Transcript Document

Alaska DEM Workshop
George Y. G. Lee
Anchorage, Alaska
July 2008
Outline
Why elevation is important to USGS
National Digital Elevation Program
(NDEP)
The National Map and elevation data
Lidar activities and Lidar for the Nation
Alaska requirements and National
Elevation Plan
2
Importance of Elevation Data to the Nation
USGS responsibility as A-16 data category
Value of nationally, consistent elevation data set
Importance to the Digital Orthophoto Program,
including Urban Area data for Homeland security
Importance of elevation data to the commercial satellite
companies
Importance of higher resolution elevation data to
USGS science programs, especially climate change
studies
3
USGS Data Requirements
A-16 responsibilities (hydro, elevation,
orthoimagery, and names)
The National Map needs
Other USGS Discipline missions
(Geology, Water Resources, BRD)
Science Program (i.e., climate change)
4
USGS Elevation Data Acquisition
Ancient past (completion of 1:24K series and
DOQ first coverage)
Recent past (10-meter DEM partners)
Current priorities (Hazards, 10-meter
partners, Urban Areas)
Future priorities (data maintenance, hi-res
DOQs, other agency needs and partnerships,
emergency response, and science programs)
5
NDEP
Established to promote the exchange of
accurate digital land elevation data among
government, private, and non-profit sectors
and the academic community and to establish
standards and guidance that will benefit all
users
Federal (11 agencies), State (NSGIC Rep)
Open Invitation to participate
Organization - Steering Committee, Technical
Subcommittee, Project Coordination Subcommittee
6
National Digital Elevation Program
BLM
FEMA
USFWS
NOAA
NGA
NASA
NSGIC
www.ndep.gov
NRCS
USACE
US Census
USFS
USGS
A consortium of agencies coordinating the collection and
application of high-resolution, high-accuracy elevation data
7
NDEP Goals
Enhance data sharing among Federal, State,
and local agencies; the private sector; and
academia
Minimize redundant data production
Leverage resources to satisfy multiple
requirements
Develop flexible standards that meet the
needs of most users
Ensure the availability and accuracy of digital
topographic data
8
Technical Subcommittee
Dean Gesch, USGS
Forum for information exchange
Standards development
Technology assessment
9
Standards Development
USGS 30-meter DEM standard
Guidelines for digital elevation data – best practices
Inventory of agency-specific specifications and
standards




USGS
FEMA
NOAA
Others
Framework Elevation Standard
ASPRS Lidar Guidelines
10
Project Coordination Subcommittee
Bryon Ellingson, USGS
Project Tracking System
http://hazards.fema.gov/metadata/NDEP/
Project Information Form
Minimal Elevation Specific Metadata set
Viewer
View w/ Query tools
GOS Harvestable (supports Module 3), Link with
RAMONA and FEMA MIP activity
11
NDEP Project Tracking
12
ROMONA
FEMA supported, Paul Rooney
NSGIC pockets of interest
Is it being used?
Why and why not?
13
14
NDEP Mode of Operation
Signed Charter
NDEP Organizational Structure, Chairperson,
Executive Secretary
Meetings and telecons
Public website update and maintenance
Quickplace website for internal
communications
15
New Directions for NDEP
Focus on coordinated elevation data
acquisition and maintenance of a national
database
Support new budget initiatives
Develop National Elevation Plan
16
USGS Research and Applications Activities
Limited basic research
Limited applications within Geography and GIO
Limited multi-discipline cooperative research
Limited development and testing with Corp of
Engineers
Research primarily in support of data acquisition,
derivative products, and production systems
development
Accuracy and comparison of new acquisition
methods
No other recall of any cooperative research with other
agencies
17
Agency Issues and Concerns
Lack of data maintenance program
Not meeting needs of other Federal agencies
Lack of National Elevation Program Plan
Lack of adequate funding
Licensed data model
Lack of quality assurance guidelines for
sensors and data acquisition
18
The Nation Map
• Elevation
• Geographic Names
• Hydrography
• Land Cover
• Orthoimagery
• Boundaries (Government Units)
• Structures
• Transportation
19
Vintage of Elevation Data
Age of USGS topographic maps in the
National Elevation Dataset (NED)
•
Terrain data in USGS topographic maps are on average 35 years old
20
Multi-Resolution NED
1 arc second
1/3 arc second
1/9 arc second
Feature Extraction:
•B
22
23
24
The National Map Needs:
• The National Map needs higher resolution
elevation data
• The National Map needs up-to-date elevation
data
• The National Map needs lidar data to map
other map category features
• Not “Lidar for the Nation” but rather
“National Elevation Program”
25
National Lidar Mapping Initiative:
A Medium-Altitude
Advanced-Technology
Implementation Concept
David J. Harding
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
[email protected]
26
National Academy of Sciences Recommendations:
FEMA Floodplain Mapping & Earth Sciences Decadal Survey
