (prices are CHF). An educational discount of 40% applies. Additional Information: The software is fully compatible with the data provided by the different space

agencies. Product Description GAMMA software supports the entire processing from SAR raw data to products such as digital elevation models (DEMs), displacement maps and land use maps. Each of the software packages is designed to be very modular allowing greater flexibility for the end user. The software packages are:

48

Modular SAR Processor (MSP): main modules include pre-processing, range compression with optimal azimuth pre-filtering, autofocus, azimuth compression and multi look post processing. Interferometric SAR Processor (ISP): encompasses a full range of algorithms required for the generation of interferograms, height and coherence maps. Differential Interferometry and Geocoding (DIFF & GEO): this software package provides the user flexibility with respect to separating topographic and displacement effects. Land Application Tools (LAT): this package supports filtering, parameter extraction, simple classification schemes, mosaicing and additional data display tools. Usability Each of the GAMMA software packages is designed to be very modular allowing greater flexibility for the end user. Target Users/Sectors GAMMA’s products are focussed on the processing of SAR raw data to products such as DEMs, deformation, and land use maps. The application of the GAMMA processing software is manifold and applicable to a number of sectors, e.g. terrestrial change detection, environmental monitoring and seismics. Service: SAR processing. Data Used: ERS-1/2, JERS-1, SIR-C, SEASAT and Radarsat. Output: Data products are stored in raster files. Most products are also available as

GeoTIFF or DIMAP. System Requirements: Output files can be easily imported into other software or GIS. Application: Generic. Availability: On request, price is dependent upon the level of service required. Additional Information: GAMMA had the opportunity to demonstrate it's processing quality and capacity

in a European project which involved the generation of a SAR backscatter mosaic of Siberia using 600 JERS-1 scenes.

49

Service Description GAMMA offers advanced SAR data processing services. SAR processing, precision image registration, interferometric processing, radiometric calibration, and geocoding are offered to end users on a fully operational basis. Advanced data processing such as large area mosaicing is also available, as well as support in data selection, determination of the processing strategy, and interpretation of the derived results.

50

Company: Veridian Details: 1200 South Hayes Street, Suite 1100

Arlington VA 22202 USA http://www.veridian.com Founded in 1997 Number of staff: n/a

Company Description: Veridian is a large company that offers information technology

(IT) products and services such as network security, systems engineering, and data mining. Veridian focuses on government agencies such as the US Department of Defense, offering expertise in intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems, as well as chemical, biological, and nuclear detection.

Product: OceanWorz. Data Used: ERS, Radarsat and others (e.g. Sea-Viewing Wide Field-of-View Sensor

[SeaWiFS]). Output: Users receive the environmental products directly from satellite-based remote

sensing imagery and can select from a variety of formats from a simple ASCII file to a GIS-compatible format.

System Requirements: Dependent on the user’s specific requirements. Application: Current features, wind, waves and vessel detection. Availability: Dependent on the user’s specific requirements and consultation between

Veridian and the user. Additional Information: Users can also subscribe to a web-based program that archives the

environmental products derived from remote sensing imagery.

Product Description OceanWorx does not actually exist as a stand-alone software package. OceanWorz is a series of capabilities that automatically extract coastal and marine environmental data from commercial SAR imagery. It provides environmental managers with the capability to generate spatial maps of oceanic winds, waves and current fronts.

51

Coastal wind fields: Generation of spatial grids of coastal oceanic wind vectors using large-scale features from SAR imagery cross-section values and local wind indicators. Coastal wave fields: Production of spatial maps of the local wave field that illustrate wavelength, wave direction and significant wave height. Coastal ship detection: Automated detection algorithm for locating ships within a field. A map of spatial locations of ships can be generated, along with a coarse estimate of their size. Coastal current fronts: Automated detection algorithm for locating current fronts and characterising their properties. Combined with other local environmental information, fronts can provide useful information about local fish production. Usability Users do not require specialised training or remote sensing knowledge and experience. Veridian work with users to design the suite of algorithms best suited to the user’s needs and to determine the computer platforms and product formats required to seamlessly interface with their existing systems. Using this information a specific version of OceanWorz is generated. Once generated, this "version" of OceanWorx is installed, and the users are trained in its operation. A computer toolkit is also available for purchase that allows users to apply the OceanWorx algorithms directly to their own imagery for ultimate flexibility in product generation. Target Users/Sectors OceanWorz is applicable to individuals in the transport and environmental protection sectors. The sea state information derived from OceanWorz could potentially be applied to a number of activities within other sectors (e.g. fisheries).

52

Company: Nigel Press Associates (NPA) Group Details: Crockham Park

Edenbridge Kent TN8 6SR

UK http://www.npagroup.com Founded in 1972 Number of staff: 26 (space related) Company Description: NPA acquire, process and distribute image data from optical and

radar satellites (including Radarsat and ERS-1/2). Covering a spectrum of remote sensing applications, NPA specialise in extracting useful information from satellite imagery. Applications include onshore/offshore oil and gas exploration, telecommunications, engineering and environment, risk management, GIS information and technology, satellite images and elevation data, radar inferometry, legal sector and research. Developing diverse commercial applications is core to NPA’s business plan.

Service: Ocean Basin Screening (OBS). Data Used: ERS-2 and Radarsat. Output: System Requirements: Application: Offshore oil and gas exploration. Availability: Additional Information:

Service Description Offshore Basin Screening (OBS) is a technique for rapid screening of offshore areas for natural hydrocarbon seepage. Slicks attributed to seepage are mapped using satellite-borne radar (ERS and Radarsat) and analysed for ocean and slick characteristics. Seepage-slicks are discriminated from those caused by look alike phenomena (e.g.

53

pollution, natural film and other oceanographic and weather effects), with varying levels of confidence. Seep distribution can then be related to regional geology and seismic data, if these are available, to address risks associated with hydrocarbon presence. The methodology includes the screening of radar data for weather compliance that is critically important to successful analysis. Seepage-slicks can be validated from boat or air, using an OBS inspection service. OBS is based on the detection capabilities of SAR. Satellite radar is able to detect surface roughness in the mm-cm range and is therefore ideal for mapping surface slicks. Radar has the added advantage of being relatively unaffected by atmospheric conditions and cloud cover and can be deployed both day and night. For seep detection the optimal footprint is Radarsat Wide 1. Raw data are purchased from the satellite operator, ground station or distributor most relevant to the project. NPA also holds a large global archive of satellite radar data. Usability OBS is a service provided by NPA and is not user interactive. Target Users/Sectors The OBS is developed for use by the offshore mineral (oil and gas) extraction sector.

54

Company: Kongsberg Satellite Services Details: P.O. Box 6180,

NO-9291 Tromsø, Norway

http://www.ksat.no

Founded in 2002

Number of staff: 48

Company Description: Kongsberg Satellite Services main EO activities are operational

marine monitoring services such as oil spill detection, ship detection and near real-time distribution of SAR data. As a partner in the SARCOM consortium KSAT can acquire, process and distribute global Envisat Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar (ASAR) data in near real-time. KSAT has built an archive for SAR data from ERS 1/2, Radarsat-1 and Envisat.

Service: Data distribution. Data Used: ERS-2, Envisat and Radarsat-1 Output: For ERS products FRI, LRI, PRI, SLC, FDC * CEOS formats are available.

Envisat products are available in PRI, SLC and GEC formats. Radarsat-1 products are available in CEOS format. For operational users, Kongsberg Satellite Services provide a NRT service. The most common form of distribution is FTP as the files are often too large to e-mail.

System Requirements: Internet access for online delivery. Application: Generic. Availability: All ERS products can be delivered online (<2hrs), either by Internet or ISDN.

Offline delivery (<3 days) on CD-ROM and exabyte is available Additional Information: Customers use SAR data acquired by Kongsberg Satellite Services for oil spill

monitoring, seepage studies, sea ice monitoring and vessel detection. Service Description SAR data from Radarsat, Envisat and ERS-2 are transferred electronically to users world wide within 1-2 hours after acquisition. These data are being used for a number of applications such as sea ice monitoring, ship detection and crop monitoring. KSAT maintains an archive for SAR data from ERS 1/2, Radarsat-1 and Envisat.

55

Company: Sarmap Details: Cascine de Barico CH-6989 Purasca Switzerland http://www.sarmap.ch

Founded in 1998

Number of staff: 8 Company Description: Besides the development and commercialisation of SARscape – a

dedicated software for SAR processing and analysis, embedded either in GIS (ArcView and GEOMania) or in image processing (ENVI) environments - Sarmap’s main areas of expertise are in the generation of comprehensive information derived from airborne and spaceborne EO integrated with ancillary (e.g., socio-economic, meteorological) data.

Product: SARscape (Basic and InSAR). Data Used: ERS-1/2, Radarsat, JERS-1, Envisat and LANDSAT. Output: The products are normally delivered in common standard formats (i.e.

GeoTIFF), suitable for direct use and incorporation in widely available commercial GIS and image processing packages. The data format can be customised for specific user requirements.

System Requirements: Can be operated within ArcView GIS environment on PC. Application: Generic. Availability: Basic - €12,000 for commercial, €9,000 for research institutes and €6,000 for

universities. The corresponding price range for the InSAR module is €6,000; €4,500 and €3,000 respectively.

Additional Information: Sarmap employ SARscape to provide a number of services that involve

detecting change in land use (rice cultivated areas, forested areas) and for generating digital surface models.

Product Description SARscape is available in two modules, basic and InSAR, however, the latter is not available as a stand alone module. The basic module is more applicable for land classification.

56

SARscape allows the user to generate digital surface model (DSM) products from satellite radar data. In order to obtain accurate products the SAR data must go through a dedicated processing chain, which carries out data focussing, interferometric processing, geo-referencing and finally mosaicing.

Usability

The SARscape software allows the inexperienced novice user to generate high quality DSM products in a semi automatic way.

Target Users/Sectors

The software can be utilised by any individuals assessing land use change and land cover (e.g. flooding, distribution of crop species, burnt areas and subsidence). Users can create DEMs and DSM’s to represent the terrestrial environment, thus SARscape can be utilised for coastal environmental applications.

57

Company: SEA (Group) Ltd Details: Beckington Castle

PO Box 800 FROME BA11 6TB United Kingdom

http://www.sea.co.uk/

Founded in 1998

Number of staff: ~185

Company Description: SEA is active in four broad sectors: space, battlespace, marine and

transport. SEA's products and services are established in the defence and commercial marine sectors. Activities include design and development of radar, sonar, communications and electronic warfare systems, requirements engineering, feasibility and technology studies, programme management and virtual prototyping. SEA also has a portfolio of products for the marine survey and environmental research markets.

Product: SAR Processor. Data Used: ERS, Radarsat, SEASAT and ALMAZ 1-B. Output: Provides image in disk file either in RAE image format or CEOS format. System Requirements: Operates on standard PC (both IBM compatible PCs and UNIX workstations).

Microsoft Windows 95, 98, 2000 and NT 4. Application: Generic. Availability: Additional Information:

Product Description The SEA SAR processor is designed as a cost-effective but flexible desktop system capable of producing high quality SAR images. The processor can currently support a range of SAR systems (Radarsat-1 ERS –1/2, SEASAT and ALMAZ 1-B). SEA has developed a program entitled SEA SAR Viewer to display SAR images produced by the

58

SEA SAR processor. However, other image analysis software such as ERDAS or MATLAB can be used to display the processed imagery. A Microsoft GUI is incorporated to select all processing parameters in a flexible and user friendly manner. The menu allows the end user to exercise considerable control over a number of the processing stages. Usability The purpose of the SEA SAR processor is to perform high end processing of SAR imagery. Although the processor is capable of operating on standard desktops it is not directed towards the beginner or inexperienced SAR user market. The processed products will be of interest to a wide audience and therefore it is possible that this system can be used as a service to provide data for the user community rather than a method for end users to directly extract data for their own requirements. Target Users/Sectors The SEA SAR processor can be employed for any activity that requires the processing and production of high quality SAR imagery.

59

Company: User Systems Inc. Details: 2411 Crofton Lane

Suite 2B Crofton MD 21114

USA http://www.usersystems.com Founded in 1978 Number of staff: n/a Company Description: User Systems Incorporated provides remote sensing focused

research and development services to the government and private industry. User Systems is devoted to the development of airborne and space based remote sensor designs and the adaptation of data produced by these sensors for specific commercial and military applications. User Systems’ services include the design and development of a wide range of contemporary and advanced remote sensing systems, the development of associated signal processing technologies for airborne and space-based radars, with a special emphasis on SARs. User Systems also provides design and implementation of visualisation and processing capabilities for the operational interpretation and analysis of remotely sensed data.

Product: ProSAR. Data Used: Any SAR data source (e.g. AirSAR, SIR-C, ERS-1 and Radarsat). Output: Processed imagery (Single Look Complex). System Requirements: ProSAR typically runs on desktop PCs (under LINUX) and UNIX workstations,

but has also been installed and run on several multiprocessor computers and two supercomputers.

Application: Generic. Availability: Standard package US$15,000, source code licence US$55,000. Additional Information: ProSAR represents a commercially available family of SAR processing

products. ProSAR's high level modular code design, allows for easy integration into a variety of processing environments.

60

Product Description ProSAR software comprises of Programs, UNIX Pipes, Utilities, and Library Functions all written in the C programming language. The latest version of ProSAR consists of a series of data processing programs that are sequenced using the UNIX "pipe" concept. Users write relatively short script files (tens of lines) to accomplish their customised processing requirements. The software is run using c-shell Scripts. ProSAR also contains customised functions to interface with Platform-Optimised Numerical Library available for most computer hardware. ProSAR Pipes is an assembly of signal processing tools. Generally speaking, each is a UNIX program that acts as a pipe (reads from stdin and writes to stdout). A single, well-defined transformation (e.g., fast Fourier transform) is applied to the input data to generate the output data. Some pipes receive additional parameters via command line arguments. An advantage to using pipes is that very large quantities of data can be transformed with very small amounts of memory. Only the data that is in the pipeline at any one instant occupies memory. Control of the processing software is entirely accomplished by the generation of script files and then execution of the script files within a UNIX c-shell. Usability The processing nature of ProSAR would imply the product is directed at the specialised, technically proficient user rather than beginner users. Target Users/Sectors The generic nature of the ProSAR product would suggest the technology can be applied to various sectoral activities that involve the processing of SAR imagery.

61

Company: BOOST Technologies Details: 1, avenue du Technopôle

29280 Plouzané France http://www.boost-technologies.com Founded in 2002 Number of staff: 4

Company Description: BOOST Technologies is a private research and development

company (SME) working in the field of remote sensing of the marine offshore and coastal environment. Staff at BOOST Technologies have a decade of experience in SAR data processing applied to marine monitoring. Based on this unique end-to-end expertise and on global knowledge of other complementary sensors (altimeters, scatterometers, HF radars), the objective is to be the reference in the field on high resolution satellite radar imagery so as to become a major actor of highly recurrent value added services applied to the monitoring of marine environment and critical areas.

Service: Oceanographic remote sensing. Data Used: Current focus is Envisat ASAR but BOOST also use other sources of SAR data

and data from altimeters, scatterometers and HF radars where needed. Output: Varies according to the particular service/product demanded by the client e.g.

maps of wind field directly inferred from SAR images can be delivered at a resolution scale ranging from 1 to 10km.

System Requirements: Application: Wind, waves, pollution incidents and current features as well as other coastal

and marine applications. Availability: Additional Information: BOOST are also active in the field of research, one such example is the

definition of new sensors to monitor the marine environment.

62

Service Description BOOST offer a variety of services in the field of coastal and marine remote sensing including:

• Sea state monitoring (2-D directional wave spectrum and high resolution wind field) - Sea state information on wind and waves (including currents in the near future), retrieved from the SAR data can be applied to

o A posteriori analyses over a global or specific area, SAR data may be used

as an external source information to validate the outputs of operational oceanography systems (such as MERCATOR) or to develop warning systems based on sea state atlases produced over weekly/monthly periods.

o NRT applications including the assimilation of SAR data in high

resolution coastal numerical wave models or the delivery of sea-state information for marine safety and marine transport.

• Current retrieval - SAR has the potential to monitor currents due the Doppler

centroid anomaly. This parameter is proportional to the motion of the short surface waves advected at the velocity of the underlying surface current. In addition to global monitoring, such processing can be performed locally to retrieve high resolution current information for a specific area.

• Oil spill monitoring - The presence of oil on the sea surface causes a dampening

of surface waves, which is picked up by SAR sensors, resulting in a decrease in backscatter. These characteristic dark tone areas are often visible on SAR images allowing detection and mapping with high resolution. Yet dampening of small wave visible by the SAR instrument may arise due to various effects leading to ambiguous slick detection: low wind conditions, surfactants, etc. In such cases multi-sensor merging is required to refine the analysis and reduces the probability of false alarm. Once the polluted area is detected, current dynamics, as given by numerical models or directly inferred from SAR imagery, can be jointly used to track and predict the oil spill drift.

• Ship detection - Knowledge vessel position in the coastal environment is vital for

agencies tasked with enforcing fisheries and environmental legislation and those responsible for pollution control. The information is also of use to coastguard agencies for search and rescue operations and law enforcement activities. The use of SAR is preferred over optical data since it is independent upon cloud cover and solar illumination. As such, it may be possible to retrieve not only an accurate information on the size, heading and geographical position of detected ships, but also on their speed using the unique Doppler information contained in SAR images.

63

Usability BOOST Technologies aim to provide value-added services for coastal and marine applications within specific sectors. Target Sectors/Users The services of BOOST Technologies appear to be aimed at the operational users (individuals/agencies) that are involved in certain activities in the coastal and marine environment e.g. fisheries, navy fleets, insurance companies, defence, scientific community, local and regional authorities.

64

Company: Satellite Observing Systems Details: 15 Church Street

Godalming Surrey GU7 1EL United Kingdom http://www.satobsys.co.uk Founded in Number of staff: n/a

Company Description: Satellite Observing Systems (SOS) provides expertise in all aspects

of satellite remote sensing of the marine environment. The company serves public and private sector organisations and offers: consultancy on the applications and exploitation of marine remote sensing; high quality marine statistics and climatology; real-time sea-state monitoring from space delivered to ships at sea; training programmes world-wide.

Service: WWWaves. Data Used: Radar altimeter on ERS-2. Output: Output products are in the form of wind and wave image maps or text

summaries. System Requirements: Users require access to the Internet. Application: Waves and wind. Availability: Register on-line. Additional Information: The Sea State Alarm service, fast delivery service (3-4 hours after acquisition)

and the daily service are also available to users, these services are components of the WWWaves service. The Sea State Alarm service was carried out as part of the COMKISS project.

Service Description The products available through the WWWaves service fall into two categories: image

maps and text summaries. These products are described below.

65

Wind and Wave Image Maps: Wind and wave data in the form of significant wave heights, wind speeds (at 10m) and minimum swell are all plotted on a mercator projection. All valid data values are colour coded in line with the legend on the left hand side of the chart. The two measurements make use of different colour scales to ease interpretation. In addition, significant wave heights are plotted as a wider line than the wind speeds. The proportion of minimum swell in the significant wave height plot is indicated by a white dot on the wave record, the position of which is proportional to the ratio of minimum swell to significant wave height. The measurements are time stamped as they are plotted (in white for ascending tracks and

in black for descending). The ERS satellites are retrograde and therefore travel from right

to left across the map. If an A prefixes the time, data are from an ascending arc traveling

from bottom right to top left.

Conversely, an arc time prefixed by a D descends from top right to bottom left. As data take around 2-4 hours to reach SOS from the satellite, some data on the map may not correspond to the date indicated at the top of the chart. Points on adjacent tracks are around 100 minutes apart. Non-ocean returns from sea-ice, land, etc. have been removed from the plots although sea-ice extent can be inferred from the start and end of ocean returns around Antarctica and the Arctic Ocean. Ice extent coverage plots may be supplied on request for both areas. Wind and Wave Text Summaries: Every image map produced is accompanied by a text summary. Summaries are generated from a review of up to 11 seconds of altimeter data, covering around 75km. The median values in the data stream are recorded and output to a text file. In the case of the daily service all valid 11 second records are written to a file which can be examined the following day via the user's dedicated web page. In the case of a Sea State Alarm message, when conditions exceed a preset threshold of 10m for significant wave height or 20m/sec wind speeds, an email is immediately dispatched to warn of the conditions recorded. An asterisk (*) is placed at the end of the record if a Sea State Alarm message has been triggered by the data. SAR Wave period and direction Image Maps: The SAR carried on the ERS satellites operates for most of the time in Wave Mode, providing the data displayed in these image maps. Wave period and direction are measured 250km to the right of the altimeter track. It is important to point out that the instrument on its own cannot distinguish direction, only orientation, i.e. a 180 degree ambiguity. Therefore, a wave train travelling due north is indistinguishable from one travelling due south. That said, however, in most cases the context or location can provide some guidance on which way the waves are travelling, for example, wave diffracting from Drakes Passage between South America and Antarctica tend to be travelling east. Very short periods (below <8 seconds) and very long periods (>20 seconds) are not well resolved.

66

Image maps of the SAR data display the dominant components of the sea state using lines whose length represent wavelength and colour represent period. The orientation of the lines indicate the orientation of the wave propagation (as opposed to the wave fronts which are at ninety degrees to the direction of propagation). These lines are not indicative of wave heights, they are simply related to the length scales of the wave field observed by the satellite. The dominant wave direction and period is therefore likely to be the one that is most consistently observed over the 5km2 footprint of the instrument. In the majority of cases this will correspond to the largest significant wave heights but that cannot be guaranteed. Ocean like responses are common over numerous land areas, particularly deserts in Africa and Australia, as well as some of central North America and the Amazonian Basin. SAR Wave period and direction Text Summaries: A description of up to four of the dominant wave period and direction spectral peaks are included in the text summaries. The index of Relative Power is in arbitrary units and does not relate in any simple way to significant wave height. Usability The WWWaves service is targeted towards users within specific sectors and is designed to be fully comprehensible to those who regularly use and require the service. The service is not interactive and therefore does not require a great deal of end user input. Target Users/Sectors The WWWaves service and its individual components are developed for operational marine activities particularly within the defence, transport and cable laying sectors. The Sea State Alarm service is provided direct to vessels anywhere at sea.

67

Company: ARGOSS Details: P.O. Box 61

8325 ZH Vollenhove Netherlands http://www.argoss.nl Founded in 1995 Number of staff: 8

Company Description: ARGOSS provides coastal mapping and marine information

services for offshore and coastal engineering applications. The company has many years of experience in projects and possess in-house global databases of observations of wind, waves, sea level and currents. Close links with research institutes and universities ensure that the latest techniques and services are available.

Service: Bathymetry Assessment System (BAS). Data Used: Satellite (e.g. ERS) and airborne radar data. Output: Bathymetric charts displaying seabed elevation. System Requirements: All processing is conducted in-house by ARGOSS. Application: Shallow water bathymetry. Availability: The price of the service varies according to the customer’s needs. For academic

organisations a 5% discount is offered. Additional Information: The service is effective to depths of approximately 30 metres.

Service Description Variations in water depth will alter sea surface currents and consequently modulate the sea surface roughness (short wave spectrum). For moderate wind speeds (3-8m/s) and currents of at least 0.5m/s these roughness modulations can be detected in radar images. Depending on the client’s requirements the BAS is able to detect seabed structures and produce bathymetric charts for areas of shallow water. The specific tools used depend on the requirements of the client (charts or detection and tracking of seabed features), the depths involved and on the available data. For the detection of seabed features radar imagery is the sole data requirement, whereas for the production of charts some sounding

68

data is required. The BAS consists of a suite of numerical models used to simulate radar images from a gridded bathymetry and a set of inverse modelling tools to retrieve the bathymetry from radar images. Usability BAS is a service offered by ARGOSS and is not interactive. Target Users/Sectors BAS is relevant for any application requiring shallow water bathymetric information, such as the monitoring of areas where the seabed changes continuously, dredging operations, sedimentological investigations and in the initial survey stages of any planned projects. Service: waveclimate.com. Data Used: ERS SAR, altimeter data, scatterometer data and buoy data. Output: Detailed information on wind speed and direction, wave height, period and

direction. Tabular data can be exported in Microsoft Excel. System Requirements: Service is available to any user with Internet access. Application: Wave and wind. Availability: Subscribe online to service and receive data using a voucher system, a standard

wind and wave report costs €2750. Additional Information: Voucher system is whereby the customers purchase vouchers and then pay only

for the material they download.

Service Description The waveclimate.com service supplies detailed SAR derived information on wind and wave conditions to online users. The service is in practice a substantial database of wave and wind data. Because SAR is weather independent the database is regularly updated without disruption due to adverse weather conditions. Usability Waveclimate.com is provided as an online service and does not rely on any input from the end user other than the parameters of the area they wish to investigate (latitude, longitude and size of data area). Target Users/Sectors

69

The waveclimate.com service is applicable to individuals involved in activities that rely on the provision of up to date reliable wind and wave measurements. Service: routeclimate.com. Data Used: Combined use of data from satellite radar altimeter, scatterometer and SAR. Output: Service provides online marine information which can be used to assess sea sate

when planning a route. System Requirements: As with the waveclimate.com service the service is available to any user with

Internet access. Application: Wave and wind. Availability: As with the waveclimate.com service, users subscribe online to the service using

the voucher system as a means of payment. Annual subscriptions are offered to frequent users.

Additional Information: Similar to the waveclimate.com service but specifically for route planning.

Service Description The service allows users to plan and plot their route with the benefit of sea state information at their disposal. The information comprises of significant wave height data obtained from radar altimeter, wind data from scatterometer and wave periods derived from SAR spectra, amended with data from a numerical wave prediction model. The service allows users to calculate the:

• Probability of exceeding the critical wave height or wind speed during the voyage;

• Wave height or wind speed corresponding to a specified probability; • Likely wave periods corresponding to the design wave height; • Most critical segments of the route.

Usability Routeclimate.com is provided as an online service and does not rely on any input from the end user other than the parameters of the route they wish to investigate (date of departure, latitude, longitude, harbour visited, and the speed in knots). Target Users/Sectors The service is of direct benefit to the marine transport sector and can offer substantial benefits to shipping companies, marine contractors, engineering consultants, maritime authorities, naval architects, towing companies and cargo owners.

70

Service: tidal-info.com Data Used: Satellite radar altimeter data and measurements obtained from coastal stations. Output: Times series of tidal height, tidal current speed and current direction are

available at ten minute intervals. Statistical information is available in the form of histograms (tidal height and current speed) and scatter diagrams (current speed versus current direction). All information can be viewed on screen and downloaded for further processing.

