Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response, Seward, Alaska, April 8th-10th, 2008: workshop proceedings

During April 8th-10th, 2008, the Aliance for Coastal Technology (ACT) partner institutions, University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), and the Oil Spill Recovery Institute (OSRI) hosted a workshop entitled: "Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response" in Seward, Alaska. The main focus was to bring together 29 workshop participants-representing workshop managers, scientists, and technology developers - together to discuss current and future hydrocarbon in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors as they apply to oil spill prevention and response. [PDF contains 28 pages] Hydrocarbons and their derivatives still remain one of the most important energy sources in the world. To effectively manage these energy sources, proper protocol must be implemented to ensure prevention and responses to oil spills, as there are significant economic and environmental costs when oil spills occur. Hydrocarbon sensors provide the means to detect and monitor oil spills before, during, and after they occur. Capitalizing on the properties of oil, developers have designed in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors that absorb or reflect the electromagnetic energy at different spectral bands. Workshop participants identified current hydrocarbon sensors (in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors) and their overall performance. To achieve the most comprehensive understanding of oil spills, multiple sensors will be needed to gather oil spill extent, location, movement, thickness, condition, and classification. No single hydrocarbon sensor has the capability to collect all this information. Participants, therefore, suggested the development of means to combine sensor equipment to effectively and rapidly establish a spill response. As the exploration of oil continues at polar latitudes, sensor equipment must be developed to withstand harsh arctic climates, be able to detect oil under ice, and reduce the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for the U.S. to adopt a multi-agency cooperation for oil spill response, as the majority of issues surounding oil spill response focuses not on the hydrocarbon sensors but on an effective contingency plan adopted by all agencies. It is recommended that the U.S. could model contingency planning based on other nations such as Germany and Norway. Workshop participants were asked to make recommendations at the conclusion of the workshop and are summarized below without prioritization: *Outreach materials must be delivered to funding sources and Congressional delegates regarding the importance of oil spill prevention and response and the development of proper sensors to achieve effective response. *Develop protocols for training resource managers as new sensors become available. *Develop or adopt standard instrument specifications and testing protocols to assist manufacturers in further developing new sensor technology. *As oil exploration continues at polar latitudes, more research and development should be allocated to develop a suite of instruments that are applicable to oil detection under ice.

Towed vehicles: undulating platforms as tools for maping coastal processes and water quality assessment, Seaside, California, February 5-7,2007. Workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop on Towed Vehicles: Undulating Platforms As Tools for Mapping Coastal Processes and Water Quality Assessment was convened February 5-7,2007 at The Embassy Suites Hotel, Seaside, California and sponsored by the ACT-Pacific Coast partnership at the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML). The TUV workshop was co-chaired by Richard Burt (Chelsea Technology Group) and Stewart Lamerdin (MLML Marine Operations). Invited participants were selected to provide a uniform representation of the academic researchers, private sector product developers, and existing and potential data product users from the resource management community to enable development of broad consensus opinions on the application of TUV platforms in coastal resource assessment and management. The workshop was organized to address recognized limitations of point-based monitoring programs, which, while providing valuable data, are incapable of describing the spatial heterogeneity and the extent of features distributed in the bulk solution. This is particularly true as surveys approach the coastal zone where tidal and estuarine influences result in spatially and temporally heterogeneous water masses and entrained biological components. Aerial or satellite based remote sensing can provide an assessment of the aerial extent of plumes and blooms, yet provide no information regarding the third dimension of these features. Towed vehicles offer a cost-effective solution to this problem by providing platforms, which can sample in the horizontal, vertical, and time-based domains. Towed undulating vehicles (henceforth TUVs) represent useful platforms for event-response characterization. This workshop reviewed the current status of towed vehicle technology focusing on limitations of depth, data telemetry, instrument power demands, and ship requirements in an attempt to identify means to incorporate such technology more routinely in monitoring and event-response programs. Specifically, the participants were charged to address the following: (1) Summarize the state of the art in TUV technologies; (2) Identify how TUV platforms are used and how they can assist coastal managers in fulfilling their regulatory and management responsibilities; (3) Identify barriers and challenges to the application of TUV technologies in management and research activities, and (4) Recommend a series of community actions to overcome identified barriers and challenges. A series of plenary presentation were provided to enhance subsequent breakout discussions by the participants. Dave Nelson (University of Rhode Island) provided extensive summaries and real-world assessment of the operational features of a variety of TUV platforms available in the UNOLs scientific fleet. Dr. Burke Hales (Oregon State University) described the modification of TUV to provide a novel sampling platform for high resolution mapping of chemical distributions in near real time. Dr. Sonia Batten (Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Sciences) provided an overview on the deployment of specialized towed vehicles equipped with rugged continuous plankton recorders on ships of opportunity to obtain long-term, basin wide surveys of zooplankton community structure, enhancing our understanding of trends in secondary production in the upper ocean. [PDF contains 32 pages]