Two NRC Committee Reports Issued in January, 2007
Floodplain Mapping Technologies
Commissioned by Congress
to Advise FEMA
Elevation for the Nation
Nationwide, seamless, consistent, publicdomain, elevation data set created using
airborne laser swath mapping (ALSM)
Contours: 1 ft (low relief), 4 ft (high relief)
Update 10 m & 30 m NED
Earth Science and Applications
from Space to Advise
NASA, NOAA and USGS
LIDAR Surface Topography (LIST)
Global topo & vegetation structure
5 m spatial resolution
0.1 m vertical precision for ground
Launch time frame: 2016-2020
Update 30 m & 90 m SRTM
27
A Wealth of Information Derived from Lidar
Volcano Monitoring
Carbon / Biomass
State-wide lidar
mapping completed
or in progress
Land Cover
Earthquake Faults
Hydrologic / Hydraulic
Urban Response
Coastal Inundation
Wildland Fires
28
Approaches to Accomplish National Lidar Mapping
Invest to Advance Capabilities
Utilize Existing Capabilities
±
Low Altitude (1 to 2 km)
Imposing Narrow Swath (~ 1 km)
Local (<20 km) Kinematic GPS
INS+GPS Attitude (0.01°)
Single Beam and Detector
Incomplete Reference Frame
Ad Hoc Error Analysis
Current Geoid for Ortho Heights
High Altitude (e.g. 15 km)
Enabling Wide Swath (e.g. 10 km)
Regional (e.g. 1,000 km) PPP GPS
INS+StarCamera Attitude (0.001°)
Multiple Beams and Detectors
Rigorous Reference Frame
Systematic Error Analysis
Concurrent Aerograv for Better Geoid
29
Potential Scenarios to Accomplish National Lidar Mapping
Increasing Role for
Advanced Capability
Scenario 1:
compete coverage by existing capability
no use of advanced capability
Scenario 2:
complete coverage by existing capability
continental datum tie-lines using advanced capability
Scenario 3:
logistically easier areas mapped by existing capability
logistically challenging areas mapped by advanced capability
Scenario 4:
Conterminous U.S. mapped by existing capability
Alaska mapped by advanced capability
Scenario 5:
local high-resolution mapping by existing capability
complete coverage by advanced technology capability
30
Decision Factors for National Lidar Mapping
+
The selection of an implementation scenario should be driven by
which maximizes total benefit for the nation:
Quality and uniformity of the resulting data and products
Time-frame over which the job is completed
Cost to complete the job
Capabilities and infrastructure established while doing the job
Advancement of the U.S. mapping and remote sensing industries
Suitability for continued mapping for change detection and map updating
31
National Lidar Mapping Initiative Concept:
Potential Partner Roles
USGS:
• project leadership and management
Local, state and federal agencies:
• requirements and standards for lidar data & DEM products meeting their
mandates
NASA:
• integrate and test medium-altitude airborne lidar instrumentation
• implement data processing methods & infrastructure
• provide instrumentation and infrastructure for operation by commercial sector
Commercial Sector:
• acquire and process medium-altitude, nation-wide data
• acquire and process low-altitude, higher-resolution
data for high-priority areas and for QC/QA
• produce derived parameters using classification & feature extraction procedures
• produce DEM products
TINs, DSMs, DTMs, canopy structure, building shapefiles
• create and market value added products
NASA and USGS:
• QA raw data, derived parameters and DEM products
USGS:
• archive and distribute raw data, derived parameters and DEM products
Local, state and federal agencies:
• use derived parameters, DEM products & value added products to meet their
mandates
32
Partners interested in National Coverage
The concept of a national Lidar survey was explored at
a September 2006 meeting
NASA, USGS, NOAA, Association of American State
Geologists
NASA, USGS, USACE, NOAA, NGA, FEMA, NRCS,
Forest Service, and other Federal agencies already
collect Lidar data
Growing interest in a full return Lidar baseline dataset
for the nation to meet multiple requirements
33
Next Steps for the Lidar Effort
Establish USGS Advisory Committee
Define strategy
Provide periodic review
Invite other agency participation
Define requirements
Propose national program plan
Define specifications
34
Proposed FY 2010 Budget
Good news is:
$$ M for mapping and integration
Includes $ M for Liar
Bad news is:
Mapping is only part of $$$ M over target
initiatives within DOI
35
Need for a National Elevation Plan
GeoLOB Bureau Data Resource (data call):
Impact on Federal agencies
A-16 Performance Reporting for National
Spatial Data Infrastructure Data Themes
Lidar for the Nation (Background, Workshop
Summary, Future Plans)
Development of National Elevation Plan
36
Summary
Alaska needs good elevation data
Alaska needs DOQs
Alaska seems to be neglected
Alaska IS different
Not a single solution
Complex project management and QA issues
Alaska elevation needs should be a part of
the National Elevation Plan
Public domain is still a general requirement
37
Thanks
Questions???
38
Contact information:
George Lee, 650-329-4255,
[email protected]
39