System Requirements: As with the routeclimate.com service the service is available to any user with

Internet access. Application: Current features. Availability: Users subscribe online to service and pay using the voucher system. Additional Information: Information is provided worldwide at a standard resolution of approximately

8km. However, more detailed information can be supplied on request. Service Description The tidal information system provides users with detailed information on tidal heights and currents. The information is derived from a database containing data on the significant components of tidal harmonics. During the computation process another 17 constituents are inferred from the original data. The contents of the database are computed by assimilating measurements obtained from satellite borne radar altimeters and from coastal stations in a shallow water tidal model. The satellite measurements provide a good overview of the tide offshore, whereas the local stations supply accurate local information for nearshore and coastal locations. The combination of the two, assimilated in a tidal model, provides good information for shallow seas and coastal areas, where tidal effects are most prominent. The data are based on the integration of more than nine years of satellite altimeter observations with measurements of approximately 5000 tidal stations. Usability Tidal-info.com is an online service and does not rely on any input from the end user other than the parameters of the location they wish to investigate (latitude, longitude and size of data area). Target Users/Sectors The tidal-info.com service is applicable to individuals involved in activities that rely on the provision of up to date reliable wind and wave measurements.

71

Company: Atlantis Scientific Inc. (ASI) Details: 20 Colonnade Road, Suite 110

Nepean Ontario K2E 7M6 Canada http://www.atlantis-scientific.com Founded in 1981 Number of staff: 38

Company Description: Atlantis Scientific Inc. (ASI) specialises in providing products and

services relating to and involving data acquisition, radar remote sensing, image analysis, advanced signal processing applications and interferometric SAR. ASI's research and development team are capable of performing studies and analyses, developing signal processing systems and simulation software, performing field studies and integrating systems for remote sensing applications.

Product: EarthView-InSAR (EV-InSAR). Data Used: ERS-1/2, JERS-1 and Radarsat. Output: User selectable final output products/images. System Requirements: Operates on Windows NT/2000, SUN Solaris and SGI IRIX workstations. Application: Terrain modelling (DEM) and land classification, ice sheet mapping. Availability: US$15,000, a 35% educational discount is available. Additional Information: Current EV-InSAR product is Version 2.1.2. Product Description EarthView InSAR (EV-InSAR) software makes use of inferometry technology as a reliable method for DEM generation and centimetre level surface change detection on regional and even global scales. EV-InSAR operates seamlessly with data processed by EarthView APP. If purchased as a standalone package, EV-InSAR can also ingest data from a number of worldwide data providers.

72

With EV-InSAR, DEMs may be created with accuracies in the order of meters. Surface change maps (e.g. ground subsidence, glacial motion) are measured with a sensitivity of centimetres per month. In addition to the generation of DEMs, deformation maps and slope maps are among the most important value-added products that can be created by the software. EV-InSAR tools include:

Data sub-scene extraction; Manual image tie-pointing; Residual phase removal; Differential phase correction tool; Unwrap edit tool; DEM geo-referencing and height trend correction tool.

Usability The Earthview InSAR software contains an easy-to-use GUI which provides the end user complete control over processing. Target Users/Sectors EarthView InSAR can be used to generate very accurate DEMs and map products for a number of applications e.g. glacier motion and ice sheet mapping, land use classification, environmental monitoring and global change, seismics and topographical investigations. Product: EarthView Advanced Precision Processor (EV-APP). Data Used: ERS-1/2, JERS-1 and Radarsat (data ingest from CD-ROM or exabyte tape). Output: User selectable final output products (imagery products are in industry standard

CEOS format). System Requirements: Operates on Windows NT/2000, SUN Solaris and SGI IRIX workstations. Application: Generic. Availability: US$15,000, a 35% educational discount is available. Additional Information: Current EV-APP product is Version 2.1.6.

Product Description EarthView APP is a sophisticated desktop SAR processor capable of producing high quality image products to custom specifications. It integrates seamlessly with EarthView InSAR (EV-InSAR) for the generation of elevation models and deformation maps. The

73

EV-APP is designed for robust handling of common raw data problems (e.g., formatting issues, missing lines). Optional features include:

Envisat (single-beam) support (multi-beam support is anticipated); ScanSAR (multi-beam) support for burst mode Radarsat data; Dual-CPU support; Resolution enhancement; Ocean current estimation.*

Ocean Current Estimation Atlantis Scientific Inc. has developed current extraction algorithms as an add on module to EV-APP. The ocean current estimation algorithms apply very accurate Doppler refinement procedures to extract surface radial speed measurements. The extracted data can be used to generate a current velocity map at spatial resolutions on the order of 1-2km and a precision of approximately 0.2-0.3m/s. Once generated the current information is made available as data overlays on a standard SAR processed image. Information on the large-scale ocean surface current is of great value to a number of applications including offshore oil and gas exploration, search and rescue and global weather prediction. Usability EV-APP has a user-friendly GUI and provides a flexible degree of control over processing to suit both novice and advanced users. Target Users/Sectors The EarthView APP is generic in its application, however, Atlantis Scientific Inc. target the mining, engineering and oil and gas industries in the marketing of their products.

74

Company: Alaska SAR Facility (ASF) Details: Geophysical Institute

University of Alaska Fairbanks P.O. Box 757320 Fairbanks, AK 99775-7320

USA http://www.asf.alaska.edu/ Founded in Number of staff: ~ 69 Company Description: ASF's primary mission is to acquire, process, archive, and

distribute satellite SAR data for the U.S. government and research communities. The ASF is involved in a wide range of activities, from planning data acquisitions to calibrating their SAR processor's output, from developing SAR data analysis tools to hosting SAR-related workshops. ASF is housed within the Geophysical Institute at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and is primarily funded through NASA's Earth Observing System.

Product: Radarsat Geophysical Processing System (RGPS) products and Geophysical

Processing System (GPS) products - unrestricted data products. Data Used: ERS-1/2, JERS-1 and Radarsat-1. Output: GPS products include ice motion, ice class grid, ice class image and wave

products. The unrestricted data products are available in CD-ROM. Other products are available in tape (4mm 2GB, 8mm 2.5 GB, 8mm 5GB) and digital linear tape (DLT) (20GB and 35GB).

System Requirements: Products are generally distributed by using FTP software, user must have this

capability installed on their operating system. Application: Ice and ocean (RGPS and GPS products). Availability: The processing cost of GPS products range from US$6-16. RGPS products are

available for free from the RGPS Lab website ( ). The unrestricted data products are free and can be ordered from ASF. http://www.gi.alaska.edu/~rgps/index.html

Additional Information: Prices are only relevant to science researchers for writing grant proposals.

75

Product Description The Geophysical Processor System (GPS) was operational between 1992 and 1994, products were generated between February 1992 and December 1994. The archive includes sea ice motion, sea ice classification, and ocean wave spectra products produced from ERS-1 data during that period. The GPS ice motion algorithm is a stand-alone software tool available from the Advanced Product Development Group at ASF. The GPS was a pre-cursor to the Radarsat Geophysical Processor System (RGPS) which generates sea ice information products from Radarsat data using more sophisticated techniques and improved coverage. Sea Ice Motion Vectors Data Set: These products recorded how far ice features move, and through what angle they rotated, between successive ERS-1 SAR images. Each product represents about three days of sea ice motion. Each data record identifies the initial latitude and longitude of an ice feature (or gridded section of an ice feature), its final latitude and longitude, the x and y displacement it went through, and how much the ice feature rotated as well as a reliability measure. Sea Ice Classification Products: This group of GPS products classify the sea ice identified in the input ERS-1 SAR images. Sea ice types have distinctive radar backscattering properties, and those properties were used to convert the input radar backscatter data to sea ice types. The ice types identified were multi-year ice, deformed first-year ice, undeformed first-year ice, and new ice/smooth open water. Two output products are available:

1) An image coloured according to sea ice classifications; and 2) A data file listing the percentage of each sea ice type found in 5km2 input image

blocks. Ocean Wave Products: The GPS wave spectra algorithm uses a two-dimensional Fast Fourier Transform to obtain a transformed wave number spectrum of a 512 by 512 portion of an ERS-1 image of ocean waves. This spectrum is smoothed by a Gaussian filter and the final output product is a contour plot of the spectrum power in polar coordinates with wave number as the radius and wave direction (relative to the image orientation) as the angle. Significant peaks are automatically located so that the dominant wavelengths and wave front angles can be presented. The Radarsat Geophysical Processor System (RGPS) is a sophisticated analysis tool for the production of sea ice motion information products. RGPS was developed by staff from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology. The RGPS was delivered to ASF in 1999 and began producing products regularly later that year. The goal of the Radarsat Geophysical Processor System (RGPS) is to derive data sets that will improve understanding of the role of the Arctic in global climate by generating a

76

range of products over the Arctic at three and six day intervals. These processes include mass balance, heat transfer, and momentum transfer between the Arctic Ocean and the atmosphere. Usability ASF’s products are developed for the scientific community particularly those involved in ice research. Therefore, individuals who purchase ASF products are likely to be proficient in the use and manipulation of these data products. Target Users/Sectors ASF generate products specifically for the academic (research) and government sectors. Service: Data distribution. Data Used: ERS-1/2, JERS-1 and Radarsat-1. Output: Various levels of processed data (low resolution to complex-format data-full

scene). System Requirements: Products are generally distributed by using FTP software, user must have this

capability installed on their operating system. Application: Generic. Availability: Price depends on level of processing required, ranges from US$2-100. Additional Information: Prices are only relevant to science researchers, for writing grant proposals.

Service Description ASF distribute ERS-1, ERS-2, and JERS-1 SAR products, Radarsat-1 Standard Beam and ScanSAR products, and geophysical products derived from ERS-1 SAR data. The prices are only applicable to science researchers, for writing grant proposals or estimating data credits; commercial users will obtain price estimates from the appropriate foreign space agency or commercial data distribution agency. Additional charges apply to data that must be obtained from Foreign Ground Stations (FGS) before processing at ASF.

77

Company: PCI Geomatics Details: 50 West Wilmot Street

Richmond Hill Ontario L4B 1M5 Canada http://www.pcigeomatics.com Founded in 1982 Number of staff: ~ 80

Company Description: PCI Geomatics is a world leading developer of Geomatics software

(geographic modelling, measurement, analysis, and output) and solutions based on its remote sensing, digital photogrammetry, spatial analysis, and cartographic editing programs. PCI Geomatics’ software products and solutions are distributed through a direct sales force, international resellers, and third party developers.

Product: Geomatica 9 Prime. Data Used: Can be used on most remotely sensed imagery including ERS-2 and Radarsat-1. Output: Geomatica 9 utilises Generic Database (GDB) technology to directly read and

write raster, vector, and other information from an extensive list of supported file formats.

System Requirements: Can operate on Microsoft Windows 98/2000/NT/XP, Sun Solaris, Linux and

IRIX (SGI) systems. Application: Generic. Availability: Geomatica is available to universities and educational institutes through the

CHEST. The first year fee is £2,700 GB and £2,200 per year for subsequent years.

Additional Information:

Product Description Geomatica 9 is geospatial software for remote sensing, photogrammetry, GIS, and cartography. Features of Geomatica 9 include the following:

78

• Enhanced GIS functionality incorporating: full raster and vector integration, on-screen digitising with full topology, improved vector editing, intuitive and easy-to-use wizards, topological and multi-layer analysis, advanced querying and modelling, suitability mapping and the ability to facilitate decision making with statistics and reports.

• New Generic Database (GDB) technology – support for the latest file formats. Geomatica's GDB technology directly reads the European Space Agency SAR Toolbox files. The SAR Toolbox library is a collection of portable and flexible software modules to facilitate the use of ERS SAR data for handling new product types, calibration methodologies and quality assessment techniques.

• Exclusive pan sharpening. • Advanced hyperspectral processing, capabilities provide end users with the

ability to better analyse and view their hyperspectral data and make it easier for them to integrate it with other geospatial data.

• New OrthoEngine technology. • New sensor support – support for the latest sensors including ASAR.

Usability Geomatica 9 is an off the shelf software package suitable for all levels of end user. The product contains enhanced usability features such as improved GUI, easy-to-use wizards, improved documentation and online help.

Target Users/Sectors The product is applicable to remote sensing, photogrammetry, GIS, spatial analysis and cartographic processing.

Product: Coastal Zone Management Information System (CZ-IMS). Data Used: Radarsat-1. Output: The outputs of the Integrated Management Tool (IMT) component of CZ-IMS

consist of custom formatted imagettes, vector and object based overlays and analysis products that indicate and map features and processes specific to the application. File sizes of IMT products are typically less than 2MB with larger files compressed using Enhanced Compressed Wavelet (ECW) compression.

System Requirements: n/a Application: Vessel detection and oil spill detection and response. Availability: After some initial development the CZ-IMS product was not taken forward as a

commercially available system. Additional Information: The CZ-IMS software tool was developed under the RUDP. The CZ-IMS

incorporates the OMW developed by Satlantic (see page 45).

79

Product Description The CZ-IMS product is intended to detect and track vessels in SAR imagery, detect and monitor oil spills in SAR imagery, generate and annotate imagettes for areas of interest and remotely access information through PC and web enabled tools. CZ-IMS is comprised of two main components each having a specific use in aiding decision makers. The first and primary component is the Integrated Management Tool (IMT), which provides data ingest capabilities, geometric correction, ship and slick detection and analysis tools. The second component is the Decision Response Tool (DRT); a specialised remote viewing tool used for practical decision making purposes. The DRT may be installed and used in an office setting or a field setting such as a vessel at sea. The digital CZ-IMS information products can be distributed directly from the IMT and displayed in remote terminals through File Transfer Protocol (FTP) or web browser access. The choice of display/distribution option will depend on the application being undertaken, the local Internet efficiency and the CZ-IMS infrastructure specifications. Usability CZ-IMS is designed as a straightforward and easy to learn software tool. However, if considering its applications the CZ-IMS tool is likely to be utilised in a specialised operational environment. Target Users/Sectors The CZ-IMS tool can be used by individuals involved in disaster management (particularly oil spill response and oil slick detection), environmental protection and preservation and integrated coastal management.

80

Company: Seaconsult Marine Research Ltd. Details: 8805 Osler Street

Vancouver B.C. V6P 4G1 Canada http://www.ultranet.ca/smrl/index.html Founded in 1975 Number of staff: n/a

Company Description: Seaconsult is a multi-disciplinary consulting organisation

providing specialised services in coastal engineering, oceanography, and computer science. Seaconsult provides consulting services in coastal engineering and hydraulics, applied physical oceanography and meteorology, instrumentation, mathematical modelling of environmental processes, and applications of computer technology. Principal areas of expertise include environmental design criteria, risk analysis, modelling of winds, waves, currents and pollutant dispersion, environmental impact assessment, field surveys, data processing and analysis, systems design and software development. Seaconsult conducts research and development in applied oceanography on behalf of clients in government and industry.

Product: SEACAST (ocean information system). Data Used: Radarsat-1. Output: Digital products and modelling outputs. System Requirements: PC Microsoft Windows. Application: Ocean surface currents, oil spill detection and response, shallow water

bathymetric mapping. Availability: Only the 3-D modelling capability of SEACAST is available at present. Additional Information:

81

Product Description The SEACAST ocean information system utilises satellite imagery and numerical modelling to generate a range of ocean and coastal data products. The generated products provide the user information on the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the ocean, and a means of predicting potential impacts. Modelling is an integral part of the SEACAST system. Initialising fields and local data are submitted to the C3 general circulation model, which produces 3-D time-varying output fields for current, upwelling/downwelling, salinity, temperature, sediment, plankton, nutrients, and water level. SEACAST digital products are transferred to the end users either via a web interface, or directly by fax, modem, or email as required. The benefits of SAR technology are used in the SEACAST system in the production of shallow water bathymetry maps. Other SEACAST applications include:

• Hazardous plankton monitoring and prediction; • Fishery exploitation through SST and frontal/upwelling products; • Ocean productivity and indices for fisheries management and research; • Sediment plume monitoring for coastal siltation and erosion; • Water quality modelling and impact assessment; • Oil spill detection and prediction; • Ocean surface currents for search and rescue, tanker drift, and oil spill response; • Coastal land use change - urban, agriculture, aquaculture development and

hydrological watershed impacts; • Damage assessment from natural disasters (e.g. flood prediction);

Seainfo PC Windows software is used to display georeferenced data produced by the SEACAST ocean information system. Fields which can be displayed include satellite ocean temperature and plankton images, in situ plankton observations, and prediction fields and time-series animation files created by the C3 model. Ocean data for fisheries and aquaculture. Usability The Seainfo software allows end users subscribed to SEACAST to download processed imagery and enables information to be presented to end users without the need for processing on their part. SEACAST was successfully demonstrated in 1997 using real-time satellite data assimilation for plankton and SST. However, due to complications the C3 modelling capability in SEACAST is the only component currently available. Target Users/Sectors The SEACAST system is applicable to individuals involved in fisheries, aquaculture, coastal management, oil spill response and coastal defence.

82

Company: GAF Details: Arnulfstr. 197

D-80634 Munich Germany http://www.gaf.de Founded in 1985 Number of staff: n/a Company Description: GAF originally provided services centring around EO satellite

data, these services were later complemented with information system technology. GAF offers a broad range of applications, ranging from geodata procurement (satellite data, DEM, land use and land cover data), value adding processing, information processing and software development to the provision of turn-key technical assistance projects and customised spatial land management and monitoring systems.

Product: GeoRover (SARview is a component of GeoRover). Data Used: ERS, Radarsat, Envisat and LANDSAT. Output: Image (GeoTIFF, TIF, MrSID), vector (ArcView shape file) and database

(ASCII) formats. System Requirements: Microsoft Windows 95/98/2000 and NT 4.0. Application: Geological mapping. Availability: Additional Information: The current generation of GeoRover is Version 1.5.

Product Description GeoRover integrates GPS navigation, GIS functionality and spatial raster data management in one tool. GeoRover enables the user to create maps in a GIS environment also including complex geometries, as common for geological features.

83

GAF offers a standardised and specialised image product family based on EO data as base mapping tool with GeoRover, one of these products, SARview, is specifically tailored for SAR derived data. SARview is an ERS, Radarsat or Envisat based data product, ortho-corrected and filtered to reduce noise effects inherent to SAR data. Usability GeoRover is an off the shelf software tool and can therefore be used by the non-specialist and specialist alike. Target Users/Sectors GeoRover is a dedicated software tool especially designed for geological field mapping.

84

Company: Oceanor Details: Pir-Senteret,

N-7462 Trondheim, Norway

http://oblea.oceanor.no/ Founded in Number of staff: n/a Company Description: Oceanor specialises in delivering integrated real-time

environmental monitoring and information systems for oceans, rivers, lakes, groundwater and soil. The systems can be used for applications such as offshore oil and gas production, harbour monitoring, sea- and fresh-water quality monitoring and weather forecasting. In developing its products and services Oceanor utilises expertise in meteorology, oceanography, biology, hydrology, chemistry, electronics and software development.

Product: Environmental Monitoring System (EMS). Data Used: Output: EMS is designed to provide graphical and other display formats of data to

clients interested in a number of applications. System Requirements: The system has a modular architecture, all installations run the same software

which configures dynamically to the instrumentation and operational requirements of the particular installation.

Application: Numerous applications within the broad categories of meteorological,

oceanographic and vessel/platform performance. Notable applications include wave parameters (height, period and direction), current speed and direction and wind speed.

Availability: Additional Information:

Product Description Environmental Monitoring System (EMS) is designed for long term unattended operation to collect environmental, meteorological, and vessel performance data and provides a flexible and practical EMS system for the offshore and marine industry. The data is

85

collected from a wide variety of sensors and instrumentation. The data are processed to give results in engineering units for use both on board, or if required, onshore, as part of a co-ordinated data collection exercise. EMS has been developed over a number of years.

The EMS software is developed to exploit low cost PC/AT style architectures for long term data monitoring in an offshore environment. The system has a modular architecture, all installations run the same software which configures dynamically to the instrumentation and operational requirements of the particular installation. EMS is designed to give a modular approach to system building, using proven components. There are two main EMS applications, firstly the Server application which interfaces to the sensors and other hardware, and Client applications which provide graphical and other displays of important data. Interfaces to local and wide area computer networks for dissemination of the data throughout the rig and other connected networks. Usability The EMS is a specialist system designed for professionals within the marine industry. Target Users/Sectors The EMS is developed specifically for the offshore industry. The system is currently in use on a number of offshore platforms/installations, which are operating throughout the world (e.g. Statoil, Esso, BP Amoco and offshore platforms/installations covered by NMD/NPD [Norwegian], DOT/DOE [United Kingdom], and ABS [USA] regulatory bodies).

Product: World Wave Atlas (WWA). Data Used: ERS-1, GEOSAT, TOPEX/POSEIDON and ERS Radar Altimeter. Output: Wind and wave statistics. Frequency and cumulative distributions and standard

statistical parameters may be presented on a seasonal, monthly and annual basis. For certain versions text descriptions are also available to users.

System Requirements: WWA requires a 486 PC or better with MS Windows 95, MS-Windows NT 3.5

or later. WWA requires about 30MB of disk space depending on the size of the area purchased. It is recommended that the PC should have 16 MB or more of RAM and a 15 inch or larger, high resolution colour screen (minimum 256 colours) to give the best results.

Application: Wind and waves. Availability: The range of products available under the WWA service also vary in price, a

complete pricelist is available from Oceanor on request. Additional Information: A demo of World Wide Atlas (Version 2.0) is available to download from the

Oceanor website, http://www.oceanor.no

86

Product Description World Wave Atlas (WWA) can be used for geographical presentation of wave and wind statistics world-wide. The WWA is in fact two things. Firstly, it is the collective name for a series of comprehensive high resolution interactive wind and wave atlases capable of providing accurate wind and wave climate statistics for any country or region worldwide. Secondly, it is a global database, which can be used to service the offshore industry, wave energy interests, coastal engineers etc. The WorldWaves coastal modelling tool incorporates high quality offshore wave data, bathymetric data, coastline data, SWAN and backward raytracing wave models and a statistical analysis package. In addition to the PC atlases, the following outputs can be provided for any location globally, based on the WWA data base.

• Time series of wave heights, period and direction; primarily these are deep water

data, but shallow water time series can also be provided if the customer does not have an in-house wave model to perform the transformation. Series of up to 20 years in European waters and up to 12 years elsewhere can be provided.

• A selection of wave statistics can be provided for the location in question. Typical

statistics include exceedence probabilities for wave height, extreme significant wave height, maximum wave height and crest height estimates, duration statistics (downtime analysis), bivariate and trivariate statistics for wave heights, periods and directions (e.g. scatter diagrams of wave height and period) etc.

• Statistics can be provided either electronically, by fax or in a printed data report,

including details of the methodology, the data quality, a general description of the wave climate, time series plots, statistics etc

Usability The WWA is a user-friendly product and is versatile in that it offers a variety of outputs in varying formats and is therefore applicable to many users. In addition, because of its versatility the WWA is applicable to users with differing levels of expertise. Target Users/Sectors The WWA is of particular relevance to sectors involved with offshore activities e.g. harbour engineering, dredging, ship routing planning and offshore wave energy resource assessment. Outputs from WWA have also been used for research and educational purposes.

87

Company: MétéoMer Details: R.N. 7 – 83480 Puget-sur-Argens France http://www.meteomer.fr/ Founded in 1985 Number of staff: n/a Company Description: MétéoMer studies and forecasts meteorological and oceanographic

conditions world wide, useful for a variety of maritime activities such as offshore oil exploration and production (drilling, field development), maritime engineering (shipyard, ports etc.) maritime transport and trans-oceanic races.

Product: CLIOSat. Data Used: Data from the Geosat, Topex-Poseidon and ERS 1/2 satellites. Output: CLIOSAT is a metocean climate atlas and contains basic statistics and climate

products (histograms, scatter diagrams, estimates of extreme values). System Requirements: CLIOSat is available in two formats: on a standard CD ROM for use with a PC

or as online service based on an archive and interrogation system. Application: Sea state (winds and waves). Availability: For the online service histogram products are available on an annual, quarterly

or three monthly bases respectively priced at €105, €52 and €30 (approximately). The prices for the scatter diagrams for the same periods are €212, €105 and €60 (approximately). There is also an access fee of ~ €200. The licence fee is approximately €1795.

Additional Information: MétéoMer produced CLIOSat through collaboration with IFREMER. Several

ESA's pilot projects have contributed to the elaboration of the CLIOSat atlas.

Product Description The purpose of CLIOSat is to offer provide prompt information for sea-state and wind parameters in predefined or specific areas. CLIOSat contains basic statistics and climate products (histograms, scatter diagrams, estimates of extreme values). CLIOSAT is a metocean climate atlas founded entirely on satellite data. The satellite derived data provide sea-state directional spectral information and thus enable users to determine sea-

88

state periods and directions. Archives of satellite measurements covering a 7-year period are available. The system provides reliable long-term statistics on climate coherent global areas and local specific areas. These data are available for any part of the world including remote and poorly documented areas. CLIOSat provides a number of different data products and two main presentation formats - histograms and scatter diagrams. A variety of parameters can be selected including wind speed, wind direction, significant wave height (Hs), wave period and direction. The user is provided with either histograms of the distribution of these wind/wave parameters or with extreme values of wave height. These values are only indicative (pre-project information) and offer a first impression of the range of estimated extreme Hs values that could be encountered within the area. Within 48 hours, users can obtain similar basic statistics (except extreme Hs values) on areas of interest of a specified location and size, and period (year, season, month, combination of months). Usability CLIOSat is not intended as an educational tool for novice users, it is an operational service and therefore requires some level of expertise. Users of CLIOSat can avail of the advice of met-ocean experts who will then analyse the selected specific area to guarantee consistent statistics and coherent climate data. Target Users/Sectors CLIOSat has a diverse range of users including offshore industries (e.g. petroleum companies), port industries, maritime transport, engineering, naval architecture and yachtsmen.

89

Company: Altamira Information Details: C/ Roger de Llúria,

50, àtic B E-08009 Barcelona Spain http://www.altamira-information.com Founded in 1999

Number of staff: 8 (including second office in Toulouse, France) Company Description: Altamira Information specialises in the analysis and processing of

images from space, with particular experience in SAR imagery. The products and services offered by Altamira Information can be categorised under the following headings:

• Studies and consultancy in space imagery and

information products • Production of mapping products • Provision of customised services • Distribution of space images

Product: Altamira Information creates products that can be for specific or generic

purposes. Data Used: SAR and optical data. Output: Products can be outputted as maps and DEMs. System Requirements: Product specific. Application: Generic. Availability: Products specific to users needs are developed in-house within Altamira

Information. Additional Information: Altamira Information can provide technology solutions for

organisations/individuals in the marine environment. Product Description Altamira Information do not sell an off the shelf product but invite clients to outline a problem or issue that Altamira Information can address. By entering into a dialogue with

90

a user they can create the product or service that best meets the users needs. A feasibility study is drafted in which the suitability of the product provided is clarified. Usability Altamira Information liaises directly with the user and therefore creates a product or develops a service that matches the expertise and needs of the user. These services give users effective access to the wealth of remote sensing expertise held within Altamira Information without having to train in advanced signal processing techniques themselves. Target Users/Sectors Altamira Information cater for applications in the following sectors: Natural hazards: damage assessment and prevention, urban monitoring (subsidence, spatial planning, infrastructure development and safety management) and environmental protection (including marine and atmospheric pollution and deforestation).