Underwater Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Remote Regions, Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, Coconut Island, Hawaii, February 7-9, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop, sponsored by the Hawaii-Pacific and Alaska Regional Partners, entitled Underwater Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Remote Regions at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology from February 7-9, 2007. The workshop was designed to summarize existing passive acoustic technologies and their uses, as well as to make strategic recommendations for future development and collaborative programs that use passive acoustic tools for scientific investigation and resource management. The workshop was attended by 29 people representing three sectors: research scientists, resource managers, and technology developers. The majority of passive acoustic tools are being developed by individual scientists for specific applications and few tools are available commercially. Most scientists are developing hydrophone-based systems to listen for species-specific information on fish or cetaceans; a few scientists are listening for biological indicators of ecosystem health. Resource managers are interested in passive acoustics primarily for vessel detection in remote protected areas and secondarily to obtain biological and ecological information. The military has been monitoring with hydrophones for decades;however, data and signal processing software has not been readily available to the scientific community, and future collaboration is greatly needed. The challenges that impede future development of passive acoustics are surmountable with greater collaboration. Hardware exists and is accessible; the limits are in the software and in the interpretation of sounds and their correlation with ecological events. Collaboration with the military and the private companies it contracts will assist scientists and managers with obtaining and developing software and data analysis tools. Collaborative proposals among scientists to receive larger pools of money for exploratory acoustic science will further develop the ability to correlate noise with ecological activities. The existing technologies and data analysis are adequate to meet resource managers' needs for vessel detection. However, collaboration is needed among resource managers to prepare large-scale programs that include centralized processing in an effort to address the lack of local capacity within management agencies to analyze and interpret the data. Workshop participants suggested that ACT might facilitate such collaborations through its website and by providing recommendations to key agencies and programs, such as DOD, NOAA, and I00s. There is a need to standardize data formats and archive acoustic environmental data at the national and international levels. Specifically, there is a need for local training and primers for public education, as well as by pilot demonstration projects, perhaps in conjunction with National Marine Sanctuaries. Passive acoustic technologies should be implemented immediately to address vessel monitoring needs. Ecological and health monitoring applications should be developed as vessel monitoring programs provide additional data and opportunities for more exploratory research. Passive acoustic monitoring should also be correlated with water quality monitoring to ease integration into long-term monitoring programs, such as the ocean observing systems. [PDF contains 52 pages]

Wave Sensor Technologies, St Petersburg, Florida, March 7-9, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop on "Wave Sensor Technologies" in St. Petersburg, Florida on March 7-9, 2007, hosted by the University of South Florida (USF) College of Marine Science, an ACT partner institution. The primary objectives of this workshop were to: 1) define the present state of wave measurement technologies, 2) identify the major impediments to their advancement, and 3) make strategic recommendations for future development and on the necessary steps to integrate wave measurement sensors into operational coastal ocean observing systems. The participants were from various sectors, including research scientists, technology developers and industry providers, and technology users, such as operational coastal managers and coastal decision makers. Waves consistently are ranked as a critical variable for numerous coastal issues, from maritime transportation to beach erosion to habitat restoration. For the purposes of this workshop, the participants focused on measuring "wind waves" (i.e., waves on the water surface, generated by the wind, restored by gravity and existing between approximately 3 and 30-second periods), although it was recognized that a wide range of both forced and free waves exist on and in the oceans. Also, whereas the workshop put emphasis on the nearshore coastal component of wave measurements, the participants also stressed the importance of open ocean surface waves measurement. Wave sensor technologies that are presently available for both environments include bottom-mounted pressure gauges, surface following buoys, wave staffs, acoustic Doppler current profilers, and shore-based remote sensing radar instruments. One of the recurring themes of workshop discussions was the dichotomous nature of wave data users. The two separate groups, open ocean wave data users and the nearshore/coastal wave data users, have different requirements. Generally, the user requirements increase both in spatial/temporal resolution and precision as one moves closer to shore. Most ocean going mariners are adequately satisfied with measurements of wave period and height and a wave general direction. However, most coastal and nearshore users require at least the first five Fourier parameters ("First 5"): wave energy and the first four directional Fourier coefficients. Furthermore, wave research scientists would like sensors capable of providing measurements beyond the first four Fourier coefficients. It was debated whether or not high precision wave observations in one location can take the place of a less precise measurement at a different location. This could be accomplished by advancing wave models and using wave models to extend data to nearby areas. However, the consensus was that models are no substitution for in situ wave data.[PDF contains 26 pages]

