Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ERA5”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

An Investigation on Seasonal and Diurnal Cycles of TOA Shortwave Radiations from DSCOVR/EPIC, CERES, MERRA-2, and ERA5

Reflected shortwave (SW) solar radiations at the top of atmosphere from Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES), Modern Era-Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications version 2 (MERRA-2), and ECMWF Reanalysis 5th Generation (ERA5) are examined to better under-stand their differences in spatial and temporal variations (seasonal and diurnal cycle time-scale) with respect to the observations from the Earth Polychromatic Imaging Camera (EPIC) on Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite. Comparisons between two reanalyses (MERRA-2 and ERA5) and EPIC reveal that MERRA-2 has a generally larger deviation from EPIC than ERA5, in terms of the SW radiance and diurnal variability in all seasons, which can be attributed to larger cloud biases in MERRA-2. MERRA-2 produces more ice/liquid water content than ERA5 over the tropical warm pool, leading to positive SW biases in cloud and radiance, while both reanalyses underestimate the observed SW radiance from EPIC in the stratus-topped region off the western coast of US/Mexico in the boreal summer. Himalaya/Tibet region in the boreal spring/summer and the midlatitude Southern Hemisphere in the boreal winter are the regions where MERRA-2 and ERA5 deviate largely from EPIC but their deviations have the opposite sign. Vertical structures of cloud ice/liquid water content explain reasonably well these contrasting differences between the two reanalyses. As two independent observa-ions, CERES and EPIC agree well with each other in terms of the SW radiance maps, showing 2-3% mean absolute errors over the tropical-midlatitudes. The CERES-EPIC consistency further confirms that the reanalyses still have challenges in representing the SW flux and its global distribution. In the CERES-EPIC observation differences, CERES slightly overestimates the diurnal cycle (as a function of local solar time) of the observed EPIC irradiance in the morning and underestimates in the after-noon, while the opposite is the case in the reanalyses.

Reflected shortwave radiance↗
NASA NTRS2021

Evaluation of CloudSat Radiative Kernels Using ARM and CERES Observations and ERA5 Reanalysis

Despite the widespread use of the radiative kernel technique for studying radiative feedbacks and radiative forcings, there has not been any systematic, observation-based validation of the radiative kernel method. Here, we utilize observed and reanalyzed radiative fluxes and atmospheric profiles from the Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) program and ERA5 reanalysis to assess a set of observation-based radiative kernels from CloudSat for six ARM sites. The CloudSat radiative kernels, convoluted with the ERA5 state variables, can almost perfectly reconstruct the monthly anomalies of shortwave (SW) and longwave (LW) radiative fluxes in ERA5 at the surface (SFC) and top-of atmosphere (TOA) with correlations significantly being greater than 0.95. The biases of kernel-estimated flux anomalies calculated using the ARM-observed state variables can be more than twice as large when compared with the ARM-observed surface flux anomalies and Clouds and Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) observed anomalies at the TOA. Generally, clouds contribute to most (>60%) of the variance of flux anomalies at Southern Great Plain (SGP), Tropical Western Pacific (TWP), and Eastern North Atlantic (ENA), and surface albedo dominates (>69%) the variance of SW flux anomalies at North Slope of Alaska (NSA). The radiative kernels exhibit the lowest correlation (r~[0.55,0.85]) when reconstructing SFC LW flux anomalies at SGP, TWP, and ENA, whose biases are related to the possibility that the kernels may not fully capture the characteristics 47 associated with MJO and ENSO at TWP and the presence of clouds at SGP and ENA.

Radiative kernels↗
NASA NTRS2021

On Assessing ERA5 and MERRA2 Representations of Cold-Air Outbreaks Across the Gulf Stream

The warm Gulf Stream sea surface temperatures (SSTs) strongly impact the evolution of winter clouds behind atmospheric cold fronts. Such cloud evolution remains challenging to model. The Gulf Stream is too wide within the ERA5 and MERRA2 reanalyses, affecting the turbulent surface fluxes. Known problems within the ERA5 boundary layer (too-dry and too-cool with too strong westerlies), ascertained primarily from ACTIVATE 2020 campaign aircraft dropsondes and secondarily from older buoy measurements, reinforce surface flux biases. In contrast, MERRA2 winter surface winds and air-sea temperature/humidity differences are slightly too weak, producing surface fluxes that are too low. Reanalyses boundary layer heights in the strongly-forced winter cold-air-outbreak regime are realistic, whereas late-summer quiescent stable boundary layers are too shallow. Nevertheless, the reanalysis biases are small, and reanalyses adequately support their use for initializing higher-resolution cloud process modeling studies of cold-air outbreaks.