91

Company: Vexcel (UK) Details: 3 Great Farm Offices

West Woodhay Newbury, Berkshire. RG20 0BP United Kingdom. http://www.vexcel.co.uk/ Founded in 2001 Number of Staff: 4

Company Description: Vexcel UK have experience with a broad array of satellite sensors

and signal processing techniques. Vexcel UK focuses its expertise in satellite sensors on applications and activities in the marine, coastal and polar environments. By exploiting the growing range of satellite sensors Vexcel aim to foster new applications and capabilities among operational users. Vexcel UK's partners include parent company, Vexcel Corporation of Boulder, Colorado and sister company Atlantis Scientific of Ottawa, Canada.

Service: ICEMON. Data Used: ICEMON uses SAR (Envisat ASAR and Radarsat ScanSAR) in combination

with other EO (Quikscat, AVHRR & SSM/I) and in situ data both for climate and operational monitoring.

Output: Outputs include ice thickness charts, climate products from SAR, charts

displaying ice drift, concentration and edges. System Requirements: The number of demonstration and envisaged products will be in a range of

outputs including: gif, eps, tiff, pdf, ASCII grid, netCDF and HDF. Application: Ice Availability: A comprehensive number of services and products are available over

demonstration periods. It is envisaged that NRT and archived products will be available in two years. These products and service are also specified on the ICEMON web page.

Additional Information: ICEMON is a research project under the GMES Service Element programme

Product Description

92

The products emanating from ICEMON can be considered in terms of long, intermediate and short term scope. The long-term objective of ICEMON will be to deliver operational monitoring and forecasting services of met-ice-ocean conditions at high latitudes including atmospheric, sea ice and oceanographical information products. Several providers will supply different monitoring, hindcast (climatic) and forecast products for different high-latitude regions as part of a global service system. In the intermediate period (3–5 years) sea ice products will gradually be integrated with meteorological and oceanographical products, including monitoring, hindcast and forecast products. EO products based on SAR and scatterometer data will be expanded to include ice thickness from CryoSat. The EO-based sea ice products will be used in modelling and data assimilation for improved forecasting services. In situ observations will be used to validate and supplement EO-products and model results. In the first 2 years (short term) ICEMON will demonstrate that SAR ice monitoring in the marine environment, delivering high-resolution (>1km) products. In addition to SAR data, new scatterometer products such as ice drift on large scale will be demonstrated. The demonstrations will consist of NRT information for operational users and offline information for climate monitoring including design criteria for marine structures. Demonstration of EO-derived sea ice products will be performed for the whole Arctic Ocean and the surrounding regional seas. These demonstrations shall document that the proposed services are of importance and benefit for the selected user segments. Usability Many of the ICEMON products and services will be made available on a demonstration basis making them available to a variety of users of varying degrees of expertise. Target Users/Sectors Because of the diversity of products and service emerging from ICEMON it sectoral application is equally diverse and includes maritime transport, fisheries, coast guard and navy, engineering companies, insurance companies, port and maritime authorities, government authorities and international conventions (for environmental monitoring purposes), offshore operators, meteorological and ice services

93

Company: Fleximage Details: 113 avenue Aristide Briand 94117 Arcueil Cedex France

http://www.fleximage.fr Founded in 1989 Number of Staff: n/a

Company Description: Fleximage is a wholly owned subsidiary of EADS (European

Aeronautic Defence and Space Company). Service: Training in image analysis Data Used: Optical, radar, infrared and hyperspectral Output: Knowledge in EO basics, sensors and platforms for all forms of EO data. System Requirements: Application: Generic Availability: Contact Fleximage directly Additional Information:

Service Description Fleximage offer training (specific and customised) in remote sensing to individuals and organisations; courses cover basics and back ground knowledge, sensors and platforms for radar, optical, infrared and hyperspectral imagery. The training can be in the form of multimedia self training or facility based training (at Fleximage offices or at client locations). Fleximage is able to design and perform fully customised courses. Usability The training caters for individuals at basic, advanced or expert level. Target Users/Sectors

94

Fleximage services are applicable to any individual or organisation with an interest in remote sensing.

95

4.4 Discussion The majority of products currently on offer from commercial companies contain SAR data as a component rather than as an end in itself. A common feature between a number of products, is the combination of SAR data with other types of data (optical data, in situ data) or technology (GIS) to provide a more marketable product. For example, it can be seen in the results of the product review that products are often available in a user-friendly format e.g. geotiff. The production of such information involves a high level of expertise in the analysis of the original data. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a high dependence on service provision for the non-expert operational end user. Companies have also endeavoured to make their products or services more attractive to end users by offering good value for money. For example, ARGOSS have developed a pricing mechanism where customers only pay for the data/information they actually use. This ensures that end users are not burdened with superfluous and unwanted data at an extra cost. The MARSAIS focus applications (pollution, sea state and current features) are represented by products and services currently available in the market, see Table 4.2. If we focus specifically on European capacity, only five companies (BOOST Technologies, ARGOSS, Satellite Observing Systems, Oceanor and Météomer) appear to offer components of products and services linked to MARSAIS. However, MARSAIS is unique in Europe by working towards the development of a generic product. The question is are European companies meeting market demands, or has the market reached full capacity for the products and services that are currently available? The challenge is to pave the way for new products and services that more adequately meet user needs, and consequently increase market potential. Table 4.2. Number of products and services per application.

Application No. of Products & Services Ice 4 Sea Surface Temperature 1 Wind 7 Wave 8 Pollution 4 Vessel Detection 3 Currents 3 Shallow Water Bathymetry 2 Terrain Modelling 5 Processing 3 Other 3 Training 1

For any SME wishing to develop a product or service it is important to consider the market conditions for what they hope to offer commercially. During the review, contact was made with a number of company representatives, a few of whom pointed at the

96

insecurity of the SAR commercial product market, high costs and practical problems with satellite imagery as obstacles to the development of SAR derived commercial products. The success and commercial history of the reviewed products shows significant variety. Some products found it hard to establish a market e.g. SEACAST, whereas others seemed to be more successful. It is notable that products developed through the Earth Observation Market Development (EOMD) initiative by ESA (e.g. routeclimate.com by ARGOSS) appear to be commercially successful. It cannot be said that this is the explicit reason for the success of the product but it does demonstrate the valuable contribution such an initiative can supply to Value-Adding Companies (VACs) and SMEs. While a number of companies offer a training element to their product, there appears to be a lack of dedicated training and education services, specifically for SAR data, available from SMEs. In fact, there was only one company identified in this review that provided training in EO data. The potential for SMEs to provide training products and services in the use of EO data should be considered in terms of capacity building for EO data use. By targeting the user community with training products it is possible to increase proficiency and in turn create a market and demand for EO products and services. The land based applications of SAR particularly InSAR technology appear to be at a more advanced stage of maturity. From the products reviewed, it is clear that topographic mapping utilising SAR data is a well developed niche market. In Europe, off the shelf terrestrial based commercial products appear more readily available than similar products aimed at the coastal and marine environment. Only a handful of European companies provide SAR marine and coastal products (see Table 4.2). Of the commercial products and services currently available, many utilise data from a number of SAR sensors. Some products also use EO data other than SAR, but to a lesser degree. The trends of sensor use by companies profiled in this study are outlined in Table 4.3. At the time of writing it is apparent from the analysis that the uptake of Envisat has been limited; only five companies are currently using Envisat in their product and service offerings. Amongst other factors, this may be due to the slow release of validation information for Envisat ASAR. This trend will be expected to change into the future. Table 4.3. The number of companies and commercial products using different sensor types.

Sensor No. of Companies No. of Products Envisat ASAR 5 8 ERS 1 & 2 16 22 Radarsat 15 21 Other SAR sensor 7 10 Non-radar sensor 6 4

97

CHAPTER 5 -SAR PROJECT REVIEW

5.1 Introduction and Objectives

Projects that aim to demonstrate the operational potential of SAR data within the coastal and marine environment are examined in this chapter. This task was undertaken on the advice of the MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG), who suggested that the MARSAIS consortium should link with similar projects. Table 5.1 outlines the projects reviewed and their features. 5.2 Methodology The information on each project was obtained from the project websites, which are quoted for each project, analysis of final reports and other published data, or from correspondence with the respective project partners.

98

5.3 Results Table 5.1 outlines the projects reviewed and their features. Table 5.1 Index of research projects where SAR is a component.

Project Acronym

Programme Complete Page No.

WEMSAR

5th Framework √ 100

MaxWAVE

5th Framework √ 101

EuroROSE

MAST-3 √ 102

Oceanides

5th Framework X 104

RAPSODI

5th Framework √ 106

RAMSES

4th Framework √ 107

ENVISYS

4th Framework √ 109

Clean Seas

4th Framework √ 111

RESSAC

4th Framework √ 113

SARMIS

INTAS √ 115

DISMAR

5th Framework X 117

COASTMON

4th Framework √ 119

COMKISS

4th Framework √ 121

DECLIMS

5th Framework X 123

Northern View

ESA - GMES Services Element

X 125

ROSES

ESA - GMES Services Element

X 126

Coastwatch

ESA - GMES Services Element

X 127

MERSEA (S1)

5th Framework X 128

99

Project Title: Wind Energy Mapping using Synthetic Aperture Radar Acronym: WEMSAR Duration: 2000-2003 Partners: Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center (NERSC),

Norway NEG Micon Project Development A/S, Denmark RISØ National Laboratory, Denmark Terra Orbit A/S, Norway Ente per le Nuove Tecnologie, l'Energia e l'Ambiente, Italy http://www.nersc.no/~wemsar/

Objective: To develop, validate and demonstrate the potential of satellite-

based SAR, scatterometer and altimeter to map wind energy in offshore and near-coastal regions for potential wind turbine siting.

Deliverable: The project aimed to develop an integrated tool, called WEMSAR

(Wind Energy Mapping using SAR), starting from meso-scale models, via micro-siting models, and to satellite scatterometer (50km resolution), altimeter (7km resolution) and SAR (400m resolution).

This tool can provide high spatial resolution wind information (based on SAR retrieved wind fields) for wind turbine siting, and thus improve cost-effectiveness when developing the renewable wind energy sources.

Final Reports: Access to project documentation via the website is password protected. Contact Ola M. Johannessen (Ola.Johannessen@nersc.no) regarding access.

100

Project Title: Rogue waves - Forecast and impact on marine structures Acronym: MaxWave Duration: 2000-2003 Partners: GKSS Forschungszentrum GmbH, Germany

Det Norske Meteorologiske Institutt, Norway Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. , Germany Meteorological Office, UK Instituto Superior Técnico, Portugal Météo France, France Ocean SensWare, Germany Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium Technische Universität Berlin, Germany Det Norske Veritas AS, Norway Institute of Hydroengineering, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland http://w3g.gkss.de/projects/maxwave/

Objective: The main objective was to provide a quality-based metocean

information product for the benefit of both high sea and coastal zone operating industry and authorities. Throughout the project the expertise of the oceanography and marine engineering communities will be combined and used to further understand the occurrence and properties of rogue waves.

Deliverable: The final information product derived from the MaxWave project,

and the experience gained throughout the lifespan of the project, will be used to better inform those in the marine industry of the behaviour and impact of catastrophic single or successive waves (rogue waves).

The project deliverables included: algorithms to estimate

individual wave heights, crest length and propagation from 2-D field data; wave model and retrieved SAR spectra for selected storms; map of extreme metocean conditions from satellite radar data and a pre-operational forecast.

Final Reports: All reports are contained on the project web pages, access to the

reports is password restricted. Users are requested to contact the project co-ordinators to obtain a username and password.

101

Project: European Radar Ocean Sensing Acronym: EuroROSE Duration: 1998-2001 Partners: GKSS, Germany

Universität Hamburg, Institut für Meereskunde, Germany Nansen Environment and Remote Sensing Center, Norway University of Sheffield, UK Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Norway Puertos del Estado, Spain OceanWaveS, Germany [subcontractor] http://ifmaxp1.ifm.uni-hamburg.de/EuroROSE/

Objective: The main objective of EuroROSE is the development of a

transportable methodology for monitoring and forecasting winds, waves, water level and currents in limited areas (typical extent 40km2), such as coastal and port approach areas.

Deliverable: EuroROSE sought to develop a tool to be used by vessel traffic

system (VTS) operators, harbour and coastal managers, to monitor and predict the significant met-ocean conditions with high temporal and spatial resolution in limited sea areas surrounding locations of intense and sensitive marine operations. This tool consisted of three basic elements, each one well matured and proven:

• High frequency radar systems, which provide gridded

coverage of wave spectra and currents within a distance from 2 - 40km off shore and a resolution of 0.5 - 2km.

• Navigational X-band radar systems, which provide near

field wave spectra and surface current averages for significant subareas (about 1km²) within a range of 0.5 - 10km.

• High resolution numerical models (less then 500m)

simulating and predicting all four classes of parameters in an area of about 40km². Such models already existed and there was a need to assimilate spatial radar sensed data into the model parameter fields in order to improve their initial fields for prediction purposes.

102

Final Reports: All publications (complete papers and technical reports) arising from the EuroROSE project are listed on the project website. Individuals wishing to view copies of the reports or view their contents are requested to ask for access information.

103

Project: Harmonised monitoring, reporting and assessment of illegal marine oil discharges

Acronym: OCEANIDES Duration: 2003-2005 Partners: Joint Research Centre, Italy

GAUSS, Germany Kongsberg Satellite Services, Norway Norwegian Computing Centre, Norway German Federal Institute of Hydrology, Germany Bolding & Burchard Hydrodynamics (SME), Germany QinetiQ, UK HELCOM, Finland German National Pollution Control Authority, Germany Finnish Environment Institute, Finland REMPEC, Malta

http://intelligence.jrc.cec.eu.int/oceanides/oceanides.html

Objective: The OCEANIDES project aims to identify and assemble the

knowledge required to establish a more harmonised and effective monitoring of European waters of illicit marine oil pollution.

Deliverable: OCEANIDES will specifically use current and traditional

satellite/airborne oil pollution surveillance services and infrastructure in order to understand, address and identify the technological, scientific, and legislative requirements for establishing a Pan-European harmonised, standardised, oil pollution monitoring and information reporting capability.

In addition, OCEANIDES will apply a state-of-the-art oil spill trajectory/fate and environmental impact assessments model to develop a methodology to assess the fraction of illegal oil spills most likely to reach environmentally sensitive areas and the scale of their environmental impact. Through this approach it is intended to:

• Define an ideal set of parameters that characterise an oil slick;

• Normalise data from past and present monitoring campaigns to this template and store them in a common database,

• Benchmark algorithms and procedures for detecting oil slicks from synthetic aperture radar satellite imagery against each other and against observations from aircraft in

104

order to arrive at a common definition of false positives and negatives. In other words to calculate in a uniform way the probability that a shape seen on an image is indeed an oil slick and, conversely, to define what weather and SAR beam mode combination make it likely that a real oil slick would be undiscovered;

• Develop statistical methods that can calculate the number of oil slicks likely to be have been deposited in a given area as a function of the limited sample that have been observed;

• Understand whether it is possible to convert the number of oil slicks deposited in a basin to a volume or mass of oil;

• Understand what fraction of the oil deposited in a sea basin over the period of a year reaches the shore and how this fraction depends on the type and average thickness of slicks.

Final Reports: OCEANIDES is an ongoing project, links to documentation

relating to OCEANIDES are available on the project website.

105

Project: Remote sensing Anti-Pollution System for geographical Data Integration

Acronym: RAPSODI Duration: 2000-2002 Partners: Thales Systemes Aeroportes SA, France Joint Research Centre, Italy Consorci Institut de Geomatica, Spain Centre de Documentation de Recherche et d'Experimentation sur

les Pollutions Accidentelles des Eaux, France Objectives: To develop a dedicated airborne SAR system for maritime oil spill

detection to complement space borne imagery use. Deliverable: A dedicated system that effectively contributes, to the necessary

efforts against maritime pollution by developing detection, estimation and tracking functions, and taking advantage of the diversity and specificity of remote sensors which operate in maritime pollution missions.

Final Reports: The RAPSODI final report (project deliverable D24) is complete

and is available on request from the project consortium.

106

Project: Regional earth observation Application for Mediterranean Sea Emergency Surveillance

Acronym: RAMSES Duration: 1998-2000 Partners: Matra Systemes et Informations, France Spot Image, France Eurimage, Italy Fondazione per la Meteorologia Applicata, Italy Advanced Computer Systems, Italy http://ramses.esrin.esa.it/ Objectives: RAMSES project aimed to implement a flexible and interactive

system for oil pollution monitoring with intelligent access schemes, able to handle a service price policy and on-demand data processing according to user requirements. These transactions, including delivery of the selected products or services were conducted on-line.

Deliverable: The RAMSES services are fully operational and are based on EO

derived input data and other non-EO information, such as meteorological observations and forecasts. These data are provided by heterogeneous sources and processed in multiple sites in an inter-networking scenario.

Primarily, RAMSES services allow users to request a dataset and to get the RAMSES oil slick information products, in a rapid and user-friendly way. The simplicity and quickness of the system is essential because it intends to serve and cope with real coastal pollution emergency scenarios, where the time to react is extremely critical. The RAMSES project integrated oil detection and monitoring system involves the following stages:

• Transmission of the satellite SAR image to the ground

station; • Local processing in the ground station; • Transmission of the ground SAR scene and meteo/ocean

data to the RAMSES server; • Detection of oil slick and integration of the meteo/ocean

data by the satellite surveillance user (Value Adder); • Emergency message sent to local authorities; • Digital data sent to local experts (e.g. GIS, R&D);

107

RAMSES initially relied on ESA’s ERS-2 SAR products as the basic EO data source. Met data (48 hour forecasts) are provided by ICOD in Malta. No other modelling is involved. The most sophisticated product available is a shape file of the requested area indicating oil slick and coast outline with superimposed vectors for wind and current, and temperature grid. A few other GIS layers are available such as major cities and rivers. The product can also be delivered as an image. Alternatively, a simple textual description is also available. The main benefit of the RAMSES system will be the provision of a specialised and operational end-to-end service to the oil pollution user community in the Mediterranean area. The GAIANET project extended RAMSES after the project was completed in 2000. Two follow on projects (CLEOPATRA and VASCO) to RAMSES have also been initiated.

Final Reports: The publications arising from the RAMSES project, and all the final reports, are available to download in pdf format from the project website.

108

Project: Environmental Monitoring Warning and Emergency System Acronym: ENVISYS Duration: 1996-1998 Partners: IMPETUS Systems & Telecommunications SA, Greece Epsilon International SA, Greece APEX SA, Greece Cyclades Regional Development Company, Greece Spacetec Kongsberg, Norway Intellserve Ltd, Greece Norsk Regnesentral Foundation, Norway Sistemas de Seguimiento Informatico S.L., Spain

Sociedad Estatal de Sasemar Salvamento y Seguridad Maritima, Spain

Prefecture of Cyclades, Greece Ministry of Aegean, Greece Ingenieria de Sistemas para la Defensa de España, Spain Hellenic Telecommunications Organisation SA, Greece IMPETUS International SA, Belgium National Observatory of Athens, Greece http://www.nr.no/envisys/ Objectives: ENVISYS' primary objective was to create a complete system for

the early detection of oil-spills, the monitoring of sea pollution due to oil spills, and the provision of support to the responsible public authorities during clean-up operations.

Other objectives included investigating the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of applying the ENVISYS system in the detection of other emergencies (e.g. forest fires and floods), and an overall evaluation of the proposed techniques. A demonstrator was built integrating and developing existing remote sensing techniques (including SAR), communication tools, GIS, databases and multimedia tools; its applicability was tested and verified during the project

Deliverable: A management, monitoring and control system for various public

authorities in Europe. The decision support system is applicable to users concerned with oil spills, their identification and due emergency warning, the system can be modified as a harmonised emergency environment for other natural disasters (e.g. forest fires, floods).

109

A demonstrator combining satellite images, map data, wind data and sea current data, merged together using GIS, RDBMS and GUI technology in order to support the operator and users in decision making. Users are also supported with oil spill development simulators and a database of cleanup equipment to make appropriate decisions.

Final Reports: The ENVISYS publication list including reports, presentations,

articles in journals and conference proceedings is available on the project web page. The publications cannot be downloaded directly from the project web page.

110

Project: European marginal seas-a study of pollution monitoring from space

Acronym: Clean Seas Duration: 1996-1999 Partners: Satellite Observing Systems, UK Ecole des Mines de Paris, France Southampton Oceanography Centre, UK Stockholm University, Sweden ACRI SA, France JRC (Marine Environment Unit, SAI), Italy University of Hamburg, Germany University Politechnic of Catalunya, Spain http://satobsys.co.uk/CSeas/homeframe.html Objectives: The principle objective was to assess the EO "system" and its

relevance to marine pollution monitoring. Specifically Clean Seas looked to quantify the effectiveness of satellite-borne SAR, infra-red and colour sensors, in detecting oil slicks, effluent discharges and algal blooms. The investigations consider the sensor’s ability when acting singly or in concert, by repeating the observations at least every 35 days (the repeat pattern of ERS 1/2) over a period of 2 years. Keeping this principal objective in mind other objectives of Clean Seas were as follows:

• To assess the capabilities and potential of the whole EO

'system' to routine surveillance of European seas; • To identify the information contained in EO images that is

useful and relevant to marine pollution monitoring; • To recommend how the EO 'system' should evolve to

ensure that the value of the information it can provide is maximised.

Deliverables: The project focussed on three coastal study sites situated in the

Mediterranean, the southern North Sea and in the Baltic, examining marine pollution in terms of the varied environmental risks and susceptibilities as well as the challenges each site presented from a spaceborne monitoring perspective. The Clean Seas project delivered results in the following areas:

• Multi-sensor analyses; • Spill statistics;

111

• Dynamic mapping and prediction; • Dispersion; • River plumes.

Final Reports: The full text of the final project report can be downloaded from the

Clean Seas project web page in Microsoft Word 98 or Adobe pdf format.

112

Project: Remote Sensing Support to Analysis of Coasts Acronym: RESSAC Duration: 1997-1999 Partners: Centro di Telerilevamento Mediterraneo (CTM), Italy,

ARGOSS, The Netherlands MétéoMer, France National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR) The Netherlands Telespazio, Italy Ministry of the Environment - Planning Division, Israel Geological Survey Institute (GSI), Israel Israel Oceanographic and Limnological Research Institute (IOLR), Israel http://www.ctmnet.it/ressac/

Objectives: The RESSAC project sought to demonstrate the usefulness and

cost-effectiveness of multi-satellite based data in the assessment and monitoring of coastal transformations, especially relevant to coastal dynamics processes and land use modifications, using the east Mediterranean Sea as a test-area.

The acquisition and analysis of data from different satellites - optical and microwave - of complementary geometric and temporal resolution, was used to verify the reliability of remote sensing to contribute to the monitoring and study of the following aspects, all of which relevant to different issues of coastal transformations in the project test area.

Deliverables: The RESSAC project delivered environmental analysis results for

the coastal and marine environment of the east Mediterranean Sea. The terrestrial outputs included an assessment of coastline transformation and a land cover assessment, which depicted land use change over a ten year period.

Results for the marine environment included assessments of total

suspended matter (TSM) distribution and concentration. The project team investigated the reliability and success of a number of sensors to examine TSM characteristics.

In addition, the marine environmental analysis also included

results on the estimation of sea state, sea bed composition and sea bed topography from satellite data.

113

Final Reports: An outline of the results derived from the RESSAC project as well as a list of the publications generated by the project is available on the project web page.

114

Project: Development of Synthetic Aperture Radar Marine Information System tailored to pollution and fishery application

Acronym: SARMIS Duration: 2001-2003 Partners: Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Norway IFREMER, France Russian Institute for Fisheries and Oceanography, Russia National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine Objective: The main goal of the project is to develop and test a SAR marine

information system (SARMIS) tailored to pollution and fishery application. Key objectives in achieving this goal include:

• Regular collecting and archiving of the high resolution SAR images as well as all other remote sensing, in situ and weather data over specific areas (Norwegian sea, Barents sea, Caspian sea) in the interests of oil spill monitoring and fishery management;

• Developing an improved model of SAR image modulation by current and thermal gradients on sea surface needed for elaboration of radar image feature detection and recognition techniques;

• Formalising and bringing to the software level the algorithms of detection, interpretation and measurement of radar signatures of oil spills, frontal and current phenomena;

• Realising these procedures in the form of tools integrated into the geo information system which SARMIS will be based on;

• Establishing a web server providing scientific community with information on project results and access to the created SAR image features catalogue and to the developed image processing tools.

Deliverables: The following major results are expected from SARMIS:

• Creation of versatile data set, of integrated satellite and in situ data featuring different types of manifestations of the ocean fronts and oil slicks;

• Development of an improved radar imaging model that includes the expanded set of physical mechanisms affecting the studied ocean surface phenomena;

• Compilation of electronic catalogue of typical radar signatures of fronts and slicks;

115

• Elaborating of algorithms for automatic detection, extraction and classification of front and slick signatures on radar imagery;

• Development of GIS-integrated program modules of image pre-processing and thematic processing according to the developed automatic algorithms;

• Creation of easy to browse and user-friendly web-site giving clear and complete overview of the project results and searchable data base in the radar signatures catalogue.

Final Reports: Contact members of project consortium for access to final report.

116

Project: Data Integration System for Marine Pollution and Water Quality.

Acronym: DISMAR Duration: 2002-2005 Partners: Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Norway

Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Norway Norwegian Institute of Water Research, Norway Optimare GmbH, Germany GKSS, Germany Telespazio, Italy

Institut fuer Neuroinformatik, Ruhr-Universitaet, Germany Italian Space Agency, Italy Armines/Ecoles des Mines, France Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, Ireland Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UK CEDRE, France Nottingham University Consultants, UK [subcontractor] Ifremer, France [subcontractor] Joint Research Centre, Italy [subcontractor] Università Piemonte Orientale, Italy [subcontractor] http://www.nersc.no/Projects/dismar/

Objective: The overall objective of DISMAR is to develop an advanced

(intelligent) information system for monitoring and forecasting marine environment to improved management of pollution crises in coastal and ocean regions of Europe. The system is intended to provide support to public administrations and emergency services responsible for prevention, mitigation and recovery of crises such as oil spill pollution and harmful algal blooms (HABs).

Deliverables: DISMAR aims to develop a system that can:

• Provide access to a wide range of data types relevant for the marine environment, both archived and NRT data;

• Combine observational data with models for improved forecasting and risk assessment;

• Synthesise information from various data sources, sensors and model simulations using state-of-the-art methods such as data fusion;

• Be useful as a decision support and crisis-management system.

117

Marine monitoring and management of pollution crises is operated very differently in European countries, DISMAR will contribute to the harmonisation and the standardisation of observing systems, models and management systems to be used for prevention, mitigation and recovery of pollution crises. DISMAR will also contribute to better exploitation of different observation systems and bridge these into operational services. In addition, DISMAR will offer standards and solutions built on a common architecture, implemented via GIS and Internet, which can be adopted by several countries and facilitate international exchange of data.

Final Reports: At the time of writing the DISMAR project was approaching its

first annual report period. As yet no publications are available for external dissemination.