Biological Platforms for Environmental Sensor technologies and their uses as indicators of the marine environment, Seward, Alaska, September 19-21, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop entitled, "Biological Platforms as Sensor Technologies and their Use as Indicators for the Marine Environment" was held in Seward, Alaska, September 19 - 21,2007. The workshop was co-hosted by the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC). The workshop was attended by 25 participants representing a wide range of research scientists, managers, and manufacturers who develop and deploy sensory equipment using aquatic vertebrates as the mode of transport. Eight recommendations were made by participants at the conclusion of the workshop and are presented here without prioritization: 1. Encourage research toward development of energy scavenging devices of suitable sizes for use in remote sensing packages attached to marine animals. 2. Encourage funding sources for development of new sensor technologies and animal-borne tags. 3. Develop animal-borne environmental sensor platforms that offer more combined systems and improved data recovery methodologies, and expand the geographic scope of complementary fixed sensor arrays. 4. Engage the oceanographic community by: a. Offering a mini workshop at an AGU ocean sciences conference for people interested in developing an ocean carbon program that utilizes animal-borne sensor technology. b. Outreach to chemical oceanographers. 5. Min v2d6.sheepserver.net e and merge technologies from other disciplines that may be applied to marine sensors (e.g. biomedical field). 6. Encourage the NOAA Permitting Office to: a. Make a more predictable, reliable, and consistent permitting system for using animal platforms. b. Establish an evaluation process. c. Adhere to established standards. 7. Promote the expanded use of calibrated hydrophones as part of existing animal platforms. 8. Encourage the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) to promote animal tracking as effective samplers of the marine environment, and use of animals as ocean sensor technology platforms. [PDF contains 20 pages]

State of Technology for In Situ Measures of Salinity Using Conductive Temperature Sensors, Savannah, Georgia, December 3-5, 2007: workshop proceedings

This Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) workshop was convened to assess the availability and state of development of conductivity-temperature sensors that can meet the needs of coastal monitoring and management communities. Rased on the discussion, there are presently a number of commercial sensor options available, with a wide range of package configurations suitable for deployment in a range of coastal environments. However, some of the central questions posed in the workshop planning documents were left somewhat unresolved. The workshop description emphasized coastal management requirements and, in particular, whether less expensive, easily deployed, lower-resolution instruments might serve many management needs. While several participants expressed interest in this class of conductivity-temperature sensors, based on input from the manufacturers, it is not clear that simply relaxing the present level of resolution of existing instruments will result in instruments of significantly lower unit cost. Conductivity-temperature sensors are available near or under the $1,000 unit cost that was operationally defined at the workshop as a breakpoint for what might be considered to be a "low cost" sensor. For the manufacturers, a key consideration before undertaking the effort to develop lower cost sensors is whether there will be a significant market. In terms of defining "low cost," it was also emphasized that the "life cycle costs" for a given instrument must be considered (e.g., including personnel costs for deployment and maintenance). An adequate market survey to demonstrate likely applications and a viable market for lower cost sensors is needed. Another topic for the workshop was the introduction to the proposed ACT verification for conductivity-temperature sensors. Following a summary of the process as envisioned by ACT, initial feedback was solicited. Protocol development will be pursued further in a workshop involving ACT personnel and conductivity-temperature sensor manufacturers.[PDF contains 28 pages]