Gulf stream↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Regional Variations in the Diurnal Cycle of Tropical Precipitation as Represented by IMERG, ERA5, and Spaceborne Ku Radar

The diurnal cycle of precipitation is highly regional and is typically a product of multiple competing effects that can be highly localized. The diurnal cycle in high precipitation regions such as the Amazon and the Maritime Continent are of particular interest, especially due to the complex coastal effects which take place over the Maritime Continent. The high spatial and temporal resolution provided by the Integrated Multi-satellitE Retrievals for Global Precipitation Measurement (GPM) mission (IMERG) dataset, is used in this study to examine the fine-scale features of the diurnal cycle in these regions. Using an 18-year (2000 – 2018) record of IMERG precipitation observations, diurnal and semidiurnal phase and amplitude are calculated using a fast Fourier transform (FFT) method on precipitation averaged for each half-hour of the day at 0.1°x0.1° spatial resolution. We first introduce an objective method of identifying locations where the diurnal signals are robust and strong. Clear patterns of precipitation phase propagation with distance from shore are shown over both regions, with the diurnal phase and amplitude exhibiting a strong dependence on the distance from the coastline. Semidiurnal cycles are generally weaker than the diurnal cycle except in some isolated locations. Similar analysis is also conducted on the ERA5 reanalysis data in order to evaluate the model’s representation of the precipitation diurnal cycle. The model captures the broad scale patterns of diurnal variability but does not capture all the fine scale patterns nor the exact timing that is observed by IMERG. Comparisons are also made to a long record Ku radar dataset created by combining Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) and GPM observations, thus providing an additional point of comparison for the timing of the ERA5 precipitation peak, since the timing precipitation can be different, even in between observational datasets.

L J Hayden↗
NASA NTRS2019

Cloud Influence on ERA5 and AMPS Surface Downwelling Longwave Radiation Biases in West Antarctica

The surface downwelling longwave radiation component (LW[down arrow]) is crucial for the determination of the surface energy budget and has significant implications for the resilience of ice surfaces in the polar regions. Accurate model evaluation of this radiation component requires knowledge about the phase, vertical distribution, and associated temperature of water in the atmosphere, all of which control the LW[down arrow] signal measured at the surface. In this study, we examine the LW[down arrow] model errors found in the Antarctic Mesoscale Prediction System (AMPS) operational forecast model and the ERA5 reanalysis model relative to observations from the AWARE campaign at McMurdo Station and the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS) Divide. The errors are calculated separately for observed clear-sky conditions, ice-cloud occurrences, and liquid-bearing cloud layer (LBCL) occurrences. The analysis results show a tendency in both models at each site to underestimate the LW[down arrow] during clear sky conditions, high error variability (standard deviations > 20 W/m[exp2]) during any type of cloud occurrence, and negative LW biases when LBCLs are observed (bias magnitudes > 15 W/m[exp2] in tenuous LBCL cases; > 43 W/m[exp2] in optically thick/opaque LBCLs instances). We suggest that a generally dry and liquid-deficient atmosphere responsible for the identified LW[down arrow] biases in both models is the result of excessive ice formation and growth, which could stem from model initial and lateral boundary conditions, microphysics scheme, aerosol representation, and/or limited vertical resolution.

Israel Silber↗
NASA NTRS2023

Comment on “Advanced Testing of Low, Medium, and High ECS CMIP6 GCM Simulations Versus ERA5-T2m” by N. Scafetta (2022)

Scafetta (2022, https://doi.org/10.1029/2022gl097716) purports to test Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) climate models through a comparison of temperature changes over three decades. Unfortunately, the paper contains numerous conceptual and statistical errors that undermine all of the conclusions. First, no uncertainty is given for the observational temperature difference, making it impossible to assess compatibility with any model result. Second, the CMIP6 data are the ensemble means for each model, but the metric being tested is sensitive to the internal variability and so the full ensemble for each model must be used. When this is corrected, the conclusion that “all models with ECS > 3.0°C overestimate the observed global surface warming” is not sustained. Third, the statistical test in Section 2 would reject all models even in a perfect model setup given sufficient ensemble members, thus the second conclusion “that spatial t-statistics rejects the data-model agreement” is also not sustainable.