118

Project: MetOcean and Coastal Zone Monitoring in Harbour Regions Using Satellite Radar

Acronym: COASTMON Duration: 1997-1999 Partners: Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Norway

ARGOSS, The Netherlands Norwegian Meteorological Institute, Norway Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, Ireland http://www.nrsc.no/COASTMON/

Objectives: The overall objective of COASTMON was to explore and test

methods for the use of SAR and other satellite data, and their integration with GIS, in monitoring environmental and metocean conditions in regions close to harbours trafficked by very large vessels. Such an approach would improve navigational safety, aid coastal zone management (CZM), and improve the utilisation of satellite observations in the user community.

Specific objectives were:

• To identify gaps between existing environmental monitoring products and user requirements, in port and harbour areas;

• To evaluate the use of satellite data to improve metocean monitoring around ports and harbours, with emphasis on satellite radars and their synergetic use with other data and numerical models, and their integration with GIS for CZM;

• To demonstrate new satellite data products, their integration with GIS and CEO's enabling services and to involve a wider user group for the products;

• To assess and recommend new satellite products for use in metocean monitoring and CZM for harbour regions.

Deliverable: COASTMON developed and demonstrated the use of SAR data in

deriving metocean information for coastal waters. Specific achievements included the: • Development of a SAR wind algorithm, which was tested and

evaluated for Norwegian coastal waters; • Investigation into the use of SAR wave spectra in near coastal

regions for Norway and Ireland; • Development of a retrieval algorithm for wave climate data; • Demonstration of GIS applications for the coastal environment

which incorporated the use of satellite data;

119

• Presentation of COASTMON results to user audiences in workshops and training courses.

Final Reports: Some published project material is available to download from the

project web page, however some of the links are now defunct. Requests for copies of the final report should be directed to NERSC.

120

Project: Conveying Metocean Knowledge Into Shipping Safety Acronym: COMKISS Duration: 2000-2002 Partners: The University of Lund, Sweden

Satellite Observing Systems, UK IFREMER, France OPTIMER, France Dockwise, Belgium Bureau Veritas, France http://satobsys.co.uk/Projects/Comkiss/index.html

Objectives: The two main objectives of the project were:

• To demonstrate to major segments of the marine transport industry the benefits of integrating satellite-derived information on sea state such as wave height and direction.

• To raise awareness of the usefulness of satellite data in

increasing the safety and overall efficiency of shipping operations.

Deliverable: The COMKISS project completed a number of deliverables during

the project lifespan;

• Satellite Observing Systems developed and trialed the Sea State Alarm service in which real-time satellite data were transmitted direct to offshore marine operations (see page 26).

• At the time of the COMKISS project, techniques for

calculating the response of vessels to sea conditions often made general assumptions about the statistical nature of the response distributions. These techniques play an important role in establishing design criteria for vessels. An important achievement of COMKISS was the development, using satellite data, of a more robust theoretical basis for such work.

• Oceanographers have developed techniques to extract

ocean surface current information from satellite measurements. Apart from a few specialist regional

121

applications, these techniques have not yet been fully developed for commercial exploitation. The COMKISS project consortium investigated whether these satellite data could be exploited in more widespread applications to improve route selection and shorten voyage duration. It was shown that further work was necessary, but that the use of satellite data could help to reduce costs for end users through reduction in, and improved predictability of, travel times.

• Using a software tool developed for the International

Association of Oil and Gas Producers (OGP), COMKISS compared climatologies derived from visual ship based observations, hindcast wind/wave models, and from satellite data. Whilst the range of wave parameters available from satellite data was limited, the satellite databases were shown to be consistent with the best of the alternative climatologies.

• COMKISS undertook end user evaluation, this was

facilitated by consulting the wider offshore community through the COMKISS/OGP workshop.

Final Reports: The final COMKISS report (pdf format) is available to download

from the project web page.

122

Project: Detection and Classification of Marine Traffic from Space Acronym: DECLIMS Duration: 2003-2006 Partners: Joint Research Centre, Italy

QinetiQ Ltd., UK Canada Center for Remote Sensing, Canada Radarsat International, Canada CEDRE, France Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research-Physics and Electronics Laboratory, Netherlands Ixl-AG, Germany Fondazione per la Meteorologia Applicata, Italy Forsvarets Forskninginstitutt, Norway Doxiades Geoimaging, Greece Collecte Localisation Satellites, France Institut de Recherche pour le Development, France Institute of Remote Sensing Application, China Absolute Communications Ltd., New Zealand Veridian Systems Division, USA Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd., Japan European Space Agency SPOT Image, France http://intelligence.jrc.cec.eu.int/declims/home.htm

Objectives: The overall objective of DECLIMS focuses on research into the

use of satellite imagery for maritime vessel detection, classification and identification. By undertaking such research the project consortium will develop a better understanding of the capabilities of such systems, to identify the advantages and drawbacks of different approaches, to strengthen the infrastructure capable of meeting the demands of users and to help drive the development of new sensors and platforms towards the operational needs of vessel monitoring.

Deliverable: The objectives of the project will be achieved using a series of

benchmark exercises for SAR vessel detection (WP 2), SAR vessel identification (WP 3), optical vessel detection and classification (WP 4) and wake detection (WP 5). These exercises will use software tools for analysing remote sensing images and determine their effectiveness and efficiency as a function of sensor characteristics, type of target and sea conditions. DECLIMS will also report on requirements for future systems and user needs.

123

Final Reports: The project is at the initial stages and no reporting is currently

available for external examination.

124

Project: The Northern View Acronym: Duration: 2003-2004 (possibility of extension) Partners: C-Core, Canada

Noetix Research Inc., Canada Radarsat International, Canada Canadian Ice Service, Canada Stockholm University, Sweden University of Bonn, Geramny Canadian Centre for Remote Sensing, Canada University of Uppsala, Sweden CRYSYS, Canada University of Helsinki, Finland Hickling Arthurs Low Corporation, Canada ESYS, UK MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates Ltd., Canada

Objectives: The Northern View aims to make (EO services more accessible

and affordable to interested parties in Northern regions. The Northern View provides users with a 'one-stop-shop' for northern information, integrating EO and other information as needed. The immediate objective is to demonstrate to key organisations the utility and effectiveness of using EO data for northern monitoring, particularly in support of policy development, and to establish relationships with northern stakeholders that might benefit from EO-based information in the future.

Deliverable: The Northern View will deliver service to northern stakeholders,

such as policy makers, northern residents, and public interest groups, who are interested in issues such as the environment, safety, and sustainable development in the North. The Northern View will also enable northern stakeholders to influence the evolution of present generation EO satellites to future systems that will better meet their information requirements. Long-term deliverables include the provision of a complete range of services in key areas of interest to all northern stakeholders. Using SAR and other EO data Northern View currently offers services in the areas of oil discharge, glacier, sea ice, iceberg, and land cover monitoring.

Final Reports: At the time of writing no published material from the Northern

View project was publicly available.

125

Project: Real Time Ocean Services for Environment and Security Acronym: ROSES Duration: Partners: Alcatel Space, France

Collecte Localisation Satellites, France Det Norske Veritas, Norway ESYS, UK GTD - Ingenieria de Sistemas y Software S.A., Spain IFREMER, France MERCATOR-Ocean, France Meteo-France, France National Centre for Marine Research, Greece Nansen Environmental And Remote Sensing Centre, Norway Satellite Observing Systems, UK Starlab, Spain Telespazio, Italy http://roses.cls.fr/

Objectives: The primary objective of ROSES is to deliver an operational and

autonomous European capacity and services for global monitoring for marine environment and safety.

Deliverable: ROSES aims to provide a range of services over differing time

scales, specifically oil spills and water quality monitoring in the short to mid term, as well as marine primary production assessment or sea-level and climate monitoring in the mid to long term. The services will also vary in complexity ranging from global, near real time to local monitoring (provided on a user request basis) and will extend to the inclusion of models and decision support systems. ROSES services will be operated as hindcast, nowcast (monitoring) and forecast elements.

Final Reports: ROSES is an ongoing project, any documentation produced within

the project is available to download from the project website.

126

Project: Coastwatch Acronym: Duration: 2003 - Partners: EADS, France HR Wallingford, UK European Topic Centre (ETC/TE), Spain EUCC, Netherlands ACRI-ST, France GIM, Belgium Satellite Observing Systems, UK ARGOSS, Netherlands University of Aberdeen, UK GKSS, Germany DLR, Germany RIKZ, Netherlands BRGM, France Institute of Marine Research, Norway BSH, Germany CEDRE, France http://www.coastwatch.info Objectives: The long-term objective of Coastwatch is to establish an

operational service for the provision of effective information supporting decision-making in coastal management.

Deliverable: Coastwatch aims to improve the delivery of synoptic information

to support integrated management of the coastal environment by delivering a series of services and products. Coastwatch will also meet the requirements of coastal and marine monitoring as set out in policy developed at European level (e.g. Water Framework Directive, EU ICZM Recommendations, marine conventions).

Final Reports: Coastwatch is a recent project under the GMES Services Element

and at the time of writing no reports were publicly available. However, the Coastwatch consortium do produce a newsletter to will inform about the initiative and its progress, news and announcements related to EO based information and operational services and upcoming events.

127

Project: Marine Environment and Security for the European Area

Acronym: MERSEA Strand-1 Duration: 2003 - 2004 Partners: Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center, Norway

Danish Meteorological Institute, Denmark Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory, UK Finnish Institute of Marine Research, Finland Collecte Localisation Satellites SA, France

Met Office, UK Southampton Oceanographic Centre, UK National Centre for Marine Research, Greece Institute of Marine Research, Norway Norwegian Meteorological Office, Norway

Laboratoire D'etudes en Geophysique et Oceanographie Spatiales, France German Aerospace Centre (DLR), Germany Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia, Italy Department of Fisheries and Marine Research, Cyprus Plymouth Marine Laboratory, UK IFREMER, France Météo-France, France Centre for Environment Fisheries and Aquaculture, UK Mercator, France http://www.nersc.no/~mersea/

Objectives: The overall objective of MERSEA is to integrate existing spaceborne observations with data from in-situ monitoring networks and systems through ocean modelling and data assimilation system.

Deliverable: By achieving its primary objective, MERSEA will:

• Deliver information products (physical, chemical and biological) required by users concerned with European marine environment and security policies;

• Report on the problems met and lessons learnt in supplying the

information products;

128

• Contribute to improving the knowledge, methods and tools required for monitoring, information production and delivery for environment and security in the marine environment.

Final Reports: At the time of publication, MERSEA have just begun and no

publicly available reports were published.

129

5.4 Discussion The 18 research projects reviewed in this section demonstrate the considerable research activity in the application of SAR technology to the better understanding and monitoring of the coastal and marine environment. Projects from the mid 1990s, following the ERS launches, through to those currently underway were examined. Throughout this period, particularly intense activity is evident in the monitoring of oil derived pollution incidents and sea state conditions. All of the projects examined contain an element of user interaction but this is expressed in differing approaches. The definition of user varies from project to project and is largely dependent on the specific objectives, target audience and eventual outputs of the project. Some projects focus on a particular user community with an interest in a specific application e.g. WEMSAR focuses on the offshore and near-coastal siting of wind turbines. The user community in this instance is likely to be clearly defined according to the interest in the wind energy sector. Other projects focus on more specialised user communities, as is the case in the MaxWAVE project, which involves the wave science community. MARSAIS appears to be unique in that it has approached users from all levels, from the inexperienced through to the technically proficient user. This inclusive user element reflects the broad range of applications that MARSAIS, as a generic solution, can potentially serve in the coastal and marine environment e.g. analysis of sea state, estimation of current features, oil slick detection and slick discrimination. Many of the research projects, past and present, have partner institutes in common. This facilitates the transfer of experience and knowledge, as well as collaboration between all parties concerned. Dedicated conferences and workshops are also important mechanisms for disseminating research findings. Throughout the lifespan of the MARSAIS project, a concerted effort was made to produce conference and workshop papers, in addition to papers for peer reviewed journals. As an example, at the 2nd Workshop on Coastal and Marine Applications of SAR, held in Svalbard, 8th-12th September 2003, six papers covering all aspects of MARSAIS were presented. To view a comprehensive list of MARSAIS conference and workshop presentations consult the MARSAIS Final Report (MARSAIS Deliverable No. D19). This critical mass of SAR expertise should be optimised fully to ensure the future contribution of SAR data and technology to the management and monitoring of the coastal and marine environment.

130

CHAPTER 6 – WORKSHOPS AND NATIONAL CASE STUDY

6.1 Introduction and Objectives The aims of the four workshops, held over the duration of the MARSAIS project were to:

• Raise awareness of MARSAIS activities, and in particular to raise awareness of the potential of SAR data applications for the coastal and marine environment;

• Direct interaction and to facilitate dialogue between the MARSAIS consortium

and potential end users from the coastal and marine environment;

• Demonstrate the role of MARSAIS in addressing user requirements;

• Provide feedback, which could be incorporated into the development of MARSAIS products.

In tandem with the workshops additional interviews were carried out with Irish end users to give an overview of the issues prevalent in one of the MARSAIS partner countries. 6.2 Methodology Workshops were organised in Hamburg (October, 2001), Cork (April, 2002) and Svalbard (September, 2003). In addition the 3rd EuroGOOS Conference in Athens (December, 2003) provided an opportunity to present the MARSAIS prototype to a range of end users. Material from the Cork and Hamburg workshops was incorporated with details from a series of semi-structured telephone interviews with Irish end users and used to construct a national case study for Ireland. Ireland was the obvious choice for a dedicated national study as many of the end users were already known to the research team. 6.3 Results 6.3.1 Workshops 6.3.1.1 Hamburg Workshop - October 2001 This workshop was organised to provide users with information about potential MARSAIS satellite-derived products, but more importantly to solicit MARSAIS data and system requirements from the users. Representatives attended the workshop from Germany (Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Institute, Hydromod and GKSS) and Ireland (Marine Institute). Attendees were asked to describe their current operational responsibility and the type of data they currently utilise. The MARSAIS consortium gave

131

a presentation emphasising the need for end user participation in the development of MARSAIS products. Further presentations outlined the MARSAIS goal and work plan and detailed a case study on the collection of coastal and marine data in the Mediterranean Sea. The workshop provided an opportunity to review the draft CoU questionnaire and this feedback was taken into consideration during the subsequent redrafting of the questionnaire. 6.3.1.2 Cork Workshop - April 2002 This workshop was attended by 18 end users and amongst others included, representatives of the offshore industry, harbour authorities, the Irish Naval Service, and survey companies. These attendees were joined by three members of the MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG). The workshop provided the first opportunity for MAG members to engage in face-to-face dialogue with the entire MARSAIS consortium and to review the project activities and initial results (i.e. comment on their assessment of the overall concept, the available SAR algorithms/models and developed products). Due to the limited utilisation of SAR data in Ireland much of the workshop was dedicated to explaining the capability of SAR data for coastal and marine applications. The majority of the workshop was held in plenum but time was allotted for individual questions and demonstration of products and the prototype to smaller groups. This was the first workshop where the MARSAIS prototype was presented. Feedback on the prototype was generally positive and participants appeared interested in learning more about MARSAIS and in obtaining access to the on line prototype during development. Questions that arose and their solutions, where available, were recorded for inclusion in the Frequency Asked Questions (FAQs) section of the online prototype. 6.3.1.3 Athens – December 2002 The 3rd EuroGOOS Conference held in Athens afforded an ideal opportunity for the MARSAIS consortium to communicate with potential end users from both the operational and scientific and research communities. The MARSAIS prototype was presented as part of the conference poster session using an offline demonstration on a PC. Individuals were invited to test the prototype and to provide feedback via a questionnaire. A project poster was displayed and various members of the MARSAIS consortium presented papers during the conference. 6.3.1.4 Svalbard Workshop – December 2003 The final workshop event was held under the auspices of the 2nd Workshop on Coastal and Marine Applications of SAR held in Svalbard, Norway. Sixty-five individuals representing the various aspects of the international SAR community attended the conference. The CMRC presented the findings to date of the end user assessments. Attendees were given the opportunity to appraise the end user assessments and comment on their findings and recommendations. This feedback was incorporated into the final

132

project document - Context of Use Survey–End User Requirements for SAR Data in the Coastal and Marine Environment. 6.3.2 National Case Study - Ireland 6.3.2.1 An overview of EO end user demands in Ireland This section summarises the general issues that have emerged from consultation with Irish agencies and scientists with regard to coastal and marine management. Many of the issues highlighted in this section will be relevant to other European regions. 6.3.2.2 Identification of priority R& D issues - areas that need to be addressed 1. Inventorying, publicising the existence of, and optimising access to existing coastal

and marine databases, especially for fundamental data such as topography, administrative boundaries, environmental parameters. A good quality inventory and quality review of existing coastal data would help minimise duplication of effort, promote good standards of data management and housekeeping and would expose any significant data gaps.

2. Inventorying of, and improved access to, archived satellite imagery for Ireland. For

example, what LANDSAT data exist for the Irish coastal zone since the first satellites were launched? Are there any quality issues for consideration e.g. cloud cover. What SAR data currently exists?

3. Collection of coastal data needs to be improved - and probably largely automated -

e.g. establishment of a good, geodetically surveyed baseline around the coast, against which trends of coastal erosion and accretion can be measured. Similarly, the collection of wind, tide and wave climate data could all be optimised and expanded. There is potential for automating many of these through the use, for example, of data loggers, dGPS, and web cameras.

4. Formal, structured analysis of the information requirements inherent in the coastal

decision making process: • Who are the key existing primary producers of coastal data? • Who are the existing organisations and individuals who add value to and

subsequently sell on products as secondary data? • Who are the main existing (and potential) consumers of coastal data? • What data are currently most used by coastal decision-makers? • What are these data used for? • What are the key data gaps? • What are the main manipulations and analyses carried out at present on these

data? • What decisions are taken, by whom and on behalf of which end users?

5. Time-series analysis - a prerequisite for the sustainable management of coastal

resources is the capability to predict change in coastal areas over periods of one or more decades. Time-series analysis of: climate data; tidal and current data; sediment

133

transport and of social and economic dynamics of human occupancy in the coastal zone. Is it possible to overcome the limitations in the data through interpolation or other statistical manipulations? What are the implications of these manipulations for the reliability of the outcome?

6. What is the appropriate scale (spatial, temporal and thematic resolutions) of analysis

of Irish coastal data? How does the scale/resolution of available data affect the quality of decision-making? Increased amounts of data and more precise data do not always lead to better decision making, while one cannot make good decisions from bad data. Is there an optimal balance? How do we know when we have achieved it? Is this dependent on the scope of the decisions being taken (local versus national planning; immediate reaction to specific events such as emergency response to a single storm versus long term strategic planning for the 21st century); are there optimal scales of data required to support each of these levels of decision making?

7. Error and uncertainty - do they matter? How can we model errors and uncertainties?

How can data providers best communicate the margins of error inherent in the data to the end user? How can we calibrate the cumulative effects of successive data manipulations on the quality of the information end product? How well do decision makers in Ireland understand these issues? Is there an education process required and, if so, how might it be achieved?

8. Collaboration over the creation of standardised coastal data dictionaries, suitable for

application in a range of areas (coastal zone engineering; socio-economic development; etc). Research and development of standards for capture, storage and exchange (inter-agency, international) of coastal data in digital form.

9. Extension / adaptation of the US Coastal Change Analysis Project (C-CAP) into

Ireland and, eventually to the rest of Europe. Existing experience and expertise in the US could be brought to focus in a very useful way, on issues very relevant to decision making in Ireland. C-CAP (originally called Coastwatch) analyses changes in wetland extent and other coastal parameters along the US coast. In every case LANDSAT images acquired at typically five years separation are analysed to map and quantify the changes that have taken place along the coast.

10. Planning, preparation and optimisation of emergency plans for use in a disaster. Risks

that might be considered include shipping accidents (e.g. logistical support, operational decision making would be required); oil spill response; evacuation plans for island populations; responding to major coastal flooding. Collaborate with Federal Emergency Mapping Agency (FEMA) model in the USA, as experience and expertise of the American authorities in these matters could prove beneficial.

6.3.2.3 Issues that need to be addressed with specific reference to EO data 1. Identification of the potential users of a coastal and marine monitoring system, who

would use this as a planning and management tool; identify user requirements and user willingness to participate in demonstration products based on EO and other data; assess how EO data can improve coastal monitoring;

134

2. Spatial resolution. What is currently the highest resolution imagery available? What

will be the resolution of imagery available in the future? What spectrum data is available from current satellites and what will be available in the future? Is it or will it be possible to obtain nearshore bathymetric information from satellite imagery? Also of interest would be the experiences, good, bad or indifferent, others have had with image interrogation software.

3. The need to plan for a coastal monitoring service; this would facilitate full use of EO

data in an integrated coastal monitoring, forecasting and management service; possible support operations include:

• Providing high resolution maps of surface winds, wind fronts and wind patterns

in open ocean and coasts; • Improved surface wave measurements, especially on the propagation and

refraction of long waves near coasts and interaction with strong surface current features such as eddies;

• Mapping of current fronts, eddies and other mesoscale circulation patterns; • Monitoring oil spills; • Mapping internal waves; • Contributing to mapping shallow bottom topography; • Mapping atmospheric boundary layer processes: fronts, waves, wind rolls, rain

cells; • Monitoring ship traffic.

4. Integration of products into any monitoring system developed; importance of GIS for

data integration. 6.3.2.4 Particular resource management themes identified from consultation with Irish end users 1. Aquaculture licensing Determining the position of licensed operators and collating information on the relative volume of equipment and estimates of production using ground truth data sets. 2. Algal mapping Low-level flight photography for surveys on expanses of Zostera (important refuge for many '0' group organisms and buffer against erosion). Low level photography for identification of substrata (including various algal stands) in use for verification in Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Natural Heritage Areas (NHA)6 delineations. Determination of expanses for exploitation and monitoring of exploitation activities (Ascophyllum, L. digitata, A. esculenta).

6 Natural Heritage Areas are ecologically designated areas in Ireland.

135

3. Accretion and erosion, bathymetry and climate change surveys Sand cell movements, sedimentation (using Spartina and Salicornia as indicators) efficacy of breakwaters, gabions and tetrablocks. Shallow water bathymetry. Coastal zone vulnerability zoning, hazard mapping and analysis. Based loosely on the FEMA model in the USA, adapted as required to local Irish conditions. This mapping would probably focus on zonation for flood and erosion risk. The aim would be to aid decision-making by planners, insurers, etc. Predicted sea level rises may be effectively monitored using changes in vegetation patterns and expanse increases/decreases in salt marsh areas. Extraction: determination of those areas vulnerable from beach sediment removal by unlicensed activities/ licensed activities. 4. Modelling What are the merits of the various sediment transport models available? Discussion on the estimation of the 'closure depth' used in sand beach profile prediction models would be useful. End users would benefit from information and experience on developing GIS for integration of EO and in situ data, to aid in decision support. 5.Coastal monitoring system Potential for the development of a coastal monitoring system using EO data. There is a wide range of potential users: meteorological service, local authorities, fisheries and aquaculture, offshore industry, naval service, insurance companies and oil companies. 6. Sea surface temperature data sets Sea surface temperature from thermal infra-red sensors. Useful in the determination of upwelling zones, front formations, stratification within bays, settlement success (e.g. oyster spat settlements), thermal plumes. SAR monitoring of current fronts, mesoscale eddies, upwelling, wind fronts, wind speed, wind direction, surface waves, internal waves, surfactants and oil spills. Visible near IR to monitor algal blooms and upwellings. Currently, NOAA-12 and NOAA-14 orbits produce images of SST for CoastWatch in the USA. These SST images are available free of charge and are intended for use by governmental and academic institutions. These CoastWatch SST images are produced four times daily for all coastal water of the US coast. It is possible to register for this information through the Internet. 7. Water quality parameters Oil spills and natural films are observable in SAR imagery as dark signatures due to low backscatter. 8. Human activity patterns Identify recreation usage of the coastal zone by means of patterns of, for example, shore disturbance; number of vessels per unit area for angling/boating/sailing. Beach usage - people per hectare in relation to facilities available (i.e. car parks, toilets, restrictions of use, life guard requirements). 9. Wind parameters One of the most important physical parameters in the coastal zone and harbour regions is the wind field. Scatterometer wind velocities from the ERS satellites are used in analysis

136

of wind fields - speed and direction at 25km resolution along a 500km swath [1]. But the scatterometer and SAR on ERS cannot operate simultaneously. Wind speed is also available from the altimeters flown on the ERS and TOPEX satellites. Altimeter wind speeds are available at 7km intervals along the ground track. 10. Shipping Examples of products which may be required by shipping include: surface current velocity map; wave height map; wave length map; wave direction map; wave period map; wind velocity map. 11. Habitat characterisation Resource evaluation on the intertidal zone; identification of key habitat types based on sediment and algal cover for estimates of periwinkle/cockle/clam biomass. 6.3.3 Sectoral Case Studies 6.3.3.1 Sectoral Case Study: The Port Operators Perspective This analysis is based on semi-structured interviews with four harbour masters in the Republic of Ireland. Current port monitoring activities include the utilisation of locally installed remote wind sensors which relay data on average every 24 hours; wave recorders which record data approximately every 20 minutes; tide gauges which can be interrogated using phone line connections and radio sensing; radar systems for monitoring ship movements; and dedicated hydrographic surveys for particular objectives. The temporal scale of data available from SAR is seen as a major drawback to the utilisation of SAR data for port operations. For example, there is a desire for more frequent wave height information, a demand that cannot be met unilaterally by SAR data. A potential use of SAR imagery in port operations could be pollution monitoring, particularly oil pollution. In the event of oil spills in port jurisdictions, aircraft have been used to obtain overviews of slicks. SAR imagery can be particularly useful as it is not restricted by either daylight or cloud coverage. At present none of the ports have any employees with remote sensing expertise - however there is a high level of technical computer expertise amongst the port information technology (IT) staff. 6.3.3.2 Sectoral Case Study: The Coastal Engineering Perspective The Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (DCMNR) has responsibilities in the areas of sea fisheries, aquaculture, coastal zone administration, marine environment, marine tourism and leisure, marine safety and maritime transport, petroleum affairs, exploration and mining and engineering. The objectives of the engineering division are to manage, design and construct fishery harbours and coastal protection projects on behalf of the sea fisheries administration division. The nature of this work requires studies to be carried out on the impact of wind, waves, currents and changes in bathymetry. Data are currently collected on an ad hoc basis, according to

137

specified projects. Satellite data are not used much in this process, however the Department has used IKONOS satellite imagery in the past, (obtained through ERA-Maptech, an Irish SME), to study coastal erosion and accretion. SAR data has not been used by the DCMNR for any monitoring purposes to date. The Department recently consulted the results of the COASTMON7 Project to determine the potential of SAR for obtaining bathymetric data. Conventional instruments to measure parameters such as bathymetry, wind, waves and currents can be located only at discrete points and are not likely to provide the spatial coverage necessary for coastal management applications. The bathymetric change data produced for Rosslare in the COASTMON project was a useful SAR application. However, it appears that bathymetric assessment from SAR data is restricted to areas of shallow water with significant tidal currents and the Department highlighted this as a limitation of SAR technology. 6.3.3.3 Sectoral Case Study: The Irish Naval Service Perspective One of the principal roles of the Irish Naval Service (INS) is to enforce fisheries regulations in the coastal zone, out to the 200-mile limit. Transponders on vessels (18m or greater in length8), linked to satellites, give a Position Reporting System (PRS). The INS relies on this information for monitoring vessel movements in Irish waters. A PRS takes approximately four minutes to become available and the maximum reporting interval is two hours. Irish coastal waters are patrolled by naval vessels and dedicated maritime aircraft. The cost of acquiring SAR images may be prohibitive in comparison to the current methods used within the INS. It is envisaged that the cost of setting up systems integrated with the existing PRS in the fisheries monitoring bases would be extremely expensive. Therefore, any products developed using SAR for fisheries monitoring would have to be cost effective. Data would be required in real time, or as near to real time as possible. The images would also have to have accurate geo-referencing. Therefore, important considerations in prototype development should include cost compared to other methods, timeliness; and effectiveness and accuracy. SAR data could be useful to the INS for fisheries surveillance especially in remote ocean regions where fishing activities cannot easily be monitored by air, as the distance is too great. However, at present this type of scenario does not apply to the activities of the INS, which concentrates on Irish territorial waters.