Recent Developments in In Situ Nutrient Sensors: applications and future directions, Savannah, Georgia, December 11-13, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a Workshop on "Recent Developments in In Situ Nutrient Sensors: Applications and Future Directions" from 11-13 December, 2006. The workshop was held at the Georgia Coastal Center in Savannah, Georgia, with local coordination provided by the ACT partner at the Skidaway Institute of Oceanography (University System of Georgia). Since its formation in 2000, ACT partners have been conducting workshops on various sensor technologies and supporting infrastructure for sensor systems. This was the first workshop to revisit a topic area addressed previously by ACT. An earlier workshop on the "State of Technology in the Development and Application of Nutrient Sensors" was held in Savannah, Georgia from 10-12 March, 2003. Participants in the first workshop included representatives from management, industry, and research sectors. Among the topics addressed at the first workshop were characteristics of "ideal" in situ nutrient sensors, particularly with regard to applications in coastal marine waters. In contrast, the present workshop focused on the existing commercial solutions. The in situ nutrient sensor technologies that appear likely to remain the dominant commercial options for the next decade are reagent-based in situ auto-analyzers (or fluidics systems) and an optical approach (spectrophotometric measurement of nitrate). The number of available commercial systems has expanded since 2003, and community support for expanded application and further development of these technologies appears warranted. Application in coastal observing systems, including freshwater as well as estuarine and marine environments, was a focus of the present workshop. This included discussion of possible refinements for sustained deployments as part of integrated instrument packages and means to better promote broader use of nutrient sensors in observing system and management applications. The present workshop also made a number of specific recommendations concerning plans for a demonstration of in situ nutrient sensor technologies that ACT will be conducting in coordination with sensor manufacturers.[PDF contains 40 pages]

Enabling Sensor* Interoperability, Portland, Maine, October 16-18 2006: workshop proceedings

The ACT workshop "Enabling Sensor Interoperability" addressed the need for protocols at the hardware, firmware, and higher levels in order to attain instrument interoperability within and between ocean observing systems. For the purpose of the workshop, participants spoke in tern of "instruments" rather than "sensors," defining an instrument as a device that contains one or more sensors or actuators and can convert signals from analog to digital. An increase in the abundance, variety, and complexity of instruments and observing systems suggests that effective standards would greatly improve "plug-and-work" capabilities. However, there are few standards or standards bodies that currently address instrument interoperability and configuration. Instrument interoperability issues span the length and breadth of these systems, from the measurement to the end user, including middleware services. There are three major components of instrument interoperability including physical, communication, and application/control layers. Participants identified the essential issues, current obstacles, and enabling technologies and standards, then came up with a series of short and long term solutions. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within 6 months of the release of this report are: A list of recommendations for enabling instrument interoperability should be put together and distributed to instrument developers. A recommendation for funding sources to achieve instrument interoperability should be drafted. Funding should be provided (for example through NOPP or an IOOS request for proposals) to develop and demonstrate instrument interoperability technologies involving instrument manufacturers, observing system operators, and cyberinfrastructure groups. Program managers should be identified and made to understand that milestones for achieving instrument interoperability include a) selection of a methodology for uniquely identifying an instrument, b) development of a common protocol for automatic instrument discovery, c) agreement on uniform methods for measurements, d) enablement of end user controlled power cycling, and e) implementation of a registry component for IDS and attributes. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within S years of the release of this report are: An ocean observing interoperability standards body should be established that addresses standards for a) metadata, b) commands, c) protocols, d) processes, e) exclusivity, and f) naming authorities.[PDF contains 48 pages]

Integrated Sensor Systems for Vessels of Opportunity, National Oceanographic Centre, Southampton, UK, October 10-12,2006 : workshop proceedings

The use of self-contained, low-maintenance sensor systems installed on commercial vessels is becoming an important monitoring and scientific tool in many regions around the world. These systems integrate data from meteorological and water quality sensors with GPS data into a data stream that is automatically transferred from ship to shore. To begin linking some of this developing expertise, the Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) and the European Coastal and Ocean Observing Technology (ECOOT) organized a workshop on this topic in Southampton, United Kingdom, October 10-12, 2006. The participants included technology users, technology developers, and shipping representatives. They collaborated to identify sensors currently employed on integrated systems, users of this data, limitations associated with these systems, and ways to overcome these limitations. The group also identified additional technologies that could be employed on future systems and examined whether standard architectures and data protocols for integrated systems should be established. Participants at the workshop defined 17 different parameters currently being measured by integrated systems. They identified that diverse user groups utilize information from these systems from resource management agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to local tourism groups and educational organizations. Among the limitations identified were instrument compatibility and interoperability, data quality control and quality assurance, and sensor calibration andlor maintenance frequency. Standardization of these integrated systems was viewed to be both advantageous and disadvantageous; while participants believed that standardization could be beneficial on many levels, they also felt that users may be hesitant to purchase a suite of instruments from a single manufacturer; and that a "plug and play" system including sensors from multiple manufactures may be difficult to achieve. A priority recommendation and conclusion for the general integrated sensor system community was to provide vessel operators with real-time access to relevant data (e.g., ambient temperature and salinity to increase efficiency of water treatment systems and meteorological data for increased vessel safety and operating efficiency) for broader system value. Simplified data displays are also required for education and public outreach/awareness. Other key recommendations were to encourage the use of integrated sensor packages within observing systems such as 100s and EuroGOOS, identify additional customers of sensor system data, and publish results of previous work in peer-reviewed journals to increase agency and scientific awareness and confidence in the technology. Priority recommendations and conclusions for ACT entailed highlighting the value of integrated sensor systems for vessels of opportunity through articles in the popular press, and marine science. [PDF contains 28 pages]