CMIP6↗
NASA NTRS2022

Evaluating Twenty-Year Trends in Earth’s Energy Flows from Observations and Reanalyses

Satellite, reanalysis, and ocean in situ data are analyzed to evaluate regional, hemispheric and global mean trends in Earth’s energy fluxes during the first twenty years of the 21st century. Regional trends in net top-of-atmosphere (TOA) radiation from the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES), ECMWF Reanalysis 5 (ERA5), and a model similar to ERA5 with prescribed sea surface temperature (SST) and sea ice differ markedly, particularly over the Eastern Pacific Ocean, where CERES observes large positive trends. Hemispheric and global mean net TOA flux trends for the two reanalyses are smaller than CERES, and their climatological means are half those of CERES in the southern hemisphere (SH) and more than nine times larger in the northern hemisphere (NH). The regional trend pattern of the divergence of total atmospheric energy transport (TEDIV) over ocean determined using ERA5 analyzed fields is similar to that inferred from the difference between TOA and surface fluxes from ERA5 short-term forecasts. There is also agreement in the trend pattern over ocean for surface fluxes inferred as a residual between CERES net TOA flux and ERA5 analysis TEDIV and surface fluxes obtained directly from ERA5 forecasts. Robust trends are observed over the Gulf Stream associated with enhanced surface-to-atmosphere transfer of heat. Within the ocean, larger trends in ocean heating rate are found in the NH than the SH after 2005, but the magnitude of the trend varies greatly among datasets.

Norman G Loeb↗
NASA NTRS2021

Evaluation of 18 Satellite- and Model-Based Soil Moisture Products Using in Situ Measurements From 826 Sensors

Information about the spatiotemporal variability of soil moisture is critical for many purposes, including monitoring of hydrologic extremes, irrigation scheduling, and prediction of agricultural yields. We evaluated the temporal dynamics of 18 state-of-the-art (quasi-)global near-surface soil moisture products, including six based on satellite retrievals, six based on models without satellite data assimilation (referred to hereafter as “open-loop” models), and six based on models that assimilate satellite soil moisture or brightness temperature data. Seven of the products are introduced for the first time in this study: one multi-sensor merged satellite product called MeMo (Merged soil Moisture) and six estimates from the HBV (Hydrologiska Byråns Vattenbalansavdelning) model with three precipitation inputs (ERA5, IMERG, and MSWEP) with and without assimilation of SMAPL3E satellite retrievals, respectively. As reference, we used in situ soil moisture measurements between 2015 and 2019 at 5 cm depth from 826 sensors, located primarily in the USA and Europe. The 3-hourly Pearson correlation (R) was chosen as the primary performance metric. We found that application of the Soil Wetness Index (SWI) smoothing filter resulted in improved performance for all satellite products. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the four single-sensor satellite products was SMAPL3E SWI , SMOS SWI , AMSR2 SWI , and ASCAT SWI , with the L-band-based SMAPL3E SWI (median R of 0.72) outperforming the others at 50 % of the sites. Among the two multi-sensor satellite products (MeMo and ESA-CCI SWI ), MeMo performed better on average (median R of 0.72 versus 0.67), probably due to the inclusion of SMAPL3E SWI . The best-to-worst performance ranking of the six open-loop models was HBV-MSWEP, HBV-ERA5, ERA5-Land, HBV-IMERG, VIC-PGF, and GLDAS-Noah. This ranking largely reflects the quality of the precipitation forcing. HBV-MSWEP (median R of 0.78) performed best not just among the open-loop models but among all products. The calibration of HBV improved the median R by +0.12 on average compared to random parameters, highlighting the importance of model calibration. The best-to-worst performance ranking of the six models with satellite data assimilation was HBV-MSWEP+SMAPL3E, HBV-ERA5+SMAPL3E, GLEAM, SMAPL4, HBV-IMERG+SMAPL3E, and ERA5. The assimilation of SMAPL3E retrievals into HBV-IMERG improved the median R by +0.06, suggesting that data assimilation yields significant benefits at the global scale.