6 Metocean and Coastal Zone Monitoring in Harbour Regions using Satellite Radar – COASTMON. Environment and Climate Programme of the European Commission. Partners were NERSC and DNMI, Norway; ARGOSS, Holland and CMRC, Ireland. 7EU regulations ensure that all EU vessels over 18m in length transmit their positions regularly to their flag state and the coastal state.

138

6.4 Discussion 6.4.1 Workshops The workshops organised during the project were a successful mechanism for presenting the objectives and results of MARSAIS to the end user community. The workshops were considered successful for two main reasons:

1. End users benefited from direct communication with the project partners. The workshops provided the end users with an opportunity to learn about the potential of SAR data from experts in the field, who were to hand to answer specific technical questions.

2. The project partners benefited from having an opportunity to learn about end user

activities and requirements. The importance of two-way dialogue cannot be underestimated. Coastal managers and planners tend to use concepts and informed knowledge; they do not consider that they need scientific research and its associated data. The EU Demonstration Project on ICZM considered the issue of lack of awareness, amongst ICZM practitioners, of technologies, data and information available to them, and often available through EU funded agencies [2]. While the workshops were organised with the end user primarily in mind, they also brought the needs of the end users to the direct attention of scientists who do not have direct or frequent contact with coastal and marine area managers. Despite the workshops sharing the common aim of raising awareness, each workshop was unique in what it achieved. The first workshop, which had the smallest number of attendees, was the most important workshop for breaking down barriers between the scientists and the end users. For scientists that were unfamiliar with dialogue at this level, the first workshop provided an ‘ice-breaker’ for what was to follow later in the project. The second workshop in Cork could be singled out as the workshop in which the end users benefited most from the experience. SAR data is under utilised in Ireland, therefore the workshop provided an opportunity to build capacity in raising awareness of the potential of SAR data products. The meeting in Athens differed in format from the first two dedicated workshops. The shift in format from a workshop setting to a presentation stand was applied to meet the opportunity presented by the concentration of potential users and scientists present at the EuroGOOS Conference. The users attending the conference were primarily potential ‘expert users’ of what MARSAIS had to offer. As a result, there was a lack of representation from other types of users. Nevertheless, there was value in obtaining feedback on the prototype from peers who carefully considered what the prototype had to offer and what MARSAIS was trying to achieve. The final workshop in Svalbard presented an opportunity to address an audience of expert scientists engaged in research into coastal and marine applications of SAR data. The

139

need to inform scientists of the needs of the end user community is as relevant an activity as educating end users about what the scientists have to offer. The Svalbard workshop was a timely opportunity to present the results of the CoU survey, which had recently been completed. This provided a focus for discussion on end user requirements within the meeting. 6.4.2 Irish Case Study The material from semi-structured interviews with Irish end users complemented the insight into the Irish situation gleaned from the Cork and Hamburg workshops. It was apparent that there is a wide range of potential users of satellite data in Ireland in the fisheries, aquaculture, weather service and private industry sectors. The final report from the COASTMON project, 1999, observed that: “A lack of awareness of the potential uses of EO data amongst the Irish coastal management community was identified” [3]. However, contact made with the MARSAIS Users Group in Ireland revealed a higher level of awareness and understanding of the potential of data derived from space borne satellites and other remote sensing data. This may in part be attributable to the considerable efforts of the teams involved in COASTMON project and the CEO EO course held in Cork in 1999. However, despite this increase in awareness there remains limited operational use of satellite data in Irish coastal waters, despite the appropriateness of SAR imagery in penetrating cloud cover, which is frequently quoted as an obstacle to the use of optical data. This suggests that difficulties persist for SAR technology and services to meet end user needs. There is a lack of remote sensing expertise in Ireland, particularly in state agencies such as the Marine Institute and the DCMNR. As a result, products developed through the MARSAIS project have to be user friendly to be of any use to coastal managers in Ireland. Nevertheless, there is a high level of technical computer skill, which could be primed to take advantage of any opportunities that the exploitation of SAR data has to offer. Many of the specific issues concerning attributes of EO data products and SAR data products in particular, coincide with the feedback obtained through the CoU survey, which is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 8.

140

REFERENCES 1. ESA. (2003) Earth Observation Handbook – 2003 Update, http://www.eohandbook.com 2. Doody JP, Pamplin CF, Gilbert C and Bridge L. (1998) Information required for integrated coastal zone management. Thematic Study F. European Demonstration Programme on integrated management in coastal zones. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/iczm/themanal.htm 3. Jenkins A, Sandven S, Korsbakken E, Hamre T, Pettersson LH, Mastenbroek K, Wensink H, Reistad M, Connolly N & O’Leary E. (1997) COASTMON report No.1 (Draft) – COASTMON WP1: Identification of gaps between current monitoring technology and user requirements, NERSC, Bergen.

141

CHAPTER 7 - USER PROFILES 7.1 Introduction The first step in identifying end user requirements is to build a database of user profiles. Identifying end users and describing their requirements is complicated by the different sectors, categories and levels of end users that exist. End users can be classified according to their sectoral area of interest. For example, for the purpose of EuroGOOS research, end users for operational oceanography were divided into 12 sectoral groups: research, services, environment, building, transport, defence, energy, food, equipment, hinterland, mineral, tourism [1]. Potential end users may occur across a broad range of categories with different functions, including: government/management, commercial/enterprise, research/academic. When dealing with the user, the product developer needs to identify which group the users belong to: decision maker/policy maker, administrator, researcher or other. End users can also be classified across different organisational levels, ranging from the institutional level to the individual level [2.]. All of these groups can be further subdivided, for example, the institutional groups can be classified according to their focus (European, regional, national, local). End users will include those interested in coastal and marine monitoring information from European to regional (involved in OSPAR and HELCOM Conventions), to national and local levels. This chapter describes the current and potential users of SAR data according to different classifications. The classifications are based on information derived from the Potential Users Database (PUD). 7.2 Methodology 7.2.1 Detailed User Profiles The detailed user profiles provided in this section are based on previous material gathered by the author, N. Connolly on the CEO Training Course held in Cork in January 1999 and on the COASTMON project [3]. Personal communications between MARSAIS researchers and end users operating in the thematic areas defined below complement this information. A significant component of the MARSAIS project was the development of a Potential Users Database for establishing and tracking potential end users. This tool was used to:

• Facilitate the development of user profiles; • Facilitate the CoU survey; • Identify end users for workshop participation; and • Provide contact details for case studies and semi structured interviews which were

used to fill information gaps arising from items one and two above.

142

7.2.2 Development of Potential Users Database (PUD) The PUD was generated to house the contact details of individuals and organisations considered to be potential end users of SAR data. The main avenues used for locating and contacting potential end users within the database were:

• Direct communication; this allowed researchers to clearly explain the MARSAIS concept to end users, as well as explaining what data and products are available at present. Dialogue was established by phone and e-mail;

• Undertaking web searches;

• Contacts provided by the MARSAIS consortium;

• Contacting trade associations;

• Attending relevant conferences and identifying contacts from conference proceedings (e.g. Oceanology International 2002 Catalogue) and specialised magazines (e.g. http://www.off-shoremag.com);

• Linking the questionnaire to the project website (http://marsais.ucc.ie); a web-enabled version of the questionnaire was identified as the most suitable method for large-scale distribution and improving accessibility to the questionnaire. As a result an on-line form was developed, which was made available for the duration of the CoU survey;

• Using existing directories (e.g. EDMED); and

• Posting details of the MARSAIS Project on electronic mailing lists, e.g.

EUCC Coastal Guide News (http://www.coastalguide.org) Coast list (http://www.theukcoastalzone.com) Coastal Management for Sustainability – CMS News

(http://www.coastms.co.uk) IMAGRS-L list - Digital Image Processing of Remotely

Sensed Data (http://adis.cesnet.cz/cgi-bin/lwgate/IMAGRS-L).

• Workshops were held in Hamburg (October 2001), Cork (April 2002), Athens (December 2002) and Svalbard (September 2003), allowing the MARSAIS consortium to interact with potential end users, gain a better understanding of their EO needs and demonstrate the benefits of SAR data and SAR products. Attendees were asked to complete a questionnaire.

As the project progressed the details of individuals or organisations that expressed an interest in the MARSAIS project were entered into the PUD. In this way the PUD grew organically for the duration of the research. The database also served as a tracking

143

mechanism for correspondence with potential end users throughout the project. At the time of the final entry, the database contained 884 records of potential contacts. The information was stored in an MS Access 2000 database. Given the methods used to locate and contact potential end users it was not surprising that the PUD comprised a diversity of users. The database contains individuals/organisations involved in a variety of activities and from academic, governmental and commercial backgrounds. The information contained within the database was organised according to the following categories, which provided the basis for developing user profiles:

• Sector – Users were classified according to sectors of activity based around the classifications used for the EuroGOOS user survey [1] - Environmental Protection/Preservation (pollution control), Research, Services (e.g. weather, ship routeing), Engineering (e.g. coastal defence), Transport (e.g. port operations), Energy/Production (e.g. wind and wave energy sitings), Defence (e.g. military operations), Mineral Extraction and Other (e.g. fisheries and aquaculture; tourism and public health).

• Category – Government, Commercial or Academic.

• Level – European, National or Local Level.

• Information needs – Type of information needed e.g. surface wind, wave spectra,

significant wave height; and short, medium or long-term nature of information requirement.

144

7.3 Results 7.3.1. Detailed User Profiles This section provides examples of the various types of user groups, classified by thematic areas such as: Meteorological Services; Shipping; Naval Services and Coast Guards; Oil and Gas Industry; Energy Companies; Pollution and Environmental Protection Authorities; Fisheries and Aquaculture. Meteorological Services Meteorological services require scatterometer data (small scale) and SAR data (large scale) available in real time to aid in the better estimation of surface winds, required for many coastal and marine operations (e.g. shipping). SAR wave spectra can contribute as input data to wave forecasting models. Altimeter data are useful for significant wave height measurements. One of the most important physical parameters in the coastal zone and harbour regions is the wind field. Scatterometer wind velocities from the ERS satellites are used in the analysis of wind fields - speed and direction at 25km resolution along a 500km swath [4]. Wind speed is also available from the altimeters flown on the ERS and TOPEX satellites. Altimeter wind speeds are available at 7km intervals along the ground track. Shipping – Navigation, Harbour Authorities Harbour authorities require information on wind, waves, currents, fronts, eddies and marine pollution. It is particularly important to obtain data with sufficient resolution near the coast, where much shipping traffic is concentrated. Wind and wave height are priority data requirements. Real time data is needed to improve monitoring and forecasts of wind, waves, swell, visibility, SST and sediment transport. Satellite data of various kinds (SAR, AVHRR, SeaWiFS) can provide input data to such operational services. Examples of SAR applications of interest include:

• Observing the funnel effects of winds within harbours using SAR data are of interest to the shipping industry;

• Vessel detection using SAR data is of interest to harbour authorities, and to security services for monitoring purposes.

• Frequent updating of bathymetric records is very important in near coast areas. Information on sediment flow using SAR and optical sensors to detect changes in shallow water bathymetry is of particular interest to port engineering and oil and gas companies. Harbour and local authorities have also shown interest in the use of EO data to monitor long term coastal erosion and sediment tracking.

Examples of products which may be required by shipping: surface current velocity map; wave height map; wave length map; wave direction map; wave period map; wind velocity map; sand cell movements, sedimentation; efficacy of breakwaters. A global wave climate database would be of relevance coastal engineering, and other products, such as Global Digital Surface Currents Atlas, Ship Traffic Monitoring or Mapping of Inter Tidal Zones may also be of relevance.

145

Planners and Insurers Planners and insurers require information on coastal vulnerability. EO data can provide information, which can enhance vulnerability mapping such as zonation for flood and erosion risk. Thus EO data can aid decision-making of both planners and insurers. Predicted sea level rise may be effectively monitored using changes in vegetation patterns and increases and decreases in salt marsh areas obtained from EO imagery. EO data can also be used to monitor human impacts on the coastal zone, such as areas vulnerable from beach sediment extraction by unlicensed/licensed activities. Insurance companies Insurance companies are primarily interested in assessing the likelihood of damage to property in the coastal zone. Their main areas of interest incorporate:

• Identification of flood risks to the coastal zone; • Prediction of storm events

Information requirements for insurance companies:

• Sediment transport data, beach movement and volatility under offshore conditions • Mean sea level, wave and water level time series, current and tide data, sea state

forecasts • Land use profiles • Records of flood events

Direct economic benefit to insurance companies would result from:

• More accurate assessment of risk and more appropriate setting of premium levels • More accurate placement and reinforcement of sea defences as a result of

improved impact assessments; this may reduce incidents of claims • Setting more appropriate premiums in high risk areas will dissuade development

in such areas Naval Services & Coast Guards The naval service and coast guards may use SAR data to monitor possible pollution incidents at sea. They require real time access to data; it would be of most benefit if they could receive it on board. Numerous types of information are useful e.g. wind, waves, currents, eddies, fronts, internal waves, pollution and ship detection. Detection of discharge of ballast water, temperature differences (from high resolution Infra Red [IR] images) or surface roughness as revealed by SAR imagery are other possible applications of interest. SAR data would be of relevance both as support data during daily operations and for general oceanographic knowledge. Oil & Gas Industry Reliable forecasts of weather and waves are essential. Industry operators need data on wind, waves, swell and currents. Real time data and forecasts are required during operations. They are very interested in altimeter data, scatterometer data and SAR data; however, SAR data is not widely used by the oil industry, as it is considered too expensive. During specific operations such as towing large platforms, there is a need for

146

specialised monitoring and forecasting of the environmental conditions. For exploration and exploitation of oil and gas on continental shelves, and the edges of these shelves, oil companies need data on wind, waves, swell and currents. Statistical data are required for design purposes, while real time data and forecasts are required during operations. For drilling in deeper waters, with floating constructions, it is important to have technical knowledge of currents at different depths; this requires modelling and observations. Both SAR and altimeter data contribute to improved information on currents, fronts and eddies. Altimeter data from all pervious and existing satellites are important, as are scatterometer and SAR data. Rig response (i.e. heave) to oceanographic conditions has to be forecasted. Rig motion is sensitive to longer periods of swell. Operators require more information on local storms and on remotely generated swells. Energy Companies The most important technologies extracting energy from the ocean (e.g. tidal energy, wave energy) use surface wave data and climate data on waves, which is essential for planning. Altimeter wave statistics are useful, but the spatial resolution appears to be too coarse. High resolution wave climatology from SAR data would be very useful near the coasts to find the best locations for these energy installations. Pollution and Environmental Protection Authorities SAR data can be used for operational monitoring of oil spills in combination with aircraft surveys. More frequent observations and better resolution and spatial coverage are required. The Netherlands Remote Sensing Board summarises the benefits of a spaceborne SAR system for slick detection as follows:

• Data acquisition is independent of weather conditions. • Low resolution data can be available within one hour. • Easy data handling and interpretation. • Minimal manpower necessary. • Accurate indication of geographical position and size of slicks detected. • Approximately 85% of spills larger than 0.3km2 are detected correctly.

Information can also be provided on predicted and actual beach movements, risk assessment and impacts, pollution detection and monitoring, and coastal defences.

147

The targets which the information must meet are:

• Detection probability: to plan air surveillance, coast guards would require alarm notification with a guarantee that any slick will be detectable using SAR data. The probability of detection must be almost 100%. Without this guarantee, end users will continue to rely on airborne measurements.

• False alarms: end users require a low false alarm threshold. Investigation of false alarms will reduce the cost benefit of including ERS data.

• Delivery time: to allow maximum benefit to be derived from the service, information on slick events is required within two hours of overflight for early warning applications. Information user for the compilation of statistics rather than the routing of surveillance aircraft is not subject to this time constraint.

• Coverage: information on national priority waters are required daily. Fisheries and Aquaculture Satellite data are not widely used for fisheries and aquaculture activities in Ireland, but users stated that improved weather and wave forecasts would be of assistance. SAR data can be used to monitor fishing vessels and SeaWiFS data can improve monitoring of chlorophyll for fishery management. Altimeter, scatterometer and SAR data can be used to improve climatic estimates of winds, waves and frontal locations. EO data can assist in the determination of the position of licensed operators and also in the determination of relative volumes of equipment and estimates of production using ground truth data sets. Sea surface temperature from thermal IR sensors can be useful in the determination of upwelling zones, front formations, stratification within bays, settlement success (e.g. oyster spat settlements), and thermal plumes. Using SAR data to monitor current fronts, mesoscale eddies, upwelling, wind fronts, wind speed, wind direction, surface waves, internal waves, surfactants and oil spills can be applicable to fisheries and aquaculture. Monitoring of Algal Blooms Monitoring of algal blooms is a major issue for fisheries managers in Ireland, as toxic algal blooms can have a serious impact on shellfish aquaculture. Visible near IR can be used to monitor algal blooms and upwellings. NOAA AVHRR satellite data have been demonstrated as useful when in combination with in-situ observations and models in occurrences of toxic algal blooms (harmful algal events). In 1992, the Nansen Centre carried out a test case investigation into the use of remote sensing data to monitor toxic algal blooms off Norway, Sweden and Denmark, May to June 1988. The study showed that sea surface temperature from Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) and Along Track Scanning Radiometer (ATSR) can be used to monitor algal fronts, as these tend to be associated with temperature fronts and tidal mixing fronts in shelf areas. They also showed that some satellite EO data (AVHRR data from NOAA) could be obtained in near real time (within 12 hours of observation); this was particularly useful for assimilating into numerical models for making predictions of algal growth movements. Thus, EO can provide data with regard to spatial coverage and temporal sampling. This is an advantage in directing research vessels for sampling.

148

Civil Engineering Industry For civil engineering, EO images could be used in feasibility studies and concept design for major projects. The scale required would have to be of 1m resolution. Civil engineering companies would make use of very high resolution (VHR) maps of 1:5000 to 1:10000 scale for: water catchment modelling, water flux and flood risk modelling, coastal zone management. Civil engineering information requirements are:

• Coastline morphology; high resolution data, to a few metres resolution, required for determination of beach movements, accretion rates etc.

• Sea level, wave, current and tide data and statistics, including historical data. • Sea state forecasts. • Sediment transport. • Chemical concentration. • Bathymetry – up to 20m depth contours required for modelling purposes (wave-

beach interactions). • Regional and local plans and field boundaries (<1km resolution) – to prioritise

protection of land areas. Water Companies Water companies need to identify High Natural Dispersion Areas (HNDAs) into which waste water can be discharged. The location of such areas will impact on the level of treatment, which has to be applied to the waste water, in adherence with the EU waste water directives, and the Water Framework Directive. If HNDAs are identified, then the primary treated waste can be discharged. If no HNDA can be identified then secondary treatment has to occur. This has cost implications for the local authority, as secondary treatment plants are expensive to build and need maintenance. Thus the information requirements for detection of HNDAs will include knowledge of:

• Chlorophyll concentration; • Current and mixing co-efficients; • Wind and wave data; • Long-term statistics on the variability of the above.

Water companies would generally be considered as intermediate level users of EO data. While aware of general uses, they are wary of the level of investment required, compared with the limited current usefulness of such data. Use is made of airborne remote sensing data, for example from Compact Airborne Spectrographic Analyser (CASI), which measure chlorophyll concentration (an indicator of possible eutrophication). Water companies have also used sensors such as HRV on the SPOT satellite to locate water channels near the coastline. There may be a shortfall in area coverage and a synoptic view from in-situ measurements. Increased use of data from SeaWiFS, and MERIS would benefit water companies in the identification of HNDAs into which waste water is discharged.

149

7.3.2 Results from the Potential Users Database (PUD) The users of SAR data for coastal and marine environmental applications identified and contacted via the MARSAIS PUD can be categorised as shown in the examples described in Table 7.1. (The examples were derived from information provided by end users in response to the Context of Use survey [See Chapter 8]). In respect of the confidentially assurances given to respondents, specific commercial, government or academic entities are not identified in the scenarios presented in Table 7.1. However, the table indicates which elements of the MARSAIS suite of tools are most likely to be of interest to the different classifications of end users (toolkit, services, prototype).

150

Information Need Wind, internal waves, slicks

Sector Category Level

Purpose

Long Medium Short

Defence National Naval Service Government National (Surveillance - Vessel monitoring)

Ship building, Weather predictions, Route planning, Emergency response

W, Iw

Iw

C, W C,W W, C,

Energy Hydrocarbon company Commercial Inter-

national Weather predictions Climate modelling Detection of oil seepage

W, Iw

O, C

W, Iw O, C

Transport Shipping companies Commercial Inter-

national Ship routeing Ship building

W W

C, WW

Port Authorities Government/ Commercial

Local Traffic managementEmergency response Harbour engineering works Port expansion – site selection

C, W C, W

WC, W C, W C, W

Engineering Local authorities Government Coastal defence W, C Services National Weather Services

Government

National

Metocean conditions and sea state W, C, Iw

Insurance companies Commercial National/ local

Offshore Flood risk analysis

W, C, O W, C

Research Modellers Academic Local Climate change W, C Protection & preservation Environmental Protection Authorities

Government

Local

Habitat protection (from disasters e.g. oil spill)

O, C,

Fisheries Departments Government National Fisheries management C, W

Table 7.1. Example of a classification structure for potential end users of SAR data, in relation to potential demand for MARprototype). Information needs for long term (>1yr), medium term (>1mth), and short term (<1mth) are coded according to cuwind and waves (W) and internal waves (Iw).

Toolkit

Services Proto- type

Direct Indirect Direct

O

√ √ √ √

√ √ √ √

√

√ √ √

√ √

√ √ √ √

√ √

√ √

√

√

W √

√

√ √

SAIS outputs (toolkit, services,rrent features (C), oil spill (O),

151

The classification of user types in Table 7.1 shows that the demand for services surpasses the demand for the MARSAIS Toolkit (which includes algorithms and software for image interpretation). However, the demand for the MARSAIS prototype (which describes the parameters needed to understand the potential of SAR data, in addition to complete descriptions of algorithms and tools available for image processing) almost matches the demand for services.

152

7.4 Discussion The main aim of profiling end users is to provide guidance to software developers and scientists concerned with developing tools to meet end user needs. The examples given in Section 7.3.1 effectively indicate the breadth of user activities concentrated within the coastal and marine environment. It can be seen from the descriptions of users that their activities and thus their specific requirements for EO data, and for SAR data in particular, vary substantially. For example, water, civil engineering and insurance companies could potentially benefit from EO data. Civil engineering companies could be considered best placed for using EO data; while water companies have experience of monitoring the coastal environment but little practical experience of interpreting satellite imagery for that purpose. At the other end of the spectrum, insurance companies are generally only interested in high-level information products derived from satellites rather than the data themselves. Companies such as insurance, civil engineering and water companies are unwilling to commit themselves to experimenting with satellite EO data while they do recognise its potential. Current use of EO, or SAR data in particular may be low because in the past companies found EO data difficult to obtain, overly time consuming and not tailored to their needs. The expertise to analyse satellite data does not generally reside within these organisations. There is also a perception that in the past satellite data may have been over sold. This is an important factor to consider in the future marketing of SAR products and services. Raising user expectations should be avoided to prevent disappointment in what SAR data can offer. The MARSAIS researchers were cognisant of this fact throughout the project, and in particular in dealing with end users in workshop environments. Defining user profiles may assist in the identification of the relevant bodies (at international and regional level) or categories of bodies (national and local level) to be specifically included in the study. However, classifications alone do not provide a great deal of insight. It is only when the classifications are combined with end user needs that the results become really meaningful. For example, Table 7.1 organises different types of potential ends users of SAR data according to sectors, categories and levels of use. Value is added to this information when the classifications of end users are matched with their information needs and with the type of MARSAIS product or service of most interest to them. The classification of user types in Table 7.1 shows that the demand for services surpasses the demand for the MARSAIS Toolkit. However, the demand for the MARSAIS prototype almost matches the demand for services. This hypothetical situation, which broadly reflects the reality, has implications for the future output of SAR based research projects. It shows that in general, end users are less interested in the highly technical software available in the toolkit, and more interested in applied products and interpretation services based on the contents of the Toolkit. No doubt, the trend would veer towards demand for the toolkit if the sample population consisted entirely of delegates at a SAR research symposium. Thus, interest in specific products will differ from group to group. This factor is considered in more detail below.

153

In general, researchers have a detailed knowledge of a special area of interest, whereas policy makers and decision makers working in the coastal zone need to have a broader perspective and understanding of many issues. This difference will result in different user needs. Researchers may require access to raw data, whereas decision makers and policy makers may need interpreted data (i.e. information). Figure 7.1 illustrates this point.

n

FigEle ThproneGemoexint DewiIn exsera nhoThSA ThtakthavisThPr

Raw Data

Database Administrators/Researchers/ Programmers

ure 7.1. Preference for aggregveld et al.; 1999).

e level of expertise among duct required for dissemina

cessary to develop more thaographical Information Systedel outputs with spatial data

pensive to purchase and differface could be constructed in

spite the sector of activity wth a significant influence on thgeneral, larger organisations

pertise necessary to interpret vice providers diminishes. Aational meteorological instituuse expertise, but with a highus, operational end users, wR products, were the focus of

e need to consider all levels oen into consideration in the dt interest in the MARSAIS Tion to develop a generic suitee results of the next chapteoducts, should be of interest t

Data Interpretatio

Decision Makers/ Policy Makers

G

ation level of data by different individual

the end user community will determtion (from raw data to information one platform for dissemination.m (GIS) is an appropriate technolog sets. However, most commercial Gicult for the non-specialist to use. T appropriate World Wide Web based

hich characterises a user group, a cre demand for SAR data is the size o

have a greater capacity to invest iSAR imagery in-house. In this situa typical example of a sector with in-hte. An example of an end user unlike demand for quality information is

ithout pre-existing SAR expertise, much of the MARSAIS project.

f end users, including non-expert poevelopment of the MARSAIS Protooolkit will reside in existing or new

of high-level SAR information produr, Contemporary and Desired Uso such an audience.