Evaluating approaches and technologies for monitoring organic contaminants in the aquatic environment, Ann Arbor, MI, July 21-23, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop on Evaluating Approaches and Technologies for Monitoring Organic Contaminants in the Aquatic Environment in Ann Arbor, MI on July 21-23, 2006. The primary objectives of this workshop were to: 1) identify the priority management information needs relative to organic contaminant loading; 2) explore the most appropriate approaches to estimating mass loading; and 3) evaluate the current status of the sensor technology. To meet these objectives, a mixture of leading research scientists, resource managers, and industry representatives were brought together for a focused two-day workshop. The workshop featured four plenary talks followed by breakout sessions in which arranged groups of participants where charged to respond to a series of focused discussion questions. At present, there are major concerns about the inadequacies in approaches and technologies for quantifying mass emissions and detection of organic contaminants for protecting municipal water supplies and receiving waters. Managers use estimates of land-based contaminant loadings to rivers, lakes, and oceans to assess relative risk among various contaminant sources, determine compliance with regulatory standards, and define progress in source reduction. However, accurately quantifying contaminant loading remains a major challenge. Loading occurs over a range of hydrologic conditions, requiring measurement technologies that can accommodate a broad range of ambient conditions. In addition, in situ chemical sensors that provide a means for acquiring continuous concentration measurements are still under development, particularly for organic contaminants that typically occur at low concentrations. Better approaches and strategies for estimating contaminant loading, including evaluations of both sampling design and sensor technologies, need to be identified. The following general recommendations were made in an effort to advance future organic contaminant monitoring: 1. Improve the understanding of material balance in aquatic systems and the relationship between potential surrogate measures (e.g., DOC, chlorophyll, particle size distribution) and target constituents. 2. Develop continuous real-time sensors to be used by managers as screening measures and triggers for more intensive monitoring. 3. Pursue surrogate measures and indicators of organic pollutant contamination, such as CDOM, turbidity, or non-equilibrium partitioning. 4. Develop continuous field-deployable sensors for PCBs, PAHs, pyrethroids, and emerging contaminants of concern and develop strategies that couple sampling approaches with tools that incorporate sensor synergy (i.e., measure appropriate surrogates along with the dissolved organics to allow full mass emission estimation).[PDF contains 20 pages]

Meteorological Buoy Sensor Workshop, Solomons, Maryland, April 19-21, 2006: workshop proceedings

The co-organized Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) and National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) Workshop "Meteorological Buoy Sensors Workshop" convened in Solomons, Maryland, April 19 to 21,2006, sponsored by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES) Chesapeake Bay Laboratory (CBL), an ACT partner institution. Participants from various sectors including resource managers and industry representatives collaborated to focus on technologies and sensors that measure the near surface variables of wind speed and direction, barometric pressure, humidity and air temperature. The vendor list was accordingly targeted at companies that produced these types of sensors. The managers represented a cross section of federal, regional and academic marine observing interests from around the country. Workshop discussions focused on the challenges associated with making marine meteorological observations in general and problems that were specific to a particular variable. Discussions also explored methods to mitigate these challenges through the adoption of best practices, improved technologies and increased standardization. Some of the key workshop outcomes and recommendations included: 0cean.US should establish a committee devoted to observations. The committee would have a key role in developing observing standards. The community should adopt the target cost, reliability and performance standards drafted for a typical meteorological package to be used by a regional observing system. A forum should be established to allow users and manufacturers to share best practices for the employment of marine meteorological sensors. The ACT website would host the forum. Federal activities that evaluate meteorological sensors should make their results publicly available. ACT should extend their evaluation process to include meteorological sensors. A follow on workshop should be conducted that covers the observing of meteorological variables not addressed by this workshop. (pdf contains 18 pages)