Hylke E. Beck↗
NASA NTRS2020

Differences in Tropical High Clouds Among Reanalyses: Origins and Radiative Impacts

We examine differences among reanalysis highcloud products in the tropics, assess the impacts of these differences on radiation budgets at the top of the atmosphere and within the tropical upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS), and discuss their possible origins in the context of the reanalysis models. We focus on the ERA5 (fifthgeneration European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts – ECMWF – reanalysis), ERA-Interim (ECMWF Interim Reanalysis), JRA-55 (Japanese 55-year Reanalysis), MERRA-2 (Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, Version 2), and CFSR/CFSv2 (Climate Forecast System Reanalysis/Climate Forecast System Version 2) reanalyses. As a general rule, JRA-55 produces the smallest tropical high-cloud fractions and cloud water contents among the reanalyses, while MERRA-2 produces the largest. Accordingly, long-wave cloud radiative effects are relatively weak in JRA-55 and relatively strong in MERRA-2. Only MERRA-2 and ERA5 among the reanalyses produce tropical-mean values of outgoing long-wave radiation (OLR) close to those observed, but ERA5 tends to underestimate cloud effects, while MERRA-2 tends to overestimate variability. ERA5 also produces distributions of longwave, short-wave, and total cloud radiative effects at the top of the atmosphere that are very consistent with those observed. The other reanalyses all exhibit substantial biases in at least one of these metrics, although compensation between the long-wave and short-wave effects helps to constrain biases in the total cloud radiative effect for most reanalyses. The vertical distribution of cloud water content emerges as a key difference between ERA-Interim and other reanalyses. Whereas ERA-Interim shows a monotonic decrease of cloud water content with increasing height, the other reanalyses all produce distinct anvil layers. The latter is in better agreement with observations and yields very different profiles of radiative heating in the UTLS. For example, whereas the altitude of the level of zero net radiative heating tends to be lower in convective regions than in the rest of the tropics in ERAInterim, the opposite is true for the other four reanalyses. Differences in cloud water content also help to explain systematic differences in radiative heating in the tropical lower stratosphere among the reanalyses. We discuss several ways in which aspects of the cloud and convection schemes impact the tropical environment. Discrepancies in the vertical profiles of temperature and specific humidity in convective regions are particularly noteworthy, as these variables are directly constrained by data assimilation, are widely used, and feed back to convective behaviour through their relationships with thermodynamic stability.

High Clouds↗
NASA NTRS2019

Daily evaluation of 26 precipitation datasets using Stage-IV gauge-radar data for the CONUS

New precipitation (P) datasets are released regularly, following innovations in weather forecasting models, satellite retrieval methods, and multi-source merging techniques. Using the conterminous US as a case study, we evaluated the performance of 26 gridded (sub-)daily P datasets to obtain insight into the merit of these innovations. The evaluation was performed at a daily timescale for the period 2008–2017 using the Kling–Gupta efficiency (KGE), a performance metric combining correlation, bias, and variability. As a reference, we used the high-resolution (4 km) Stage-IV gauge-radar P dataset. Among the three KGE components, the P datasets performed worst overall in terms of correlation (related to event identification). In terms of improving KGE scores for these datasets, improved P totals (affecting the bias score) and improved distribution of P intensity (affecting the variability score) are of secondary importance. Among the 11 gauge-corrected P datasets, the best overall performance was obtained by MSWEP V2.2, underscoring the importance of applying daily gauge corrections and accounting for gauge reporting times. Several uncorrected P datasets outperformed gauge-corrected ones. Among the 15 uncorrected P datasets, the best performance was obtained by the ERA5-HRES fourth-generation reanalysis, reflecting the significant advances in earth system modeling during the last decade. The (re)analyses generally performed better in winter than in summer, while the opposite was the case for the satellite-based datasets. IMERGHH V05 performed substantially better than TMPA-3B42RT V7, attributable to the many improvements implemented in the IMERG satellite P retrieval algorithm. IMERGHH V05 outperformed ERA5-HRES in regions dominated by convective storms, while the opposite was observed in regions of complex terrain. The ERA5-EDA ensemble average exhibited higher correlations than the ERA5-HRES deterministic run, highlighting the value of ensemble modeling. The WRF regional convection-permitting climate model showed considerably more accurate P totals over the mountainous west and performed best among the uncorrected datasets in terms of variability, suggesting there is merit in using high-resolution models to obtain climatological P statistics. Our findings provide some guidance to choose the most suitable P dataset for a particular application.

