06.07.2013 Views

2011 - Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences ...

2011 - Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences ...

2011 - Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

of the complex processes not available from other field program<br />

data. The analysis provides a basis <strong>for</strong> future test<strong>in</strong>g of<br />

the generality of the results, and contributes to better physical<br />

understand<strong>in</strong>g of multi-year analyses of melt-season<br />

trends from less extensive data sets. A paper describ<strong>in</strong>g the<br />

generality of the SHEBA results us<strong>in</strong>g the ASCOS observations<br />

and the Soviet data is <strong>in</strong> preparation.<br />

Milestone 2. Us<strong>in</strong>g a Weather <strong>Research</strong> and Forecast<strong>in</strong>g<br />

(WRF) or 1-D model, simulate select cases from SHEBA,<br />

ASCOS, AMISA and other field programs to a) evaluate the<br />

model representation of the observed physical processes<br />

and b) suggest improvements to related parameterizations<br />

when possible. Improvements to the parameterization of<br />

turbulent fluxes and surface albedo will be tried.<br />

Simulations of a spr<strong>in</strong>gtime Arctic stratocumulus cloud<br />

over sea ice near Barrow dur<strong>in</strong>g the 2008 Indirect and<br />

Semi-Direct Aerosol Campaign (ISDAC) campaign were<br />

done us<strong>in</strong>g a large-eddy simulation configuration of the<br />

WRF model. Diagnostics of the dynamic and thermodynamic<br />

<strong>in</strong>teractions with<strong>in</strong> the cloud and the surround<strong>in</strong>g<br />

environment were carried out to understand the processes<br />

by which these types of clouds are able to ma<strong>in</strong>ta<strong>in</strong><br />

themselves. Features found to be key <strong>for</strong> this ma<strong>in</strong>tenance<br />

<strong>in</strong>clude a shallow upper entra<strong>in</strong>ment zone act<strong>in</strong>g as a<br />

moisture source <strong>for</strong> the cloud from a humidity <strong>in</strong>version<br />

above cloud top; mall-scale cloud-top turbulence facilitat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

this moisture transport; and larger-scale convective cells<br />

encompass<strong>in</strong>g the cloud and a sub-cloud region driven by<br />

cloud-top cool<strong>in</strong>g. The moisture <strong>in</strong>version co<strong>in</strong>cid<strong>in</strong>g with<br />

the temperature <strong>in</strong>version at cloud top appears to be a feature<br />

unique to Arctic stratocumulus compared to subtropical<br />

ones. Moisture and energy transport from the surface<br />

was found to have m<strong>in</strong>imal impact on the cloud <strong>for</strong>mation<br />

and ma<strong>in</strong>tenance. A paper describ<strong>in</strong>g the results has been<br />

submitted. This milestone is also enhanced by contributions<br />

to an <strong>in</strong>ternationally collaborative paper validat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

surface energy fluxes <strong>in</strong> a regional climate model over East<br />

Antarctica.<br />

Milestone 3. In collaboration with E. Andreas, use the SURFA<br />

global Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) surface flux<br />

archive to exam<strong>in</strong>e the Arctic surface energy budget and its<br />

sensitivity to surface flux parameterizations<br />

The Surface Flux Analysis (SURFA) data set was not<br />

used, and hence the sensitivity of the modeled surface energy<br />

budgets to surface flux parameterizations was not studied.<br />

However, work validat<strong>in</strong>g the surface energy fluxes <strong>in</strong> four<br />

reanalysis data sets over Arctic sea ice was completed, and<br />

this work revealed significant sensitivity of the various terms<br />

of the surface energy budget to the representation of cloud,<br />

surface and turbulent processes. In this study, meteorological<br />

parameters, turbulent fluxes, cloud properties, radiative fluxes<br />

and the surface energy budget from ERA-40 (the European<br />

Centre <strong>for</strong> Medium-Range Weather Forecasts [ECMWF] 40-<br />

Year Re-analysis), ERA-Interim, National Centers <strong>for</strong> <strong>Environmental</strong><br />

Predication/Department of Energy (NCEP/DOE) and<br />

JRA-25 (Japanese 25-year reanalysis) reanalyses are compared<br />

to observations from the Surface Heat Budget of the Arctic<br />

Ocean (SHEBA), one of very few year-long measurement<br />

programs on the Arctic sea ice measur<strong>in</strong>g surface fluxes and<br />

cloud properties. Seven-day runn<strong>in</strong>g means of reanalysis and<br />

observational data were compared to understand how well<br />

the reanalyses represent the basic meteorological parameters<br />

and the processes produc<strong>in</strong>g the energy fluxes to the sea ice.<br />

All reanalyses represent basic atmospheric state variables well,<br />

with annual mean errors of 3.3-3.6% <strong>for</strong> ECMWF products<br />

and 5.3-5.4% <strong>for</strong> JRA-25 and NCEP/DOE. However, they have<br />

trouble simulat<strong>in</strong>g turbulent and radiative fluxes. Individual<br />

flux terms have larger biases than net components, <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g<br />

the presence of compensat<strong>in</strong>g errors (i.e., net fluxes are realistic<br />

<strong>for</strong> the wrong reasons). RMS (root-mean-square) errors of<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual fluxes are 5.7-7.1 Wm-2 <strong>for</strong> the NCEP products,<br />

13.6 Wm-2 <strong>for</strong> JRA-25 and 21.5 W m-2 <strong>for</strong> NCEP/DOE. All reanalyses<br />

produce negative mean biases <strong>for</strong> the annual surface<br />

energy balance, with three of the reanalyses <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g a net<br />

ga<strong>in</strong> of surface sea ice dur<strong>in</strong>g a year <strong>for</strong> which observations<br />

showed a loss of 76 cm of ice. Hence, improved representations<br />

are needed of relationships between basic meteorological<br />

parameters, cloud properties and <strong>in</strong>dividual components <strong>in</strong><br />

the surface energy budget. Dur<strong>in</strong>g 2010-<strong>2011</strong>, these results<br />

are described <strong>in</strong> the University of Colorado master’s thesis of<br />

Cassandra Wheeler, and a manuscript describ<strong>in</strong>g these results<br />

is be<strong>in</strong>g prepared <strong>for</strong> publication.<br />

CSV-05 Climate <strong>Research</strong><br />

Database Development<br />

n NSIDC-01 Digitization of Analog Cryospheric Data Under<br />

the Climate Database Modernization Program<br />

n NSIDC-03 World Data Center <strong>for</strong> Glaciology, Boulder—Current<br />

Programs<br />

NSIDC-01DigitizationofAnalogCryosphericData<br />

undertheClimateDatabaseModernizationProgram<br />

FEDERAL LEAD: CARL GROENEVELD<br />

CIRES LEAD: JANE BEITLER<br />

NOAA Goal 2: Climate<br />

Project Goal: Scan and make available onl<strong>in</strong>e data from<br />

NSIDC’s analog collections so that it is more easily located,<br />

browsed and obta<strong>in</strong>ed by users.<br />

Clockwise, from top left:<br />

Bird’s-eye aerial ice reconnaissance<br />

imagery taken <strong>in</strong> 1973;<br />

Wilkes Station, Antarctica,<br />

1958, as photographed by<br />

John T. Holl<strong>in</strong> dur<strong>in</strong>g the International<br />

Geophysical Year;<br />

Muir Glacier, as photographed<br />

by Frank LaRoche <strong>in</strong> 1893.<br />

From the Glacier Photograph<br />

Collection, National Snow<br />

and Ice Data Center.<br />

CIRES Annual Report <strong>2011</strong> 119

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!