Optical Remote Sensing of Coastal Habitats, Moss Landing, California, 9-11 January, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop on Optical Remote Sensing of Coastal Habitats was convened January 9-11, 2006 at Moss Landing Marine Laboratories in Moss Landing, California, sponsored by the ACT West Coast regional partnership comprised of the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML) and the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI). The "Optical Remote Sensing of Coastal Habitats" (ORS) Workshop completes ACT'S Remote Sensing Technology series by building upon the success of ACT'S West Coast Regional Partner Workshop "Acoustic Remote Sensing Technologies for Coastal Imaging and Resource Assessment" (ACT 04-07). Drs. Paul Bissett of the Florida Environmental Research Institute (FERI) and Scott McClean of Satlantic, Inc. were the ORS workshop co-chairs. Invited participants were selected to provide a uniform representation of the academic researchers, private sector product developers, and existing and potential data product users from the resource management community to enable development of broad consensus opinions on the role of ORS technologies in coastal resource assessment and management. The workshop was organized to examine the current state of multi- and hyper-spectral imaging technologies with the intent to assess the current limits on their routine application for habitat classification and resource monitoring of coastal watersheds, nearshore shallow water environments, and adjacent optically deep waters. Breakout discussions focused on the capabilities, advantages ,and limitations of the different technologies (e.g., spectral & spatial resolution), as well as practical issues related to instrument and platform availability, reliability, hardware, software, and technical skill levels required to exploit the data products generated by these instruments. Specifically, the participants were charged to address the following: (1) Identify the types of ORS data products currently used for coastal resource assessment and how they can assist coastal managers in fulfilling their regulatory and management responsibilities; (2) Identify barriers and challenges to the application of ORS technologies in management and research activities; (3) Recommend a series of community actions to overcome identified barriers and challenges. Plenary presentations by Drs. Curtiss 0. Davis (Oregon State University) and Stephan Lataille (ITRES Research, Ltd.) provided background summaries on the varieties of ORS technologies available, deployment platform options, and tradeoffs for application of ORS data products with specific applications to the assessment of coastal zone water quality and habitat characterization. Dr. Jim Aiken (CASIX) described how multiscale ground-truth measurements were essential for developing robust assessment of modeled biogeochemical interpretations derived from optically based earth observation data sets. While continuing improvements in sensor spectral resolution, signal to noise and dynamic range coupled with sensor-integrated GPS, improved processing algorithms for georectification, and atmospheric correction have made ORS data products invaluable synoptic tools for oceanographic research, their adoption as management tools has lagged. Seth Blitch (Apalachicola National Estuarine Research Reserve) described the obvious needs for, yet substantial challenges hindering the adoption of advanced spectroscopic imaging data products to supplement the current dominance of digital ortho-quad imagery by the resource management community, especially when they impinge on regulatory issues. (pdf contains 32 pages)

Dissolved oxygen probes: making oxygen measurements routine like temperature, St Petersburg, Florida, January 4-6, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop "Making Oxygen Measurements Routine Like Temperature" was convened in St. Petersburg, Florida, January 4th - 6th, 2006. This event was sponsored by the University of South Florida (USF) College of Marine Science, an ACT partner institution and co-hosted by the Ocean Research Interactive Observatory Networks (ORION). Participants from researcldacademia, resource management, industry, and engineering sectors collaborated with the aim to foster ideas and information on how to make measuring dissolved oxygen a routine part of a coastal or open ocean observing system. Plans are in motion to develop large scale ocean observing systems as part of the US Integrated Ocean Observing System (100s; see http://ocean.us) and the NSF Ocean Observatory Initiative (001; see http://www.orionprogram.org/00I/default.hl). These systems will require biological and chemical sensors that can be deployed in large numbers, with high reliability, and for extended periods of time (years). It is also likely that the development cycle for new sensors is sufficiently long enough that completely new instruments, which operate on novel principles, cannot be developed before these complex observing systems will be deployed. The most likely path to development of robust, reliable, high endurance sensors in the near future is to move the current generation of sensors to a much greater degree of readiness. The ACT Oxygen Sensor Technology Evaluation demonstrated two important facts that are related to the need for sensors. There is a suite of commercially available sensors that can, in some circumstances, generate high quality data; however, the evaluation also showed that none of the sensors were able to generate high quality data in all circumstances for even one month time periods due to biofouling issues. Many groups are attempting to use oxygen sensors in large observing programs; however, there often seems to be limited communication between these groups and they often do not have access to sophisticated engineering resources. Instrument manufacturers also do not have sufficient resources to bring sensors, which are marketable, but of limited endurance or reliability, to a higher state of readiness. The goal of this ACT/ORION Oxygen Sensor Workshop was to bring together a group of experienced oceanographers who are now deploying oxygen sensors in extended arrays along with a core of experienced and interested academic and industrial engineers, and manufacturers. The intended direction for this workshop was for this group to exchange information accumulated through a variety of sensor deployments, examine failure mechanisms and explore a variety of potential solutions to these problems. One anticipated outcome was for there to be focused recommendations to funding agencies on development needs and potential solutions for 02 sensors. (pdf contains 19 pages)