Hylke E. Beck↗
NASA NTRS2021

Evaluation of Global Surface Water Temperature Data Sets for use in Passive Remote Sensing of Soil Moisture

Inland open water bodies often pose a systematic error source in the passive remote sensing retrievals of soil moisture. Water temperature is a necessary variable used to compute water emissions that is required to be subtracted from satellite observation to yield actual emissions from the land portion, which in turn generates accurate soil moisture retrievals. Therefore, overestimation of soil moisture can often be corrected using concurrent water temperature data in the overall mitigation procedure. In recent years, several data sets of lake water temperature have become available, but their specifications and accuracy have rarely been investigated in the context of passive soil moisture remote sensing on a global scale. For this reason, three lake temperature products were evaluated against in-situ measurements from 2007 to 2011. The data sets include the lake surface water temperature (LSWT) from Global Observatory of Lake Responses to Environmental Change (GloboLakes), the Copernicus Global Land Operations Cryosphere and Water (C-GLOPS), as well as the lake mix-layer temperature (LMLT) from the European Centers for Medium-Range Weather Forecast (ECMWF) ERA5 Land Reanalysis. GloboLakes, C-GLOPS, and ERA5 Land have overall comparable performance with Pearson correlations (R) of 0.87, 0.92 and 0.88 in comparison with in-situ measurements. LSWT products exhibit negative median biases of −0.27 K (GloboLakes) and −0.31 K (C-GLOPS), whereas the median bias of LMLT is 1.56 K. When mapped from their respective native resolutions to a common 9 km Equal-Area Scalable Earth (EASE) Grid 2.0 projection, similar relative performance was observed. LMLT and LSWT data are closer in performance over the 9 km grid cells that exhibit a small range of lake cover fractions (0.05–0.5). Despite comparable relative performance, ERA5 Land shows great advantages in spatial coverage and temporal resolution. In summary, an integrated evaluation on data accuracy, long-term availability, global coverage, temporal resolution, and regular forward processing with modest data latency led us to conclude that LMLT from the ERA5 Land Reanalysis product represents the most optimal path for use in the development of a long-term soil moisture product.

Runze Zhang↗
NASA NTRS2020

Basin-Scale River Runoff Estimation from GRACE Gravity Satellites, Climate Models and In Situ Observations: a Case Study in the Amazon Basin

River runoff is estimated as a water budget residual using Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) terrestrial water storage time series, ERA5 reanalysis data, and precipitation observations for January 2003 through December 2015 for the Obidos upstream drainage basin and for the entire Amazon basin. Estimated runoff based on the water budget agrees remarkably well with in situgauge observations at Obidos, especially at seasonal time scales, with nearly perfect phase agreementbut slightly larger seasonal amplitude. The discrepancy in the seasonal amplitude maybe attributed to underestimation of river gauge runoff during the wet season when water overflows the riverbanks. The ERA5 model appears to overestimate long-term mean evapotranspiration in the Amazon by ~2 cm/monthb ased on comparisons with precipitation and runoff observations. Using precipitation data based on satellites and gauge observations relative to gauge observations alone improved agreement between water budget runoff estimates and in situ runoff observations. Seasonal variations in ERA5 simulated runoff are about twice as large as those from in situobservations and show a large phase lag as well. Water budget based runoff for the entire Amazon (~ 7,200 km3averaged 29over the 13 yr period) is significantly larger than observed runoff (~5,700 km3) at notably larger than previous estimates for the entire Amazon. These differences may be partly related to submarine runoff from the Amazon basin that cannot be captured by surface gauges.