Information

eneral Public

user groups (from

ine the type of n). It may be

For example, a y for integrating IS packages are herefore, a user

software.

oss cutting factor f an organisation. n developing the tion, reliance on ouse expertise is ly to develop in-

a port authority. or knowledge of

tential users was type. It is likely SMEs with the cts and services.

e of SAR Data

154

REFERENCES 1. Fischer J & Flemming NC. (1999) Operational Oceanography: Data Requirements Survey, EuroGOOS Publication No. 12, Southampton Oceanography Centre, Southampton. ISBN 0-904175-36-7. 60pp.

2. Eleveld MK, Siegert AG, Schrimpf BH. (1999) CoastBase Information Definition and User Requirements. JRC SAI Marine Environment Unit, Monitoring and Assessment of Coastal Environment. 67pp 3. Jenkins A, Sandven S, Korsbakken E, Hamre T, Pettersson LH, Mastenbroek K, Wensink H, Reistad M, Connolly N & O’Leary E. (1997) COASTMON report No.1 (Draft) – COASTMON WP1: Identification of gaps between current monitoring technology and user requirements, NERSC, Bergen. 4. ESA. (2003) Earth Observation Handbook – 2003 Update, http://www.eohandbook.com

155

CHAPTER 8 - CONTEMPORARY AND DESIRED USE OF SAR DATA PRODUCTS

8.1 Introduction The aim of this chapter is to provide an overview of the usage of SAR data products as determined from a multifaceted approach to analysis of end user requirements in the MARSAIS project. As a nested component of the wider end user requirements work package (WP6) the Context of Use (CoU) survey, presented below, involved the analysis of the data obtained from respondents to a questionnaire (an example of the questionnaire structure is given in Appendix 2). Data collection for the CoU survey was initiated in April 2002 and ran until November 2002. The aim of the CoU survey was to collect relevant data, via a questionnaire survey in order to establish end user needs and requirements in relation to SAR data in the coastal and marine environment. The methodology outlines the principal component of the CoU survey, i.e. the development of the MARSAIS questionnaire. The Potential Users Database (PUD) was an important tool, frequently used during the CoU survey. The updateable PUD allowed for the targeting and tracking of respondents to the questionnaire throughout the CoU survey. The analysis of the data derived from the questionnaire then formed the basis for the CoU survey results. 8.2 Objectives The objective of end user requirement analysis in MARSAIS was to acquire information in relation to the following questions:

• Who are the potential users of SAR data? • What kind of tasks do these users intend to perform? (examples of applications

are: pollution incidents, current features, shallow water bathymetry) • In which context do the users intend to use SAR data in relation to the

applications proposed in MARSAIS? (extent and scale of use of certain

variables e.g. delivery medium, temporal resolution, synergy)

• What are the links between applications and variables?

Fundamentally, the authors wanted to know if an individual/organisation uses SAR data, why they are using it and for what purposes (i.e. what application)? Alternatively, the authors wanted to know if an individual/organisation is not using SAR data, what is prohibiting their use of SAR data? In this sense the non-users of SAR data (potential future users) and the information they provided is as pivotal as that provided by existing SAR data users.

156

8.3 Methodology 8.3.1 Questionnaire Development & Format In the development of the MARSAIS questionnaire, initial choices on the style and approach to be implemented had to be made. For example, a questionnaire could contain open–ended questions [1], or multiple-choice questions, e.g. the EuroGOOS Data Requirements Survey [2]. It is well known that longer questionnaires tend to have lower response rates. Open questionnaires, compared to multiple-choice formats, tend to invite answers that are more laborious to process and statistically difficult to analyse. However, they do have the advantage that they do not push the respondents in any specific direction. The style and format of the MARSAIS questionnaire was developed in close consultation with the project partners and with input from the MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG). A number of initial drafts were produced for consideration. MAG recommendations and previous studies involving end user questionnaires, e.g. EuroGOOS Data Requirements Survey, were taken into consideration and influenced the final development of the MARSAIS questionnaire. The format of the questionnaire consisted of three forms: Form A (Figure 8.1), Form B (Figure 8.2) and Form C (Figure 8.3). Form A required the input of general information e.g. contact details, personal information and organisation information. Respondents were asked to choose from a list of 12 sectors of activity that most closely represented a description of their organisation. There was an option to select other if the respondent felt their activity was inadequately covered by the suggestions provided. The sectors of activity were adopted from the EuroGOOS Data Requirements Survey [2] and included: transport, energy production, environmental protection/preservation, mineral extraction, food from the sea, defence, engineering, services, equipment sales, tourism and recreation, basic and strategic research, hinterland, and other. Form B dealt with the contemporary use of SAR data products and sought to determine the extent of SAR data use within various applications (the focus of MARSAIS was on applications centred on sea state, current features, internal waves and pollution incidents). Respondents were requested to indicate their use of these applications and to provide information on certain variables (Table 8.1). Form B also allowed those respondents not using SAR data to describe why not by selecting from a dropdown list of limiting factors (cost, capacity and capability). Form C covered the desired use and possible requirements of SAR derived data and products. Respondents were requested to approach this section in the same manner as Form B, except with desired use in mind. Data from this section of the questionnaire elucidated information on future demand for particular SAR derived products.

157

Table 8.1. Variables used in the MARSAIS questionnaire and explanatory notes (modified from Fischer & Flemming, 1999).

Variable Explanation Geographic Coverage The typical areas of geographic coverage in use or likely to be

required. Options included estuarine, coastal seas, shelf seas, ocean basin, hemisphere and global. Coastal seas were defined as coastal water out to a distance of 10-20km. Shelf seas were defined as full continental shelf width, or out to 200 nautical miles. Ocean basins implied North Atlantic, etc.

SAR Product Type Options included raw data (a stream of observational data with time and geographic co-ordinates plus quality control information), processed data (data where statistical treatment, contouring averaging, gridding has been applied) and statistics (includes a wide range of climatic and engineering summaries of data such as spectra, occurrence and exceedance diagrams, inter-annual changes etc.).

Delivery Medium EO data and data products can be delivered through a number of media; the options provided included tape, network/e-mail, disc, fax, hard copy and shipboard.

Latency of Delivery The latency of delivery defines the time elapsed between observation of the last variable value which is included in the data set and the delivery of the data or product to the user, options ranged from six hours to six months.

Temporal Resolution Temporal resolution of an observing scheme or data product defines the time interval of observational data sampling or the time step of output data presentation within a single point, or within a defined standard area, options ranged from one hour to three months.

Forecast Period The period of forecast involved in the provision of data. Product forecast times will vary, options ranged from 10 days to 20 years.

Synergy (with SAR) Other sensor data that could be possibly used with SAR data, options included optical, hyperspectral, infrared, radar and laser.

Spatial Resolution The spatial resolution of field data sampling in use or required, options ranged from <0.5km to 500km. The options relate to resolution after analysis and probably after modelling or gridding.

Figure 8.1. Form A: Online MARSAIS questionnaire - general information.

158

Figure 8.2. Form B: Online MARSAIS questionnaire - contemporary use of SAR data.

Figure 8.3. Form C: Online MARSAIS questionnaire - desired use and possible future requirements of SAR data users. 8.3.2 Potential Users Database The Potential Users Database (PUD) (see Section 7.2.2) was used as a first step in identifying respondents to the questionnaire. Types of end users targeted ranged from remote sensing/SAR experts to coastal area managers and individuals from other marine application domains. These contacts formed the main repository from which the CMRC obtained feedback via the project questionnaire. The database contained information such as contact details, job description and nationality. Once the details of potential end users were entered into the database it was necessary to initiate contact with individuals, to stimulate interest in the MARSAIS project and to convey the need for feedback. The sampling strategy was random to an extent. The PUD allowed the study team to catalogue potential respondents and target those most

159

appropriate for feedback, with the purpose of obtaining a representative response from potential and existing users of SAR data within the various sectors of application considered in MARSAIS. However, this may not be represented in the results as not every request for feedback yielded a response. 8.3.3 Elimination of Bias & Quality Control The methodology was designed to eliminate bias within the questionnaire. The quality of the response is pivotal in developing meaningful and accurate results.

• The questionnaire was designed to ensure a representative selection of activities typical to the coastal and marine environment. No extra emphasis was placed on any single sector over other sectors.

• All returned questionnaires were examined for completeness and where

possible ambiguities were clarified by communication with the respondent.

• The MARSAIS questionnaire was primarily conducted in English and the online questionnaire form was available in English only. However any inherent bias towards English was overcome by facilitating, as much as possible, dialogue in native languages. Telephone interviews and e-mail correspondence were conducted in French, German and Italian as well as in English.

• Although the partner countries were the focus for feedback it was important to

place MARSAIS in an international context. Most of the present and upcoming spaceborne SAR systems are international initiatives, and therefore it was necessary for MARSAIS to draw upon an international user base. The distribution of the questionnaire online mitigated against any geographical bias. It also facilitated response from contacts within different time zones (e.g. USA and Canada).

• No effort was made to elicit a response from any specific sector or application.

For example, requests for feedback might be sent to active mailing lists for internal waves, pollution response, coastal engineering etc. but the response was dictated by the relevance of MARSAIS to the contacted individuals not by the effort in obtaining the response.

• End user workshops were held in Germany (Hamburg, 2001), Ireland (Cork,

2002), Greece (Athens, 2002) and Norway (Svalbard, 2003). Attendees were requested to complete the MARSAIS questionnaire at these workshops, therefore influencing the number of responses received from these countries.

160

8.4 Results of the CoU Survey 8.4.1 Response to the MARSAIS CoU Survey During the CoU survey, 497 individuals/organisations from the PUD, representing remote sensing/SAR experts, coastal managers and individuals in other marine application domains (such as harbour authorities and oil companies), were asked for feedback. Of the contacted individuals/organisations 356 were from the MARSAIS partner countries, 26 were from other European countries and 115 were from outside Europe. This was appropriate as much of the research and commercial activity in the EO sector is global in nature and it was essential to place MARSAIS in the context of an international user base.

Nationality of Respondents

0

5

10

15

20

25

Country

No.

of R

espo

nden

ts

UKGreeceUSAIrelandMexicoFranceNorwayGermanyItalyNetherlandsCanadaSpainIsraelJapanIndonesiaCroatiaBrazilBelgiumAustralia

Figure 8.4. The number of respondents to the MARSAIS questionnaire from each country. A total of 96 completed questionnaires formed the basis of the CoU survey results, 65 were from the partner countries, seven were from other European countries and 24 were from outside Europe. Response rates among the partner countries varied from four (Italy) to 23 (UK). The 96 returned questionnaires equated to a success rate of 19% in obtaining feedback from contacted individuals (this represents the percentage of respondents from within the PUD and includes direct and unsolicited responses). The corollary of exploiting a variety of mechanisms to attain feedback was a wide geographical distribution of respondents (Figure 8.4). In Europe feedback was received from all the partner countries (feedback from the partner countries composed 68% of the total response). 8.4.2 Users of SAR Data The respondents to the questionnaire comprised a hierarchy of users in terms of SAR data use and SAR expertise that transcended predefined sectors of activity. Analysis

161

of the questionnaire results allowed for a broad division into the three user categories of commercial, academic and government sectors (Figure 8.5).

User Category

44% 43%

13%

Commercial

Government

Academic

Figure 8.5. Categorisation of respondents to the MARSAIS questionnaire. Respondents were almost equally represented by the academic and commercial sectors (44% [n=42])* and 43% [n=41] respectively) with respondents representing the government sector making up the remaining 13% (n=12).

SAR use (and non-use) by sector of activity as indicated by all respondents (n=96).

he greatest level of response came from those in the environmental

SAR Use by Sector of Activity

0 5 10 15 20 25

Environmental Protection/Preservation

Basic & Strategic Research

Other

Services

Engineering

Transport

Energy Production

Defence

Mineral Extraction

Sect

or o

f Act

ivity

Num ber of Respondents

Use of SAR

Non use of SAR

Figure 8.6. Tprotection/preservation sector (32% of respondents, n=31) (Figure 8.6). Other respondents came from the basic and strategic research sector (23%, n=22), services sector (14%, n=13) and the engineering sector (10%, n=10) (Figure 8.6). There was also a strong cumulative response for other (e.g. Geographic Information Systems

162

* n = the number of respondents to a given question.

(GIS) consultants) (11%, n=11). Defence, transport, mineral extraction and energy production all featured to a minor extent; however, amongst the respondents from these sectors the combined contemporary use of SAR data was zero. Sectors of activity that did not feature in the response were tourism and recreation, hinterland, equipment sales and activities centred on food from the sea. Of those that use SAR data, the basic and strategic research and environmental

.4.3 Response from MARSAIS Partner Countries

hen considered in isolation, responses from the MARSAIS partner countries were

nalysis of respondents from the MARSAIS partner countries showed differences

protection/preservation sectors were the strongest areas of use representing 31% each (n=16), followed by engineering and services each representing 12% (n=3). 8 Wcomparable to trends in the overall response (Figures 8.6 and 8.7).

Figure 8.7 SAR use (and non-use) by sector of activity as indicated by respondents from the

SAR Use By Sector of Activity in MARSAIS Partner Countries

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Environmental Protection

Basic & Strategic Research

Services

Other

Engineering

Transport

Energy Production

Mineral Extraction

Defence

Sect

or o

f Act

ivity

Number of Respondents

Use of SAR

Non use of SAR

MARSAIS partner countries (n=65). Awithin the sectors of activity. The environmental protection/preservation sector had the greatest number of respondents (Figure 8.7) but the basic and strategic research sector and the services sectors had the greatest geographical spread, with responses from all of the partner countries except Germany and Greece (Table 8.2).

163

Table 8.2. Response by sector for each of the MARSAIS partner countries. Numbers indicate the total response for each sector per country. (The numbers alongside in bold parentheses indicate the number of respondents that currently use SAR data). Sector →

Country ↓

Environ. Prot/Pres

Basic & Strategic Research

Other Serv. Eng. Energy Prod.

Trans. Min. Ext.

Def. Total

Norway 0 (0) 3 (1) 1 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (2)

France 0 (0) 3 (1) 1 (0) 1 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 6 (1)

Germany 2 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 5 (1)

Italy 0 (0) 1 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 4 (0)

UK 8 (3) 6 (3) 3 (2) 3 (0) 3 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 23 (9)

Ireland 1 (0) 1 (0) 2 (0) 2 (0) 0 (0) 1 (0) 2 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 10 (0)

Greece 8 (2) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 11 (3)

Total 19 (5) 14 (5) 8 (2) 9 (2) 8 (2) 2 (0) 4 (0) 1 (0) 0 (0) 65 (16)

Greece, despite having the second highest number of respondents from the partner countries (11) expressed the lowest diversity of sectors of activity. In Greece, all of the respondents were represented by two sectors of activity, engineering (27%, n=3) and environmental protection/preservation (73%, n=8). Italy had the lowest number of respondents (n=4) from the partner countries but they were distributed across four sectors of activity. Half of the responses received from Norway originated from the basic and strategic research sector (n=3), with the service and energy production sectors making up the remainder of the responses. In France respondents came from the basic and strategic research sector and the service and engineering sectors. The response from Germany comprised of environmental protection/preservation sector (n=2) and services (n=2) sector. The UK response was also dominated by the environmental protection/preservation sector (n=8) and the basic and strategic research sector (n=6). Respondents to the questionnaire from Ireland demonstrated the greatest diversity of sectors of activity, with six sectors of activity and other represented. The only sector of activity not to return a response within Ireland that received a response elsewhere was engineering. However, none of the respondents from Ireland presently use SAR data. The greatest numbers of SAR users in the MARSAIS partner countries were from the UK (n=9), Greece (n=3), Norway (n=2), France (n=1) and Germany (n=1). Ireland and Italy were the only partner countries where none of the respondents use SAR data. The percentage of respondents in the partner countries who use SAR data (25%, n=16) was comparable to that in the overall response (26%, n=25).

164

165

8.4.4 Limiting Factors in the Use of SAR Data The percentage of respondents using SAR data was 26% (n=25). Of the total 96 respondents, almost three-quarters (74%, n=71) stated they did not currently use SAR data (Figure 8.8 [a])

SAR Use

0 20 40 60

Use

Number

Yes

No

80

Is cost a limiting factor?

34%

66%

Yes

No

Is capability a limiting factor?

56%

44%

Yes

No

Is capacity a limiting factor?

60%

40%

Yes

No

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Figure 8.8. (a) Respondents use and non-use of SAR data, (b) cost as a limiting factor in the use of SAR data, (c) capability as a limiting factor in the use of SAR data, (d) capacity as a limiting factor in the use of SAR data. For the purposes of the CoU survey capability and capacity can be defined as follows: Capability refers to the training and skills of the respondent in using SAR data and SAR derived products. Capacity refers to the hardware and software infrastructure required to analyse and interpret SAR data and to operate SAR derived products. Respondents were asked to suggest limiting factors in their use of SAR data, however the choices were limited to cost, capability and capacity. Considering that a substantial number of respondents stated that they did not use SAR data at present (74%, n=71), these limiting factors are important for identifying the reasons for this trend. Results show that cost featured as the strongest limiting factor among respondents with 66% (n=46) citing it as a limiting factor (Figure 8.8 [b]). This was

followed by capability (56%, n=43) (Figure 8.8 [c]) and capacity (40%, n=28) (Figure 8.8 [d]). The limiting factors were also analysed in terms of their influence on specific sectors (i.e. government, academic and commercial). Results show that cost features as a factor within all sectors and that capacity and capability are more of a concern for users from the government sector (Table 8.3). Table 8.3. Limiting factors to the utilisation of SAR data presented as a percentage of respondents per sector. Cost Capability Capacity Government 75% 70% 70% Academic 66% 56% 40% Commercial 62% 52% 32%

8.4.5 Applications of SAR Data Having established a profile for the respondents to the questionnaire, it was important to establish which applications they utilised/desired to utilise. The choice of applications given in the questionnaire were:

• Internal waves

• Natural film (plankton)

• Ice

• Wind

• Waves

• Shallow water bathymetry

• Current features (including mesoscale eddies, converging and diverging

fronts)

• Pollution incidents (oil slick and oil spill) and

• Other.

166

As with the sectors of activity, respondents had the opportunity to choose and describe other if they felt the selection did not include applications relevant to their contemporary or desired use of SAR data. Figure 8.9 provides an overview of the number of respondents and their contemporary and desired use of SAR data within applications. For the purposes of the CoU survey, the following definitions should be assumed: Contemporary use refers to existing use of SAR data or SAR derived products. Desired use refers to respondents preferred use of SAR data for certain applications and variables. Desired users include individuals who do not currently use SAR and contemporary users who indicate their desired options for SAR data use.

Contemporary and Desired Use of SAR data within Applications

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Pollution Incidents

Current Features

Other

Shallow Water Bathymetry

Waves

Wind

Ice

Natural Film

Internal Waves

App

licat

ion

Number of Respondents

Desired Use

Contemporary Use

Figure 8.9. Contemporary use and desired use of SAR data within applications. From Figure 8.9 it is evident that pollution incidents, current features and shallow water bathymetry applications feature strongly in both contemporary and desired use of SAR data. In the context of contemporary use, pollution incidents and current features are the most popular applications. All applications expressed some level of desired use. The other option featured in responses for both contemporary and desired use of SAR data and SAR derived products. Descriptions of other applications were given as: land use mapping; flood monitoring; coastal vegetation; coastal zone management; coastal marine navigation charts; climate change; measurement of forest parameters and planimetry update in equatorial areas. Some of the above descriptions are broad e.g. climate change and coastal zone management and therefore it was difficult to assess specific elements of SAR data/products utilised by these respondents.

167

8.4.6 Use of SAR Data For each application (e.g. pollution incidents) the respondents were asked to provide information on the aspects of their use of SAR data. This included information on data variables such as:

• Geographic coverage

• Product type

• Delivery medium

• Latency of delivery

• Spatial resolution

• Temporal resolution

• Forecast period and

• Synergy with other EO data. Within each variable there was a range of choices and an option to click other if the respondent felt the choice given did not reflect their contemporary or desired use of SAR data for that particular variable. The subsequent analysis of the data presented in this chapter focuses on current features and pollution incidents, as these two applications were shown to be most significant (Figure 8.9). Although shallow water bathymetry was also significant in terms of feedback received, it was not a focus of the MARSAIS project. Shallow water bathymetry has proven to be commercially successful and is already at an operational level (e.g. Argoss http://www.argoss.nl), and therefore was not included within the scope of the MARSAIS project. All aspects of use, both contemporary and desired, were analysed for current features and pollution incidents.

168

8.4.6.1 Geographic Coverage (Figures 8.10 and 8.11):

Pollution Incidents - Geographic Coverage

0 10 20 30 40

Coastal Seas

Shelf Seas

Estuarine

Ocean Basin

Other

Global

Hemisphere

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.10. Contemporary and desired geographic coverage for pollution incidents.

• 45% (n=10) of respondents who use SAR data in relation to pollution incidents require data for coastal seas.

• Ocean basins and estuarine areas are relevant for the contemporary examination of pollution incidents with SAR data, and were each cited by 18% (n=4) of the respondents.

• The desired use of SAR data was comparable to contemporary use in terms of geographic coverage for pollution incidents e.g. coastal seas represent 45% (n=34) of the response. There was also a strong desire for use at estuarine (27%, n=20) and shelf seas (13%, n=10) coverage scales.

Current Features - Geographic Coverage

0 10 20 30 40

Coastal Seas

Shelf Seas

Estuarine

Ocean Basin

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.11. Contemporary and desired geographic coverage for current features. • Coastal seas and estuarine areas are important for the contemporary study of

current features with SAR data; they represented 45% (n=9) and 35% (n=7) of the response respectively.

169

• Shelf seas showed no response for contemporary use of SAR data for the study of current features but a considerable response in desired use (21%, n=14). Only 10% (n=5) of SAR data users stated contemporary use of ocean basins.

• The desired use of SAR data for the study of current features in coastal seas and estuarine areas produced a high level of response, 46% (n=31) and 22% (n=15) respectively.

• For the study of current features with SAR data, ocean basin coverage accounted

for only 7% (n=2).

170

8.4.6.2 SAR Product Type (Figures 8.12 and 8.13):

Pollution Incidents - SAR Product Type

0 10 20 30 40

Statistics

Raw Data

ProcessedImage

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.12. Contemporary and desired SAR Product Type for pollution incidents. • Processed imagery is the most common SAR product type presently used, with

46% (n=10) SAR data users indicating contemporary use of processed imagery for pollution incidents.

• Demand for raw data represented 36% (n=8) and the use of statistics represented 18% (n=4) among contemporary users of SAR data.

• Processed imagery was selected by 53% (n=35) of respondents for desired use of SAR data; statistics accounted for 24% (n=16) of the response for desired use, raw data made up the remaining 23% (n=15).

Current Features - SAR Product Type

0 10 20 30 40

Statistics

Raw Data

ProcessedImage

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.13. Contemporary and desired SAR Product Type for current features.

• Raw data accounted for 47% (n=8) of contemporary SAR data use by respondents in relation to current features.

• Statistical format is the least prevalent SAR product type in contemporary use, 18% (n=3).

• The most desired product type was processed image (61%, n=35), followed by statistics (28%, n=16).

• Raw data was the least desired product type accounting for only 11% response (n=6).

171

8.4.6.3 Delivery Medium (Figures 8.14 and 8.15):

Pollution Incidents - Delivery Medium

0 10 20 30 40

Disc

Netw ork

Tape

Shipboard

Hard Copy

Fax

OtherVa

riabl

e

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.14. Contemporary and desired delivery media for pollution incidents.

• Of those using SAR data 50% receive data via disc (n=12) for pollution incidents.

• Responses were also received for delivery of SAR data products via network (25%, n=6), tape (17%, n=4) and shipboard (8%, n=2).

• Network and disc were selected as the most desired delivery media, comprising 57% (n=34) and 35% (n=21) of the total response respectively. The remaining responses included hard copy, fax, shipboard and other.

Current Features - Delivery Medium

0 10 20 30 40

Disc

Netw ork

Tape

Fax

Hard Copy

Shipboard

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.15. Contemporary and desired delivery media for current features.

• Disc was the most widespread delivery option chosen among contemporary users of SAR data, accounting for 56% (n=10) of the total response. Delivery via a network made up the remaining 44% (n=8) of the response received in relation to current features.

• Network and disc were the most desired delivery medium. The network option was selected by 52% (n=23) of the respondents and disc was chosen by 40% (n=18) of respondents. There was some minor interest in fax, tape and hard copy as desired delivery media.

172

8.4.6.4 Latency of Delivery (Figures 8.16 and 8.17):

Pollution Incidents - Latency Delivery

0 5 10 15

6 Hours

12 Hours

1 Day

5 Days

1 Month

6 Months

OtherVa

riabl

e

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.16. Contemporary and desired latency of delivery for pollution incidents.

• Results were dominated by the six hour option with 50% of existing SAR data users selecting this option (n=6) for pollution incidents

• The one month, six months and other options were not selected by any respondents in terms of contemporary use of SAR data.

• The six hour option was the most popular desired option in relation to pollution incidents; 36% (n=14) of respondents chose six hours.

Current Features - Latency Delivery

0 5 10 15

6 Hours

12 Hours

1 Day

5 Days

1 Month

6 Months

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.17. Contemporary and desired latency of delivery for current features.

• For contemporary use of SAR data in studying current features, one month was selected as the most common option (44%, n=4). The one day and five day options were also selected by respondents.

• The most desired latency of delivery period for current features was one month; 37% (n=13) of respondents opted for this option. 17% (n=6) of respondents indicated one day as a desired latency of delivery period.

173

8.4.6.5 Temporal Resolution (Figures 8.18 and 8.19):

Pollution Incidents - Temporal Resolution

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

1 Hour

6 Hours

1 Day

10 Days

1 Month

3 Months

OtherVa

riabl

e

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.18. Contemporary and desired temporal resolution for pollution incidents.

• Eighty percent (80%, n=10) of contemporary SAR data users require a temporal resolution of one day or less when assessing pollution incidents. No respondents currently used data with a temporal resolution greater than one month.

• All the options showed some level of desired interest. The most desired option was six hours. Thirty-two percent (32%, n=12) of the respondents indicated this to be their desired temporal resolution.

• For pollution incidents other parameters that demonstrated a high desired response include the one day (22%, n=8) and one hour (19%, n=7) options.

Current Features - Temporal Resolution

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

1 Hour

6 Hours

1 Day

10 Days

1 Month

3 Months

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.19 Contemporary and desired temporal resolution for current features.

• Temporal resolutions less than one day were not selected by any of the respondents in the contemporary use of SAR data for current features. The majority of SAR data users indicated the use of options ranging from one day to one month, with 10 days being the most popular option (33%, n=7). The next most popular was one month (24%, n=5) followed by one day (14%, n=3).

