Engineering Papers⌕ Search

NASA NTRS · 20160000451

Introducing GFWED: The Global Fire Weather Database

Abstract

The Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index (FWI) System is the mostly widely used fire danger rating system in the world. We have developed a global database of daily FWI System calculations, beginning in 1980, called the Global Fire WEather Database (GFWED) gridded to a spatial resolution of 0.5 latitude by 2-3 longitude. Input weather data were obtained from the NASA Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA), and two different estimates of daily precipitation from rain gauges over land. FWI System Drought Code calculations from the gridded data sets were compared to calculations from individual weather station data for a representative set of 48 stations in North, Central and South America, Europe, Russia,Southeast Asia and Australia. Agreement between gridded calculations and the station-based calculations tended to be most different at low latitudes for strictly MERRA based calculations. Strong biases could be seen in either direction: MERRA DC over the Mato Grosso in Brazil reached unrealistically high values exceeding DCD1500 during the dry season but was too low over Southeast Asia during the dry season. These biases are consistent with those previously identified in MERRAs precipitation, and they reinforce the need to consider alternative sources of precipitation data. GFWED can be used for analyzing historical relationships between fire weather and fire activity at continental and global scales, in identifying large-scale atmosphereocean controls on fire weather, and calibration of FWI-based fire prediction models.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Field, R. D., Spessa, A. C., Aziz, N. A., Camia, A., Cantin, A., Carr, R., de Groot, W. J., Dowdy, A. J., Flannigan, M. D., Manomaiphiboon, K., Pappenberger, F., Tanpipat, V., Wang, X.. 2015-12-14. Introducing GFWED: The Global Fire Weather Database. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20160000451

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related reports

Evaluation of ERA-interim and MERRA Cloudiness in the Southern Oceans

The Southern Ocean cloud cover modeled by the Interim ECMWF Re-Analysis (ERA-Interim) and Modern- Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) reanalyses are compared against Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and Multiangle Imaging Spectroradiometer (MISR) observations. ERA-Interim monthly mean cloud amounts match the observations within 5%, while MERRA significantly underestimates the cloud amount. For a compositing analysis of clouds in warm season extratropical cyclones, both reanalyses show a low bias in cloud cover. They display a larger bias to the west of the cyclones in the region of subsidence behind the cold fronts. This low bias is larger for MERRA than for ERA-Interim. Both MODIS and MISR retrievals indicate that the clouds in this sector are at a low altitude, often composed of liquid, and of a broken nature. The combined CloudSat-Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) cloud profiles confirm these passive observations, but they also reveal that low-level clouds in other parts of the cyclones are also not properly represented in the reanalyses. The two reanalyses are in fairly good agreement for the dynamic and thermodynamic characteristics of the cyclones, suggesting that the cloud, convection, or boundary layer schemes are the problem instead. An examination of the lower-tropospheric stability distribution in the cyclones from both reanalyses suggests that the parameterization of shallow cumulus clouds may contribute in a large part to the problem. However, the differences in the cloud schemes and in particular in the precipitation processes, which may also contribute, cannot be excluded.

bias↗

Direct Top-down Estimates of Biomass Burning CO Emissions Using TES and MOPITT Versus Bottom-up GFED Inventory

In this study, we utilize near-simultaneous observations from two sets of multiple satellite sensors to segregate Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer (TES) and Measurements of Pollution in the Troposphere (MOPITT) CO observations over active fire sources from those made over clear background. Hence, we obtain direct estimates of biomass burning CO emissions without invoking inverse modeling as in traditional top-down methods. We find considerable differences between Global Fire Emissions Database (GFED) versions 2.1 and 3.1 and satellite-based emission estimates in many regions. Both inventories appear to greatly underestimate South and Southeast Asia emissions, for example. On global scales, however, CO emissions in both inventories and in the MOPITT-based analysis agree reasonably well, with the largest bias (30%) found in the Northern Hemisphere spring. In the Southern Hemisphere, there is a one-month shift between the GFED and MOPITT-based fire emissions peak. Afternoon tropical fire emissions retrieved from TES are about two times higher than the morning MOPITT retrievals. This appears to be both a real difference due to the diurnal fire activity variations, and a bias due to the scarcity of TES data.

bias↗