Jianli Chen↗
NASA NTRS2021

Large-Eddy Simulations of Marine Boundary-Layer Clouds Associated With Cold Air Outbreaks During the Activate Campaign – Part 1: Case Setup and Sensitivities to Large-Scale Forcings

Large-eddy simulation (LES) is able to capture key boundary-layer (BL) turbulence and cloud processes. Yet, large-scale forcing and surface turbulent fluxes of sensible and latent heat are often poorly prescribed for LES simulations. We derive these quantities from measurements and reanalysis obtained for two cold air outbreak (CAO) events during Phase I of the Aerosol Cloud meTeorology Interactions oVer the western ATlantic Experiment (ACTIVATE) in February-March 2020. We study the two contrasting CAO cases by performing LES and test the sensitivity of BL structure and clouds to large-scale forcings and turbulent heat fluxes. Profiles of atmospheric state and large-scale divergence and surface turbulent heat fluxes obtained from the reanalysis data ERA5 agree reasonablywell with those derived fromACTIVATE field measurements for both cases at the sampling time and location. Therefore, we adopt the time evolving heat fluxes, wind and advective tendencies profiles from ERA5 reanalysis data to drive the LES.We find that large-scale thermodynamic advective tendencies and wind relaxations are important for the LES to capture the evolving observed BL meteorological states characterized by the hourly ERA5 reanalysis data and validated by the observations. We show that the divergence (or vertical velocity) is important in regulating the BL growth driven by surface heat fluxes in LES simulations. The evolution of liquid water path is largely affected by the evolution of surface heat fluxes. The liquid water path imulated in LES agrees reasonably well with the ACTIVATE measurements. This study paves the path to investigate aerosol-cloud-meteorology interactions using LES informed and evaluated by ACTIVATE field measurements.

Large-eddy simulation↗
NASA NTRS2023

A Surface Radiation Balance Data Set from Siple Dome in West Antarctica for Atmospheric and Climate Model Evaluation

A field campaign at Siple Dome in West Antarctica during the austral summer 2019-2020 offers an opportunity to evaluate climate model performance, particularly cloud microphysical simulation. Over Antarctic ice sheets and ice shelves, clouds are a major regulator of the surface energy balance, and in the warm season their presence occasionally induces surface melt that can gradually weaken an ice shelf structure. This dataset from Siple Dome, obtained using transportable and solar-poweredequipment, includes surface energy balance measurements, meteorology and cloud remote sensing. To demonstrate how these data can be used to evaluate model performance, comparisons are made with meteorological reanalysis known to give generally good performance over Antarctica (ERA5). Surface albedo measurements show expected variability with observed cloud amount, and can be used to evaluate a model's snowpack parameterization. One case study discussed involves a squall with northerly winds, during which ERA5 fails to produce cloud cover throughout one of the days. A second case study illustrates how shortwave spectroradiometer measurements that encompass the 1.6-micron atmospheric window reveal cloud phase transitions associated with cloud lifecycle. Here, continuously precipitating mixed-phase clouds become mainly liquid water clouds from local morning through the afternoon, not reproduced by ERA5. We challenge researchers to run their various regional or global models in a manner that has the large-scale meteorology follow the conditions of this field campaign, compare cloud and radiation simulations with this Siple Dome dataset, and potentially investigate why cloud microphysical simulations or other model components might produce discrepancies with these observations.

cloud remote sensing↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementation of A New Microwave Scattering Database and A Forward Model for Active Microwave Sensors in CRTM