Technologies for Measuring Currents in Coastal Environments, Portland, Maine, October 26-28, 2005:workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop entitled "Technologies for Measuring Currents in Coastal Environments" was held in Portland, Maine, October 26-28, 2005, with sponsorship by the Gulf of Maine Ocean Observing System (GoMOOS), an ACT partner organization. The primary goals of the event were to summarize recent trends in nearshore research and management applications for current meter technologies, identify how current meters can assist coastal managers to fulfill their regulatory and management objectives, and to recommend actions to overcome barriers to use of the technologies. The workshop was attended by 25 participants representing state and federal environmental management agencies, manufacturers of current meter technologies, and researchers from academic institutions and private industry. Common themes that were discussed during the workshop included 1) advantages and limitations of existing current measuring equipment, 2) reliability and ease of use with each instrument type, 3) data decoding and interpretation procedures, and 4) mechanisms to facilitate better training and guidance to a broad user group. Seven key recommendations, which were ranked in order of importance during the last day of the workshop are listed below. 1. Forums should be developed to facilitate the exchange of information among users and industry: a) On-line forums that not only provide information on specific instruments and technologies, but also provide an avenue for the exchange of user experiences with various instruments (i.e. problems encountered, cautions, tips, advantages, etc). (see References for manufacturer websites with links to application and technical forums at end of report) b) Regional training/meetings for operational managers to exchange ideas on methods for measuring currents and evaluating data. c) Organize mini-meetings or tutorial sessions within larger conference venues. 2. A committee of major stakeholders should be convened to develop common standards (similar to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) committee) that enable users to switch sensors without losing software or display capabilities. (pdf contains 28 pages)

Measures of turbidity in coastal waters, Coconut Island, Oahu, Hawaii, August 31 - September 2, 2005: workshop proceedings

A three day workshop on turbidity measurements was held at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology from August 3 1 to September 2, 2005. The workshop was attended by 30 participants from industry, coastal management agencies, and academic institutions. All groups recognized common issues regarding the definition of turbidity, limitations of consistent calibration, and the large variety of instrumentation that nominally measure "turbidity." The major recommendations, in order of importance for the coastal monitoring community are listed below: 1. The community of users in coastal ecosystems should tighten instrument design configurations to minimize inter-instrument variability, choosing a set of specifications that are best suited for coastal waters. The IS0 7027 design standard is not tight enough. Advice on these design criteria should be solicited through the ASTM as well as Federal and State regulatory agencies representing the majority of turbidity sensor end users. Parties interested in making turbidity measurements in coastal waters should develop design specifications for these water types rather than relying on design standards made for the analysis of drinking water. 2. The coastal observing groups should assemble a community database relating output of specific sensors to different environmental parameters, so that the entire community of users can benefit from shared information. This would include an unbiased, parallel study of different turbidity sensors, employing a variety of designs and configuration in the broadest range of coastal environments. 3. Turbidity should be used as a measure of relative change in water quality rather than an absolute measure of water quality. Thus, this is a recommendation for managers to develop their own local calibrations. See next recommendation. 4. If the end user specifically wants to use a turbidity sensor to measure a specific water quality parameter such as suspended particle concentration, then direct measurement of that water quality parameter is necessary to correlate with 'turbidity1 for a particular environment. These correlations, however, will be specific to the environment in which they are measured. This works because there are many environments in which water composition is relatively stable but varies in magnitude or concentration. (pdf contains 22 pages)