174

• For desired use in relation to current features, all options returned a response; the one day option showed the greatest level of feedback at 27% (n=13). Although one hour and six hours showed no contemporary use amongst respondents there was a high a level of response for their desired use, 25% (n=12) for one hour and 19% (n=9) for six hours.

175

8.4.6.6 Forecast Period (Figures 8.20 and 8.21):

Pollution Incidents - Forecast Period

0 5 10 15

10 Days

30 Days

3 Months

1 Year

10 Years

30 Years

OtherVa

riabl

e

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.20. Contemporary and desired forecast period for pollution incidents.

• Contemporary users of SAR data require forecast periods of 10 days for the study of pollution incidents.

• 10 days was the most selected desired forecast period for pollution incidents; returning 58% (n=14) of the total response received.

Current Features - Forecast Period

0 5 10 15

10 Days

30 Days

3 Months

1 Year

10 Years

30 Years

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.21. Contemporary and desired forecast period for current features.

• Respondents using SAR data to study current features require forecast periods of 30 days or more. Thirty days was the most common option chosen (33%, n=3) with the remainder of the response equally divided between the one year, 10 years and other options.

• There were high levels of interest in the desired use of two forecast period options that indicated no contemporary use among respondents 10 days (43%, n=12) and 3 months (25%, n=7) respectively.

176

8.4.6.7 Synergy (Figures 8.22 and 8.23):

Pollution Incidents - Synergy w ith SAR

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Radar

Infra red

Hyperspectral

Optical

Laser

OtherVa

riabl

e

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.22. Contemporary and desired synergy with SAR data for pollution incidents.

• Radar data (36%, n=8) and optical data (27%, n=6) are both used most frequently in synergy with SAR data for pollution incidents among contemporary users.

• Although respondents indicated a desire for all the options provided, the most selected sensors were optical (38%, n=24) and hyperspectral (23%, n=16) respectively. The lowest preference was expressed for laser data (3%, n=2).

Current Features - Synergy w ith SAR

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Radar

Infra red

Hyperspectral

Optical

Laser

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.23. Contemporary and desired synergy with SAR data for current features.

• Synergy with SAR data for current features among contemporary users of SAR data saw responses for optical (22%, n=6), infrared, laser, radar (all ~ 19%, n=5) and hyperspectral (15%, n=4) data.

• Desired synergy with optical, infra red and hyperspectral data was evident; 34% (n=25), 24% (n=18) and 19% (n=14) respectively.

• The least popular options were radar (15%, n=11) and laser (7%, n=5).

177

8.4.6.8 Spatial Resolution (Figures 8.24 and 8.25):

Figure 8.24. Contemporary and desired spatial resolution for pollution incidents.

Pollution Incidents - Spatial Resolution

0 5 10 15 20 25

<0.5 km

0.5 km

10 km

50 km

100 km

500 km

OtherVa

riabl

e

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

C

• Results for the contemporary use of SAR data in examining pollution incidents showed a preference for 0.5km and 10km, each representing 27% (n=6) of the response received.

• SAR data users revealed no interest in spatial resolutions of 100km and <0.5km.

• The desired spatial requirements for SAR data in relation to pollution incidents were 500km and 0.5km.

Current Features - Spatial Resolution

0 5 10 15 20 25

<0.5 km

0.5 km

10 km

50 km

100 km

500 km

Other

Varia

ble

Number of Respondents

Desired

Contemporary

Figure 8.25. Contemporary and desired spatial resolution for current features.

• The results for the contemporary use of SAR data in relation to current features show 500km as the most selected option (represented 50% (n=8) of the total response). However 0.5km and 10km also feature in the response.

• 100km and <0.5km were not important to respondents in the contemporary use of SAR data to observe current features; both options returned no response.

• 500km (38%, n=17) and 0.5km (40%, n=18) were the most desired options chosen by respondents in the use of SAR data to study current features.

178

*NB Questions 26 and 27 were formulated considering the spatial resolution of final derived or gridded products. However, during evaluation of the results it became apparent that some respondents considered the question, not in terms of spatial resolution but in terms of spatial coverage, or swath width of the sensor. Therefore due to the ambiguous nature of the answers it is inadvisable to assume any conclusions from the results presented in Figures 8.24 and 8.25 Nevertheless, a possible interpretation is that the spatial resolution of products should not exceed 0.5km, the exception being specific cases for wind and currents where 1-10km is optimal. It could also be inferred that a spatial coverage of a 500km wide swath is the most desirable option as long as the resolution is considered to be satisfactory. If the results were considered in this context, Figures 8.24 and 8.25 would support the aforementioned theses.

179

8.5 Discussion The respondents who formed the basis of the CoU survey can be broadly divided into the academic (44%), commercial (43%) and governmental (13%) sectors. Of the 12 sectors of activity, the greatest number of respondents came from the environmental protection and preservation sector. Within the partner countries, the greatest number of SAR data users came from the UK (of the MARSAIS partner countries UK also had the greatest number of respondents to the questionnaire). Respondents from Ireland and Italy stated no existing use of SAR data. This is not necessarily indicative of the true situation but could be related to the low number of responses per partner country when the data is analysed at national level. 8.5.1 Use of SAR Data Products The CoU survey showed that obstacles to the use of SAR data persist within the coastal and marine end user community. Obstacles such as cost, capability and capacity are a focus of this discussion. Obstacles such as these, which hinder the use of SAR data among the marine and coastal end user community need to be considered and overcome to promote exploitation of this potentially valuable data and information resource. Cost Of the limiting factors, cost featured as the predominant one in the use of SAR data among coastal and marine end users. Almost two in every three respondents cite cost as a reason for the non-utilisation of SAR data. The issue of cost is twofold; the actual price of the data and the pricing scheme for the data. The former is prohibitive due to the actual expenditure involved and the latter is a convoluted system that can appear perplexing even to experienced SAR users [3,4,5,6, 7]. For example, the cost of SAR data varies and is dependent on a number of factors: the origin of the data i.e. the sensor (e.g. ERS, Radarsat–1), whether the imagery is for commercial or research purposes, the number of images requested and the degree of processing required by the buyer. Commercial rates for the purchase of a single scene, covering an approximate area of 100km2, of ERS-1/2 data from suppliers (e.g. Eurimage, Radarsat International) can reach €23009 (http://www.eurimage.com). For Radarsat, the cost can reach US$3500 (~€3300). There are discounts of 25% or 50% available for both sets of images depending on the number of scenes purchased. The cost of ERS imagery for research purposes is 50% less per scene, significantly cheaper than the commercial rate. ESA cost the supply of data on the basis of the use made of the data rather than who will use it i.e. Category-1 (ESA approved research) and Category-2 (all other uses which do not fall into Category-1) [8]. ESA’s implementation of the Category-1 and Category-2 system is a positive development from the previous pricing scheme. With regard to Envisat, ESA offer ASAR products for research and development applications at a cost of €100 per image. The expected price range for Category-1 use of Envisat data will be similar to

9 This price is for a terrain geocoded image, lesser processed images can be obtained for €1400, €1200 and €1000.

180

that for ERS data [8]. ESA’s implementation of these differentiated pricing schemes is to be welcomed and certainly supports a wider use of SAR data. Cost is a contentious issue for users from all sectors of activity (i.e. academic, commercial and government). There is no strong difference between academic, commercial or government sectors in relation to cost as a limiting factor in the use of SAR data, although fewer commercial respondents identified cost as a reason for non-utilisation of SAR data (62%), compared to respondents from the academic sector (66%) or government sector (75%). Therefore, it can be hypothesised that the availability of discount schemes does not greatly influence the sectoral use of SAR data products. To offset the issue of cost it would also be worthwhile to examine the scope for using a single SAR image for multiple purposes. Examining options for getting more for your money from an individual SAR image. Multi-use products and multi-use concepts would potentially reduce the price for individual users of SAR data. Applications in the marine environment are more spatially and temporally intensive than in the terrestrial environment. The number of images required for coverage in the marine environment further exacerbates the problem of cost for marine and coastal end users of SAR data. The provision of the Open Distributed Information and Services for Earth Observation (ODISSEO) [9] server by ESA is a valuable tool for potential users of EO data. Users can access the ESA remote sensing catalogues and can browse and preview the meta data and quick-look images of the currently available Envisat products (ASAR Image Mode, ASAR wide swath mode, ASAR alternating polarisation, images MERIS full and reduced resolution and AATSR), and view the planned and potential acquisitions for these instruments. The ODISSEO service is positive in that it allows individuals to preview any potential purchase, however, the on-line ordering of remote sensing products is open only to ESA's Principal Investigators (products for Category-1 projects can be ordered free of charge) [9]. Capability & Capacity The MARSAIS CoU survey showed that capability and capacity also influence the use of SAR data among end users; these limiting factors are intrinsically linked. Among the academic and commercial sectors, capability and capacity are less influential limiting factors in the utilisation of SAR data than cost. Within the government sector, capability and capacity are as influential as cost. The potential end users targeted throughout the CoU survey represent a hierarchy of expertise in relation to SAR data and SAR derived products ranging from the EO specialist end user to the inexperienced end user. The level of expertise of the end user will greatly influence their capability to utilise SAR data. Expert technical users will generally find a way around any data formatting problems [3] and experienced users will be in a better position to tackle any obstacles that may be incurred in obtaining and using SAR data (e.g. accessibility, cost, delivery of data). For the inexperienced end user these obstacles may be significant enough to inhibit their use of SAR data.

181

Interpretation of SAR data is perceived as being difficult [10] and efforts have to be made by the SAR community to dispel this notion among potential end users. The capacity of potential end users to handle SAR data and SAR data products needs to be developed and expanded. The infrastructural requirements for processing SAR data (and EO data in general) can be costly and constraining. Greater capacity building initiatives to address issues such as accessing, formatting, processing and interpreting SAR data would make it easier for end users to initiate use of SAR data. Adequate training should be provided so that operators and stakeholders can take full advantage of SAR derived information [11]. These initiatives should be iterative so as to ensure continual training of new SAR data users as well as maintaining an existing knowledge base. Capability and capacity have been demonstrated to influence the selection of SAR product type. The predominant trend in the response to the questionnaire for SAR product type was towards processed imagery. The desire for processed data surpassed its contemporary use, suggesting a need for more processed imagery at the end user level, particularly the inexperienced SAR user level. In choosing a particular SAR product type much will depend on the level of expertise of the user and the level of product sophistication required to complete their research/employment tasks. In addition, much will depend on the phenomena the user is investigating, how much information the user will want to extrapolate from a SAR image and how much they wish to manipulate the image. The data requirements of value adders will vary greatly from those of the inexperienced SAR data user. For example, value adders want raw data to which they can add value and satisfy a demand for a particular product. Value adders are a crucial link between raw data providers, who distribute SAR data, and the end users who need valuable information relevant to their activities. The challenge is to provide well developed products to suit end user needs at an attractive cost. In general, users want information rather than data [10]. Users have the option of extracting information from data themselves or relying upon value adders to satisfy this requirement. If information can be provided to the end user at the right specifications (i.e. grid size, temporal resolution) with sufficient quality at the right price and in a timely manner they will demand such products. It can be argued that the capacity and capability of potential end users to handle non-processed SAR imagery is not yet fully developed, given that these factors have been shown to be limiting factors in the questionnaire feedback. The fact that there is a strong demand for processed products may be due to a combination of desire and necessity rather than simply desire alone. 8.5.2 Applications The CoU survey showed that pollution incidents, current features and shallow water bathymetry were the most popular applications in the use of SAR data in the coastal and marine environment. Applications such as internal waves, wind and waves were shown to be not as popular. Applications that involve the utilisation of SAR data products are at different levels of maturity and demand. It is unsurprising that the

182

demand for SAR data in response to pollution (oil spill) received a high level of interest as software products in this area are comparatively well established. The use of SAR data to monitor the illicit discharge of oil in marine environments is well documented [12, 13, 14 15, 16,17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22]. If applications have a low response rate (e.g. for wind and internal waves), it does not imply that there are no contemporary research or operational activities involving SAR data and the application. For example, SAR data (Radarsat ScanSAR) is presently being used by the Asian Seas International Acoustics Experiment (ASIAEX) for observations of non-linear internal waves in the shelf-break region of the South China Sea (http://www.space.gc.ca/csa). Internal wave detection using SAR imagery is also being conducted in the Lombok Strait [23]. Niche markets can exist for well tailored products as demonstrated by the emergence of BOOST Technologies; a private French based SME providing value-added services for marine applications such as wind/wave conditions to end users. Therefore, while the MARSAIS questionnaire was circulated as widely as possible and while overall response to the survey was good (~20%) it is possible that some very specific interests did not generate feedback. Nevertheless, the results of the survey give a strong indication of general contemporary trends and provide valuable feedback on the future desired use of SAR and SAR derived data products. 8.5.3 Variables The discussion below will focus on variables that received a high level of response from respondents. This would imply that these parameters are of greater interest to the coastal and marine end user community. Survey results indicate that variables such as SAR product type (see above), geographic coverage, delivery medium, synergy, temporal resolution and spatial resolution all returned high levels of response for both contemporary and desired use of SAR. Variables such as forecast period and latency of delivery returned low levels of response and this decreased the potential for further meaningful analysis. Geographic Coverage For geographic coverage the demand for SAR data is highest closer to the coast (coastal seas, shelf seas and estuaries) for both pollution incidents and current features. This is unsurprising as the coastal area is a dynamic environment that accommodates physical, chemical and biological interactions as well as a focus for numerous human activities (for example, as outlined in [24]). SAR data can be a vital resource in coastal marine monitoring [17, 25, 26, 27]. The fact that a strong preference exists for coastal and estuarine areas across both applications suggests that there is a strong desire to utilise SAR data products in the management and monitoring of these dynamic areas. The global monitoring of pollution incidents generated little interest (as demonstrated by the feedback received). Spills in the open ocean are admittedly harmful; however, they are less likely to have an impact on coastal habitats (as well as socio-economic impacts) as spills closer to the coast. There are increased obligations throughout Europe to monitor and develop actions in response to pollution incidents in the coastal

183

and marine environment. Thus, potential opportunities exist for further utilisation of SAR data products in pollution response measures within European Member States. Delivery Medium Suppliers of SAR data e.g. Eurimage, ESA and Radarsat International, primarily deliver data by CD. Some products can be delivered in electronic form on the Internet via ftp i.e. ERS1/2 medium resolution imagery from Eurimage (http://www.eurimage.com). The predominant supply of data by CD applies to all levels of data from raw data (Level 0) through to more processed data (Level 1 and 2). The questionnaire feedback indicates that SAR data users largely employ disc as a delivery medium. It is also apparent from the results of the CoU survey that there is strong demand for networked data. It can be argued that networked data is advantageous in that it allows for rapid data delivery; end users can directly download the data they require. However, much of the data is large in size and many users may not have networks of sufficient capacity at their disposal (e.g. storing and extracting a typical ASAR data file requires up to 1 gigabyte of free space on your hard drive) [28]. In addition, because of the high bandwidth required to download some of the data in question, certain networks may be very slow or unable to cope with the download tasks. The strong trend expressed for networked data and to a lesser extent data in disc format would suggest a desire within the coastal and marine end user community for increased access to, and availability of, these particular delivery media. Coastal and marine end users who require the fast delivery of products can avail of ESA’s NRT service. ESA’s NRT services are typically three hours from sensing for data used in forecasting or tactical operations (global and regional products produced and distributed systematically). For applications requiring high resolution images (agriculture, forestry, soil moisture, etc.) NRT products are typically available one to three days from sensing [28]. As stated previously this service will be dependent on the network capability and capacity to handle the data volumes involved. Synergy with SAR SAR data combined with other EO sensor data can provide a better insight into oceanic processes. The results of the CoU survey show that SAR data users frequently use optical data and infrared data in synergy with SAR data and expressed a strong demand for synergy between SAR data, optical, infrared and hyperspectral data. Synergy with SAR data can be achieved through combining it with data from other satellite sensor systems (e.g. optical and infrared sensors such as SeaWiFS and NOAA AVHRR) or by combining data from various instruments onboard the same satellite (e.g. the Medium Resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MERIS) and ASAR onboard Envisat) [29]. Envisat is the first satellite that integrates instruments for simultaneous observations of physical and bio-geochemical variables [30], thus providing opportunities for synergy. The high level of contemporary synergy between SAR data and optical data is possibly due to a number of factors; optical data are relatively easily available and cheap, the measured parameters are more familiar and are standard oceanographic measurements and an extensive established knowledge base for processing exists. Hyperspectral sensors contain numerous channels (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer [MODIS] has 36 compared to LANDSAT which has 7). The very

184

narrow bands of hyperspectral sensors increase sensitivity to specific surface (and atmospheric) phenomena. Therefore, hyperspectral data are advantageous from a synergy perspective. However, the issue of large quantities of data will need to be considered. SAR data offers a number of advantages in terms of synergy with other EO data. The high spatial resolution of SAR and its all weather capability make SAR data attractive from a synergy point of view. Onboard Envisat, data from MERIS and ASAR will be combined to survey oil spills [28]; the wide swath capability of ASAR (~400km) will allow monitoring of large oil slicks. In the case of the Prestige oil spill disaster off the Spanish coast (November 2002) Envisat and ERS-2 acquired images demonstrated the scale and extent of the spill despite heavy rain and cloud cover in the region that hindered the coverage of optical instruments [28]. Synergy between SAR data and other EO data can also elucidate information on oceanic features [31]. The use of data from SAR sensors with data acquired by optical or thermal infrared sensors can help end users to better understand physical and bio-physical processes in the marine environment e.g. frontal features (oceanic and atmospheric), eddies and coastal upwelling (Figure 8.26). SAR data combined with ocean colour (e.g. SeaWiFS) and SST EO data is useful for the detection, classification and monitoring of ocean surface features such as slicks, frontal convergence and divergence, eddy size and rotation. The combination of ASAR data with data from the Radar Altimeter (RA-2), both onboard Envisat, can be used to provide information on winds, waves and sea ice [30].

Figure 8.26. ERS 2 SAR and AVHRR SST images from Iberian Shelf (September 1999) depicting coastal upwelling. Frontal SAR signatures correspond to outline of thermal front.

185

Temporal Resolution The repeat cycle of radar satellites typically varies from 24 days (Radarsat) to 35 days (both ERS satellites and Envisat). From the response received during the CoU survey there is a strong demand from the coastal and marine end user community for more frequent temporal coverage, particularly in the case of pollution incidents where the immediate post incident period is critical in the monitoring and containment of the spill. The desire for increased temporal resolution (<24 hours) for SAR can be accommodated under certain circumstances. However, for increased temporal resolution to become readily available for SAR applications is, at present, unrealistic. Although the repeat cycle for Envisat and both ERS satellites is 35 days at the equator, revisits as short as one day are possible at higher latitudes under certain conditions. By using the descending and ascending passes of all three satellites (ERS, Envisat and Radarsat) end users can obtain a number of images of the same location over a relatively short period of time. This capability is unique to SAR sensors as they can be deployed both day and night. However, a number of technical factors need to be considered when combining data from different SAR sensors. Geographical location can also influence the temporal resolution of SAR satellite sensors. At high latitudes the confluence of polar orbiting SAR satellite swaths provides relatively frequent coverage [32]. Radarsat and Envisat repeat cycles can provide one-day repeat coverage (at high latitudes) and approximately three day repeat coverage (at the mid latitudes). In addition, the wide swath modes of Envisat (~400km) and Radarsat (~500km, 300km and 100km) have a shorter repeating cycle, which results in better temporal resolution [31,32]. However, it is important to point out that increased swath width will lead to lower spatial resolution. This will have implications for applications such as pollution features and current features where high spatial resolution is desirable. For SAR data users the issue appears to be one of utilising the optimal temporal resolution provided by the SAR sensor(s) for a particular scientific application at a particular location. This situation is set to improve with the launch of future satellites (Radarsat-2, ALOS, COSMO SkyMed and TerraSAR), which will complement existing systems (Radarsat-1, Envisat and ERS-2). Spatial Resolution No conclusions on spatial resolution could de drawn due to the unfocussed nature of the question regarding spatial resolution (see below). 8.5.4 Critique of CoU Survey The CoU questionnaire survey was designed to reduce or eliminate sources of potential bias or ambiguity and to be as representative of the user community as possible. Despite this, certain limitations were identified during the analysis of the data. These were: the low number of responses to the questionnaire for certain variables and applications, geographical bias in the response and ambiguity associated with the question on spatial resolution. Different applications require different products. As a result, the identification of specific data and product requirements for different applications is an important task that has to be augmented by the user requirement analysis procedure. Despite the high

186

number of returned questionnaires (96) and the good response rate to the questionnaire as a whole (~20%) (this represents the percentage of respondents from within the PUD and includes direct and unsolicited responses), in depth analysis of the results was limited to pollution and current features. Further analysis of the remaining application areas was not possible due to the low number of responses obtained in relation to these; despite attempts to obtain an equitable level of feedback from each of the applications. Despite endeavouring to eliminate geographic bias by soliciting as balanced a response as possible, awareness by the CMRC researchers of potential end users of SAR data in Ireland and the UK resulted in greater feedback numbers from those countries. Greater input on behalf of designated national focal points for correspondence with the MARSAIS project partners would have more than likely provided a more balanced response from the partner countries. During the presentation of the CoU survey findings at the Svalbard workshop, certain sectoral gaps were identified within the report. Lower response rates were received from sectors that use large volumes of SAR data e.g. military and meteorological users. In order to address this gap, direct contact was made with individuals from relevant organisations e.g. UK Met Office, Met Éireann, and Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI). The contacted representatives of these sectors largely corroborated the findings and recommendations of the CoU report thus substantiating the reports conclusions. However, it should be borne in mind that the analysis of the CoU data only reflects the response received throughout the survey. Also, the role of MARSAIS was not to promote the use of SAR data within any one specific sector but to attempt to break new ground with users in the coastal and marine environment. The options for spatial resolution specified in the MARSAIS questionnaire were intended to be post analysis and referred to products that have probably been modelled or gridded. However, the results obtained for the question on spatial resolution were difficult to interpret as they showed a strong demand for spatial resolutions at two dissimilar scales e.g. 500km and 0.5km for both pollution incidents and current features. It is likely that these two scales represent responses for spatial coverage and spatial resolution respectively. Therefore, it is possible that the wording of the question may not have been explicit enough to the respondents. If the respondents were unaware of the post analysis nature of the question the high demand for 500km may refer to swath widths, i.e. spatial coverage, whereas the comparable demand seen for 0.5km may refer to spatial resolution as represented by pixel size (the Radarsat -1 satellite provides users access to a wide variety of beam selections that can image swaths from 45km to 500km in width, with resolutions from 8m to 100m [33]. This flexibility in spatial [and temporal] coverage and resolution allows the satellite to cater for many user requirements in monitoring the marine environment).

187

REFERENCES 1. Westinga E, Bijker W, van Dijk K, Savenije H, Heering J, Looyen W & Overbosch E. (1999) Technical Document 2: Design of the User Needs Assessment Study. User Requirements Study for Remote Sensing Based Spatial Information for the Sustainable Management of Forests. 12pp. 2. Fischer J & Flemming NC. (1999) Operational Oceanography: Data Requirements Survey, EuroGOOS Publication No. 12, Southampton Oceanography Centre, Southampton. ISBN 0-904175-36-7. 60pp. 3. Briggs DJ, Boxall S & Soulakellis N. (2001) Matching Demand and Supply for Earth Observation Data and Information. A report of s study undertaken as part of the EUFOREO Thematic Network. 54pp. 4. Jolly GW, Mangin A, Cauneau F, Calatuyud M, Barale V, Snaith SM, Rud O, Ishii M, Gade M, Redondo JM & Platinov A. (1999) The Clean Seas Project – Final Report. Contact Number: ENV4-CT96-0334, European Commission. 5. Al Khudhairy DHA. (2002) Marine Oil Pollution. Technologies and Methodologies for Detection and Early Warning. EUR 20231 EN, European Commission. 192pp. 6. Williams JB. (1999) Micro Solutions to Macro Problems in the Information Society, Proceedings Remote Sensing Society, From Data to Information, Cardiff . 7. ESA (2002) Data Users Programme – Users Symposium Summary Report. DUPT-UCAB-EOAD-RP-02-0001. European Space Agency. 17pp. 8. Kohlhammer G. (2001) The Envisat Exploitation Policy. ESA Bulletin 106; June 2001. 9. ODISSEO http://odisseo.esrin.esa.it/ 10. Downey I, Archer D, Perryman A, Williams J, Looyen W, Oostdijk A, Noorbergen H, van der Kamp A, Sandford T, Stephenson J & Stephenson R. (1998) RAPIDS – Enabling Local User Access to remote sensing: recent experiences from Indonesia. Presented at ESA Euro-Asian Space Week, Singapore. 11. Raney RK & Nielson CS. (2000) International Policy on Wide Swath SAR Ocean Weather Data. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp 170-176. 12. Macklin JT. (1992) The imaging of oil slicks by synthetic aperture radar. GEC Journal of Research, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 19-28. 13. Bern TI, Wahl T, Anderssen T & Olsen R. (1993) Oil Spill Detection Using Satellite Based SAR: Experience from a Field Experiment. Photogrammetric Engineering & Remote Sensing, Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 423-428. 14. Singh KP. (1995) Monitoring of Oil Spills using Airborne and Spaceborne Sensors. Advances Space Research, Vol. 15, No. 11, pp. 101-110.

188

15. Sherwin TJ, Matthews JP & Kennedy F. (1997) Effluent Slicks in the Menai Strait: a comparison of ERS-1 SAR signatures and model predictions. Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 264-268. 16. Johannessen JA, Garello R, Chapron B, Romeiser R, Pavlakis P, Robinson I, Connolly N, Nittis K, Hamre T, Ufermann S, Alpers W, Espedal H, Furevik B, Cummins V & Tarchi D. (2001) Marine SAR analysis and interpretation system – MARSAIS. Special Issue of Annals of Telecommunications, Vol. 56, No. 11-12, pp 655-660. 17. Vachon PW, Thomas SJ, Cranton JA, Bjerkelund CA, Dobson FW & Olsen RB. (1998) Monitoring the Coastal Zone with the RADARSAT Satellite. Oceanology International 98, 10 pp. 18. Wismann V, Gade M, Alpers W & Huhnerfuss H. (1998) Radar signatures of mineral oil spills measured by an airborne multi-frequency radar. International Journal of Remote Sensing, Vol. 19, No. 18, pp. 3607-3623. 19. Lu J, Lim H, Bao M, Liew SC & Kwoh LK. (1999) Mapping Ocean Pollution with ERS SAR Imagery. Proceedings of the 20th Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, Vol. 1, pp. 325-330. 20. Espedal HA & Johannessen O. (2000) Detection of Oil Spills near offshore installations using synthetic aperture radar (SAR). International Journal of Remote Sensing, Vol. 21, No. 11. 21. Espedal HA & Wahl T. (1999) Satellite SAR Oil Spill Detection Using Wind History Information. International Journal of Remote Sensing, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 49-65. 22. Samad R & Mansor S. (2002) Detection of oil spill pollution using RADARSAT SAR imagery. Proceedings of the 23rd Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, http://www.gisdevelopment.net/aars/acrs/2002/sar/096.pdf. 23. Arvelyna Y & Oshima M. (2002) Proceedings of the 23rd Asian Conference on Remote Sensing, http://www.gisdevelopment.net/aars/acrs/2002/sar/158.pdf. 24. Connolly N, Buchanan C, O Connell M, Cronin M, O’Mahony C, Kay D & Buckley S. (2001) Assessment of Human Activity in the Coastal Zone. Maritime Ireland/Wales INTERREG Report No.9. 126pp. 25. Johannessen J. (2000) Coastal Observing Systems: The Role of Synthetic Aperture Radar. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp 41-48. 26. Vachon PW, Adlakha P, Edel H, Henschel M, Ramsay B, Flett D, Rey M, Staples G & Thomas S. (2000) Canadian Progress Toward Marine and Coastal Applications of Synthetic Aperture Radar. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp 33-40.

189

27. Forget P & Broche P. (1996) Slicks, Waves, and Fronts Observed in a Sea Coastal Area by an X-Band Airborne Synthetic Aperture Radar, Remote Sensing of Environment, 57 (1) pp.1-12. 28. Envisat http://envisat.esa.int/ 29. Ufermann S, Robinson IS & Da Silva JCB. (2001) Synergy between synthetic aperture radar and other sensors for the remote sensing of the ocean. Special Issue of Annals of Telecommunications, Vol. 56, No. 11-12, pp 672-681. 30. Lehner S, Hoja D & Schulz-Stellenfleth J. (2002) Marine parameters from synergy of optical and radar satellite data. Advances Space Research, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp. 23-32. 31. Wu S, Liu A, Leonard G & Pichel WG. (2000) Ocean Feature Monitoring with Wide Swath Synthetic Aperture Radar. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp 122-129. 32. Olsen RB & Wahl T. (2000) The role of wide swath SAR in high-latitude coastal management. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp 136-140. 33. Radarsat Program Official WWW Server http://radarsat.space.gc.ca/asc/index.html

190

CHAPTER 9 - COST BENEFIT SCENARIOS FOR SAR DATA

9.1 Introduction and Objectives Within WP6, the analysis of end user feedback highlighted the issue of cost as significant in the uptake of SAR data. Many respondents to the Context of Use (CoU) Survey (Chapter 8) perceived the cost of SAR imagery as overly expensive. This works against the uptake of SAR data as a resource. In order to investigate these findings further, the CMRC conducted a number of interviews with personnel engaged in applications that involve, or potentially involve, the use of SAR data. The cost scenarios presented below give an indication of what criteria SAR data will need to fulfil in order to become viable and attractive to end users (purely in terms of cost). The costs quoted are indicative but they broadly reflect the current expenditure incurred by the organisations in question. 9.2 Methodology The CoU survey showed pollution incidents and current features to be the two most popular applications for SAR data among respondents in the coastal and marine end user community. Therefore, it was decided to focus attention on individuals/organisations involved in these application areas. Interviewees were selected from individuals of the MARSAIS Users Group (MUG) who were familiar with the subject of the MARSAIS project. Interviews were conducted with personnel from: Port of Cork, The Marine Institute and The Irish Coast Guard (Ireland) and CEDRE (France). The first scenario involves surveillance/monitoring options for detecting oil slicks at sea by the Irish Coast Guard. The second scenario involves the case of coastal and marine oil pollution incidents (using the Whitegate spill in Cork Harbour and the Prestige incident as examples). Individuals were asked about the method of response, the cost/expenditure involved and the use, or provision for use, of satellite SAR imagery. The third scenario looks at the case of detecting current features. The cost of establishing a wave buoy network, versus use of SAR data for the extraction of wave/current parameters, was examined. The prices quoted for the cost of ERS SAR and Envisat ASAR imagery were correct at the time of writing. By examining these cost scenarios it was possible to broadly assess the options of using, or not using SAR data, on the basis of cost.

191

9.3 Results 9.3.1 Scenario 1 – Irish Coastguard oil spill monitoring Detection of oil pollution incidents relies on the co-operation of the general public, reports from ships at sea to the Irish Coastguard (IRCG) and reports from the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA). The IRCG receives reports from the IAA on any pollution incidents observed from the air e.g. when there is an oil slick, where there is a possibility of a spill or when illegal dumping is observed at sea. The Irish Coast Guard also purchase SAR imagery from ground stations. To order and purchase 10-15 images per month the cost to the Irish Coast Guard is ~ €1,200 per image, but this is considered expensive in terms of the budget currently available. The interpretation of the images by ground station staff is included in the cost of the image. Coast Guard organisations in other Member States (e.g. Netherlands) have opted to train their own staff in the interpretation of SAR imagery, which avoids this extra cost per image. The IRCG are working towards a situation where SAR imagery is systematically used to facilitate the efficient deployment of surveillance aircraft to offshore areas where anomalies associated with reduced backscatter are identified by the SAR data interpretation procedure.

Ireland

Approximate ERS SAR Swath. In 2003 there were 3 images collected for this area

Figure 9.1. The area of the south coast of Ireland used in the example given in Table 9.1. The shaded box represents the coverage of an ERS SAR image.

192

Table 9.1. Comparison between ERS SAR, IRCG aircraft and helicopter in terms of technical advantages and disadvantages for oil slick monitoring.

SAR (ERS/Envisat) Aircraft Helicopter C

ost

€800/ raw image €800 - €1,400/ processed image ERS SAR or Envisat ASAR image in raw format is available at €800. Processed SAR images cost €800 for Envisat but depending on the level of processing increase to €1,400 for ERS.

€600 Approximately €200/hr. covering Cork coastline a number of times in 3 hours. Will cover 140-180km/hr.

€5,200 Approximately €5200 for 4 hours flight time

Adv

anta

ges

Weather and light independent SAR image can contain information on sea state and currents as well as slick properties Can increase the cost effectiveness of aircraft deployment Unlike aircraft (and vessels) satellite SAR can operate continuously without the need to return to a base

Can be deployed at short notice and at regular intervals Less likelihood of false identification Polluting vessel can be easily identified Equipment can be regularly modified, updated and maintained

Easier to manoeuvre than a fixed wing aircraft.

Can be deployed at short notice and at regular intervals Less likelihood of false slick identification Polluting vessel can be easily identified Equipment can be regularly modified, updated and maintained

Dis

adva

ntag

es

False targets can occur on image Fixed orbit and infrequent temporal coverage

Inclement weather has the potential to reduce capability of aircraft surveillance Coverage is limited to smaller areas Man power intensive Limited information on the relative thickness of the surface oil

More expensive than SAR or aircraft Inclement weather has the potential to reduce capability of helicopter surveillance Coverage is limited to smaller areas Limited information on the relative thickness of the surface oil

193

9.3.2 Scenario 2a – Oil spill response: The Whitegate coastal oil spill Should an oil spill occur in Cork Harbour the initial reconnaissance will involve using the Port of Cork pilot boat to assess the extent of the oil spill. Once the initial assessment is complete a request for aerial surveillance is made to the Irish Coast Guard. From this stage onwards, parameters such as tides and winds have to be considered in predicting the movement of the spill. Aerial reconnaissance is repeated every six to eight hours as required and usually continues for two to three days after the oil spill occurs. The authorities at the Port of Cork do not use radar data to any extent at present. Aerial reconnaissance (by the Irish Coast Guard) consists solely of visual identification by helicopter or airplane. At present the Irish Coast Guard contract out surveillance/reconnaissance aircraft with SLAR\UV\IR capability, which costs in the region of €800 per hour. This would change to a daily rate if necessitated over a prolonged period. On the 4th of November 1997, an oil spill occurred at the Whitegate Oil Refinery in Cork Harbour. Up to 6,000 gallons of fuel oil leaked into the harbour when a pipe was fractured during the unloading of a tanker at the refinery. A SAR overpass on 7th November was due, however ESA were not requested to switch on the SAR because initial reports indicated that the spill was small, <700 gallons. When it became apparent that the oil spill was greater than initial estimates, the refinery sought to obtain a SAR image to assess the impact of the spill. The only SAR image available for the area was taken on 13th November, 10 days after the initial spill (Figure 9.2). The details of present day costs associated with the monitoring of a similar sized spill are provided in Table 9.2.

Figure 9.2. ERS-2 SAR image (11.26 GMT) of Cork Harbour, November 13th 1997.

194

Table 9.2. Comparison between SAR and aircraft in terms of cost and associated advantages and disadvantages for a present day oil spill incident in Cork Harbour.

SAR (ERS/Envisat) Aircraft

Cos

t

€800/ raw image €800 - €1,400/ processed image ERS SAR or Envisat ASAR image in raw format is available at €800. Processed SAR images cost €800 for Envisat but depending on the level of processing increase to €1,400 for ERS.

€56,000 Contract rate for surveillance at €800/hour, for 10 hours a day over the course of a week

Adv

anta

ges

Weather and light independent SAR image can contain information on sea state and currents as well as slick properties Can increase the cost effectiveness of aircraft deployment Unlike aircraft (and vessels) satellite SAR can operate continuously without the need to return to a base

Can be deployed at short notice and at regular intervals Less likelihood of false identification Polluting vessel can be easily identified Equipment can be regularly modified, updated and maintained

Dis

adva

ntag

es

False targets can occur on image Fixed orbit and infrequent temporal coverage. In the case of the 1997 oil spill in Cork Harbour a single SAR image was not available until the 13th of November 1997. The oil spill occurred on the 4th of November.

Inclement weather has the potential to reduce capability of aircraft surveillance Coverage is limited to smaller areas Man power intensive Limited information on the relative thickness of the surface oil

9.3.3 Scenario 2b – Oil spill response: The Prestige offshore oil spill Personnel from the Centre of Documentation, Research and Experimentation on accidental water pollution (CEDRE) were interviewed regarding the Prestige incident, which spilled 63,000 tons of oil off Spain’s Galician coast on 13th November 2002 (see Figures 9.3 and 9.4). CEDRE received SAR images through the International Charter for Major Disaster10 during the initial stages of the Prestige crisis. The SAR data, comprising ERS-2, Envisat ASAR and Radarsat images, were analysed together with other information received from aircraft and vessels on a daily basis. The cost of deploying dedicated aircraft in France is around €11/km2. This cost will vary from country to country, depending on the aircraft and equipment used e.g. in Germany the approximate costs of aerial surveillance are in the region of €21/km2. Table 9.3 presents a comparison of the use of satellite SAR data and aircraft for monitoring a scenario analogous to the Prestige oil slick.

10 The International Charter aims to provide a unified system of space data acquisition and delivery to those affected by natural or man-made disasters through authorised users. http://www.disasterscharter.org

195

Figure 9.3. Envisat ASAR wide swath image, vertical polarisation from 17/11/02 showing the Prestige oil slick. Source: http://earth.esa.int/ew/oil_slicks/

Figure 9.4. The stricken hull of the Prestige oil tanker, 13th November 2002. Source: http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2002/oil.spill/

196

Table 9.3. Oil spill response in marine waters, comparison between SAR and aircraft in terms of cost and associated advantages and disadvantages.

SAR (ERS\Envisat) Aircraft C

ost

€1,200 ERS SAR or Envisat ASAR image in raw format is available at €800. Processed SAR images cost €800 for Envisat but depending on the level of processing increase to €1,400 for ERS. It is important to note that Envisat has the added capability of being able to vary swath width

€1,100 €11/km2 covering area of 100km2

Adv

anta

ges

Weather and light independent Good spatial coverage and provides a better overview of spreading slick SAR image can contain information on sea state and currents as well as slick properties

Can be deployed at short notice and at regular intervals Less likelihood of false slick identification

Dis

adva

ntag

es

Insufficient Temporal Coverage e.g. in the case of the Prestige the oil spill began on the 13/12/02 but the next ERS SAR image that covered the area was not available until 23/12/02.

Download and process time can be contrary to oil spill response requirements i.e. delay between acquisition and analysis False targets can occur on image Availability of data in the form of imagery is not adequate for needs of response team SAR is ineffective if acquisition does not occur before the slick sinks to the sub surface For oil slick detection SAR is not so effective under certain environmental conditions e.g. very calm conditions or periods of high winds Methodology not fully refined e.g. algorithm development

Inclement weather has the potential to reduce capability of aircraft surveillance Coverage is limited to smaller areas Limited information on the relative thickness of the surface oil

197

9.3.4 Scenario 3 – Analysis of current features in Irish waters Interviews were conducted with personnel from the Oceanographic Services section of the Irish Marine Institute. The Irish Marine Data Buoy Network (the distribution of the buoy network is shown in Figure 9.5) is a joint project designed to improve weather forecasts and to improve safety at sea. The project is the result of successful collaboration between the Irish Marine Institute, Met Éireann, the UK Met Office and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (Ireland). The network consists of four buoys (with a fifth proposed) situated around the coast of Ireland. It provides hourly reports of wind speed and direction, wave height and period, air and sea temperature (near real time information is available on-line from the Irish Marine Institute web site - http://www.marine.ie). The indicative cost per buoy can be broken down as follows: Initial purchase of hull and sensors €200,000 Ship time/yr €30,000 Insurance/yr €20,000 Tracking system/yr €4,000 Moorings/yr €10,000 Sensors servicing/yr €10,000

Figure 9.5. Irish Marine Buoy Network. Source: Irish Marine Institute (http://www.marine.ie). The white square shows the approximate overlapping coverage of an ERS SAR image for the M2 data buoy. For a single wave buoy this equates to a total initial cost of €200,000 with total ancillary costs of €74,000 per annum. It should be noted that this does not include costs for additional sensors, R&D projects/trials, replacement moorings (these can vary from year to year, especially during the initial years of set up). By examining the current prices for Envisat ASAR & ERS SAR products (RAW, PRI, SLC - as quoted on http://www.eurimage.com at time of writing) it is possible to estimate the cost involved in monitoring the Irish coastal water/approaches. An example of this comparison was conducted for marine data buoy M2 (Table 9.4.). The annual running

198

costs for marine data buoy M2 are compared to annual costs t for the purchase of SAR imagery covering the waters of M2. Table 9.4. Analysis of current features in Irish waters, a comparison between SAR and wave buoy in terms of cost and associated advantages and disadvantages.

SAR (ERS\Envisat) Buoy

Cos

t

€38,400 This cost assumes a minimum availability of four images per month at a cost of €800 per image. ERS SAR or Envisat ASAR image in raw format is available at €800.

~ €74,000 Operational costs only for M2 data buoy, costs broken down as shown above

Adv

anta

ges

Can cover a greater area Can extract more/ancillary data, geophysical parameters

Can provide NRT services

Continuous data stream Robust equipment and will operate in most weather conditions

Dis

adva

ntag

es

Limited temporal coverage and infrequent coverage In appropriate for the provision of NRT services Not suitable under certain environmental conditions e.g. high wind speeds

Limited spatial coverage - point source record only

Maintenance and servicing

199

9.4 Discussion It is futile to state the technological benefits of SAR data, unless the cost effectiveness can also be conveyed to any potential user. As a result, this chapter attempts to provide concrete examples of the cost benefits of SAR data for oil spill response, oil spill monitoring and current feature monitoring. In reality, decisions pertaining to the utilisation of SAR data are taken where costs are examined in the context of the potential benefits. For this reason, the advantages and disadvantages of monitoring options have to be presented in tandem with the cost figures. While it is impossible to directly compare the costs of SAR data against other monitoring systems, it is feasible to indicate when SAR data can be considered an economically viable alternative. For example, the cost benefits of SAR data, over alternative methods of monitoring for oil spills and current features, appear to increase in general as requirements for spatial and temporal coverage increase, and as the distance from the coastline increases. This is represented graphically below in Figure 9.6.

Time

Area

+

+

+

−

Dis

tanc

e

Figure 9.6 The improved cost benefit of SAR in relation to increased distance froarea covered and longevity of monitoring observations. The economic viability of SAR data is also more attractive when it is uswith other methods of observation. This is best demonstrated in offssurveillance situations, where the deployment of aircraft is made more efsystematic pre-analysis of SAR imagery.

SAR CostBenefit

m the shore,

ed in tandem hore oil spill ficient by the

200

CHAPTER 10 – CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS One of the goals of the MARSAIS project is to identify what issues are of most concern to existing and potential SAR users and what is restricting the use of these systems. 10.1 Conclusions

• With the launch of new satellites, such as Envisat, with wide swath (~500km) technology, multi-angle and multi-polarisation SAR sensors, SAR applications are on the threshold of a new era. This presents novel and unique opportunities for the international coastal and marine user community. If the operational capabilities of existing and near to launch SAR systems are not successfully demonstrated within the next few years, the opportunity to build a sustainable international user base in support of imaging SAR systems will be lost.

• The importance of user requirements is recognised in the current policy

framework for EO data. One of the most significant policies to emerge in the last couple of years is Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES). GMES provides an opportunity to develop enhanced operational oceanographic observational capabilities within the EU. GMES contributes to the objectives of MARSAIS and other SAR research projects by providing the policy framework necessary for the development of SAR data in an operational environment.

• This research found that the issues preventing the wider uptake of EO data to

emerge from various end user requirements studies in the last ten years have remained largely unchanged (e.g. cost, accessibility, resolution). This questions the success of end user studies in raising awareness of user requirements among decision makers and the research community. Either the message from end users is not getting through to data suppliers, policy makers and software developers, or EO technology has yet to reach a level of sophistication that can fulfil the needs of a wide end user community. In reality, it is possible that both points are valid.

• While some policy makers would be reticent to hear that what we need is more

research, this remains true in the development of marine and coastal applications for SAR data. At the current point in time, it is imperative to obtain a balance between promoting what is presently available (without falsely raising user expectations), and building on existing technologies to make SAR data more attractive to end users in the long term.

• There are a number of commercially viable companies in the marketplace

providing SAR derived services and products for the coastal and marine end user community. However, insecurity of the SAR commercial product market, high costs and practical problems with satellite imagery are perceived as obstacles to the success of small to medium enterprises (SMEs) entering into and operating within this sector.

201

• It is notable that products developed through the Earth Observation Market Development (EOMD) initiative by ESA, e.g. routeclimate.com by ARGOSS, appear to be commercially successful. It cannot be said that this is the explicit reason for the success of such products but it does demonstrate the valuable contribution that such an initiative can supply to Value-Adding Companies (VACs) and SMEs. A similar initiative that would build upon and complement the range of EO products and tools successfully developed through the European Commission 5th and 6th Framework research programmes should be considered.

• Commercial products and services are generally available in two formats –

information or software. For example, data is either highly processed in the form of a sophisticated product which directly lends itself to the decision making process; or software is provided to enable the end user to apply further interpretation or processing techniques.

• There appears to be a gap in the market for the further development of SMEs

to provide training and educational services for SAR data. By targeting the user community with training products it would be possible to increase proficiency and in turn to increase the market and demand for SAR products and services. There also appears to be a gap in the market in the provision of generic services or products for coastal and marine data. Companies currently tend to focus on particular singular applications.

• There is a need to optimise all of the SAR research currently underway within

the EU by ensuring that adequate opportunities exist for the exchange of dialogue on scientific achievement between the many research projects focusing on SAR. Opportunities for communication between scientists should be supported by the likes of the European Commission, the European Space Agency (ESA) and the European Science Foundation (ESF). This is important for building on progress to date and for avoiding duplication.

• As well as the need for communication among peers, the importance of two-

way dialogue between scientists and end users cannot be underestimated. End user workshops provide an excellent forum to bring the needs of the end users to the attention of scientists who do not have direct or frequent contact with coastal and marine area managers. On the other hand, end users are provided with an opportunity to learn about the potential of SAR data from experts in the field, who are to hand to answer specific technical questions.

• In general, researchers have a detailed knowledge of a special area of interest,

whereas policy makers and decision makers working in the coastal zone need to have a broader perspective and understanding of many issues. This difference will result in different types of user profiles. Researchers may require access to raw data, whereas decision makers and policy makers may need interpreted data (i.e. information). The need to consider all levels of end users, from experts to non-experts, is an important prerequisite for the exploitation of SAR derived products or services.

202

• Overall, end users express plausible and tangible requirements for SAR data, which indicates a general level of understanding of what SAR data can offer in the coastal and marine environment. This can be attributed to the success of projects aimed at raising awareness among the end user community in recent years. This also suggests that these efforts should be sustained as progress is made in SAR based research.

• End users have a strong preference for the use of SAR imagery in the

examination of current features, shallow water bathymetry and pollution incidents. Lower levels of interest exist for the use of SAR data in relation to features such as internal waves, wind and waves. Trends in demand are likely to be influenced by the availability of sophisticated products. For example, relatively sophisticated SAR data products currently exist for oil spill detection and shallow water bathymetry. A gap exists in the availability of mature end user orientated SAR products for other marine application areas.

• In a choice between cost, capability and capacity, cost was cited as the most

significant limiting factor in the use of SAR imagery in the marine and coastal end user community. The issue of cost relates to both the price of the data and the associated pricing scheme. The former can be prohibitively expensive and the latter can appear convoluted, particularly to the inexperienced SAR data user.

• Capability (training and skills) and capacity (infrastructure) also influence the

use of SAR data. The level of expertise of an end user will greatly influence their capability to access and utilise SAR imagery. Users need to consider the cost of improving capacity and capability (investment in hardware and employing or training individuals to interpret SAR data) against the increased cost of purchasing processed data.

• Specific demands of end users include the following: greater availability of

processed imagery; improved provision of coastal data over data pertaining to the open ocean; delivery of data via networks; more frequent temporal coverage; and synergy between SAR data and other EO data formats.

203

10.2 Recommendations

• SAR data products should be developed with the level of expertise of the end user in mind. Tools should be adapted for use by non-specialists and easy access to SAR data should be provided.

• The promotion of SAR data products for the marine and coastal environment

should be focused on concrete examples where efficiency, availability and affordability can be demonstrated.

• Solving current environmental problems often requires more than one

algorithm or model. The potential for combining multiple tools to produce more generic products should be promoted to improve marketability. Combining slick detection and wind retrieval algorithms for improved wind estimates is one example.

• Future efforts should be directed towards increasing awareness of the potential

of SAR data for particular sectors identified within MARSAIS which under utilise SAR data at present, including marine transport, mineral extraction and energy production.

• Many organisations lack in-house capacity and capability to interpret SAR

imagery. This coincides with a gap in the marketplace for interpretive, value adding services; particularly in relation to less mature application areas, such as those related to wind fields and sea state. Support should be provided for SMEs willing to maximise new opportunities to exploit SAR data in the coastal and marine environment. As an example, some end users are not interested in SAR data, but rather in the information that can be provided via thematic maps to aid decision making.

• Particular attention should be paid to specific demands of end users which

include the following: greater availability of processed imagery; improved provision of coastal data over data pertaining to the open ocean; delivery of data via networks; more frequent temporal coverage; and synergy between SAR data and other EO data formats.

• SAR data providers, including ESA, should continue to take steps towards the

simplification of pricing schemes to ensure the maximum uptake of SAR products by potential end users, in particular by first time and non-expert end users.

• The results of this survey should not be considered in isolation. It is important

to bear in mind that the future of coastal area management involves the use of EO based technologies in integrated management systems, where EO products will be integrated into intelligent systems capable of assimilating different types of data to produce what is requested by resource managers.

• The above recommendations are of relevance to the GMES Services Element

programme which focuses upon the delivery of policy-relevant services to end

204

users, primarily (but not exclusively) from EO services. It is recommended that the results of this survey be disseminated to appropriate audiences in ESA and the EU.

205

APPENDIX 1 - Members of the MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG).

Name

Organisation Contact e-mail

Nicholas Fleming

EuroGOOS, UK Nicholas.C.Flemming@soc.soton.ac.uk

Johannes Guddal

DNMI, Norway J.Guddal@dnmi.no

Han Wensink

ARGOSS, Netherlands wensink@argoss.nl

Hans Jørgen Sætre

Norske Shell, Norway Hans.Jorgen.Satre@shell.no

Carlo Marino

Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Italy

carlo.marino@unimib.it

Jose da Silva

Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal

jdasilva@fc.ul.pt

Stephane Charron

Thales Airborne Systems, France

stephane.charron@fr.thalesgroup.com

Hafedh Hajji

MétéoMer, France rd@meteomer.fr

206

APPENDIX 2 - MARSAIS Questionnaire.

MARSAIS END USER REQUIREMENTS QUESTIONNAIRE

Questionnaire Structure

Form A General information Form B Current use of SAR

Form C Desired use and requirements of SAR

FORM A

General Information A1.Title __________

A2.Surname _____________

A3.Forename ____________

A4.Name of organisation __________

A5.Address ___________

A6.Telephone ____________

A7.Facsimile _____________

A8.Email ____________

A9.Please select the activity, which most closely describes your organisation:

A10.If you wish to add extra explanatory information on your Activity Sector please

do so in the space provided below:

A11.Would you like to be kept informed of the development of the MARSAIS

project?

FORM B

Current use of SAR The following questions will help us to evaluate the areas in which data derived from SAR are currently being used. B1. Do you use SAR data?

207

If YES, please go to Question B5 and then proceed to FORM C If NO, complete Questions B2-B4 before proceeding to FORM C B2. Is cost a limiting factor? B3. Is capability (e.g. training and skills) a limiting factor? B4. Is lack of capacity (e.g. hardware and software infrastructure) a limiting factor?

Proceed to Form C B5. (This next section has room for three data applications. Please feel free to fill in as many or as few as you like before proceeding to Form C.) Please select from the drop-down menu a Data Application that you use SAR to examine: (Select from internal waves, natural film (plankton), ice, wind, waves, shallow water bathymetry, current features and pollution incidents). If other, please state ___________ Please complete the table below in relation to the Data Variable you have selected. (Select from geographic coverage product type delivery medium latency of delivery spatial resolution temporal resolution forecast period and synergy).

FORM C

Desired Use and Possible Requirements of SAR by your Organisation The following questions will help us determine how best to develop the MARSAIS TOOLKIT.

FORM C is your WISH LIST (Again, this next section has room for three data applications that you would like to measure using SAR. Please feel free to fill in as many or as few as you like before submitting the form.) C1. Data Application that you would like to measure using SAR. (Select from internal waves, natural film (plankton), ice, wind, waves, shallow water bathymetry, current features and pollution incidents). If other, please state ___________ Please complete the table below in relation to the Data Variable you have selected. (Select from geographic coverage product type delivery medium latency of delivery spatial resolution temporal resolution forecast period and synergy).

208

209

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The CMRC would like to acknowledge the following individuals for their support and input throughout the MARSAIS project: Members of the MAG and MUG; Anne Marie Hayes, Gordon Campbell, Steve Coulson (ESA); Vicki O’Donnell (CMRC); Harry Sealy (formerly of CMRC); Bernard Denore (European Commission), Richard Olsen (FFI), Shenna Fennell (Irish Marine Institute).

ERS-2 image acquired April 11, 2002. Image shows the central part of Spitsbergen Island, Svalbard region, Norway. Features such as fjords, steep flanks of mountains (very dark), some pointed but some forming high plains are visible in the image. Source: ESA - http://earth.esa.int/ers/