Radiative transfer models are extensively used for the assimilation of satellite observations into NWP models as well as retrieving geophysical products from satellite measurements. CRTM is a community model developed by NOAA JCSDA and widely used for different purposes requiring RT calculations. CRTM requires bulk scattering lookup tables in order to perform all-sky RT calculations. However, the current CRTM lookup tables for microwave frequencies were generated based on the Mie theory by assuming spherical frozen particles. The scattering lookup tables generated using the DDA technique has shown to largely improve the RT scattering calculations in the MW region. This presentation targets (i) the implementation and validation of a DDA database that was originally developed for the ARTS RT model into CRTM, and (ii) developing the CRTM active sensor module that takes advantage of the backscattering coefficients computed using the DDA method. The DDA database only provides single scattering properties of different habits, while CRTM requires bulk scattering properties. The CRTM cloud coefficients were previously generated based on the effective radius for representing the size of the particles. However, effective radius is neither measurable nor provided by the NWP models, thus need to be estimated from other geophysical variables such as water content. Therefore, in addition to calculating the CRTM bulk scattering properties from the DDA single scattering database, the CRTM was also largely modified to use cloud water content (kg.m-3), instead of effective radius, for performing the interpolation over size/mass of the particles. CRTM already requires water content as input, thus no extra variables are required for performing scattering calculations using the new ARTS DDA database. The CRTM scattering modules search for effective radius in cloud coefficient files and will use the cloud water content if the effective radius dimension is not found in the cloud coefficient files. Figure 1 shows the CRTM simulated brightness temperatures computed using different cloud coefficients versus ATMS observed values over Hurricane Irma on September 7, 2017 at 18:00 UTC. We used all the cloud water content values included in ERA5 with default CRTM/DDA habits for water, rain, snow, ice, hail, and graupel. ERA5 does not provide separate water content values for ice, hail, and graupel, thus the ice water content values were divided between ice, hail, and graupel clouds similar to what was explained in the previous section. In channels with a frequency lower than 90 GHz, emission from water and rain clouds can compensate for cloud scattering so that cloud contaminated Tbs are larger than corresponding clear sky Tbs. The DDA simulations for channels 1-7 largely perform better than the Mie simulations. The DDA simulations show a mix of small negative and positive simulated minus observed values, while the Mie results show large negative biases. The weighting functions for some of the ATMS temperature sounding channels (channels 9-15) peak mostly above the clouds, therefore the measured Tbs become less sensitive to clouds so that the results of both Mie and DDA become very similar. The Mie lookup tables generate excessive scattering for channel 16, but not enough scattering for the water vapor channels. In the specific case of Hurricane Maria, the DDA lookup tables do not generate enough scattering for channel 16, but the DDA results are much more consistent with observations for water vapor channels than for channel 16. It should be noted that the results may vary if we use other habits to represent snow, hail, and graupel in the DDA simulations. Although these results clearly show the advantage of the DDA database over the Mie dataset, different error sources such as error in the observations, displacement of clouds in the ERA5 reanalysis, and also lack of convective clouds or in general errors in the input atmospheric and cloud profiles contribute to the differences between the simulated and observed values. Aside from the improvements in the simulations, a major advantage of the new dataset is a large number of habits that can be used to tune the data assimilation systems to perform well in different weather conditions.

Isaac Moradi↗
NASA NTRS2022

An Overview of ARTMIP’s Tier 2 Reanalysis Intercomparison: Uncertainty in the Detection of Atmospheric Rivers and their Associated Precipitation

Atmospheric rivers, or long but narrow regions of enhanced water vapor transport, are an important component of the hydrologic cycle as they are responsible for much of the poleward transport of water vapor and result in precipitation, sometimes extreme in intensity. Despite their importance, much uncertainty remains in the detection of atmospheric rivers in large datasets such as reanalyses and century scale climate simulations. To understand this uncertainty, the Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP) developed tiered experiments, including the Tier 2 Reanalysis Intercomparison that is presented here. Eleven detection algorithms submitted hourly tags--binary fields indicating the presence or absence of atmospheric rivers--of detected atmospheric rivers in the Modern Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2) and European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts' Reanalysis Version 5 (ERA5) as well as six-hourly tags in the Japanese 55-year Reanalysis (JRA-55). Due to a higher climatological mean for integrated water vapor transport in MERRA-2, atmospheric rivers were detected more frequently relative to the other two reanalyses, particularly in algorithms that use a fixed threshold for water vapor transport. The finer horizontal resolution of ERA5 resulted in narrower atmospheric rivers and an ability to detect atmospheric rivers along resolved coastlines. The fraction of hemispheric area covered by ARs varies throughout the year in all three reanalyses, with different atmospheric river detection tools having different seasonal cycles.

ARTMIP↗
NASA NTRS2020

Arctic Snow Depth and Sea Ice Thickness From ICESat‐2 and CryoSat‐2 Freeboards: A First Examination

We present a first examination of Arctic sea ice snow depth estimates from differencing satellite lidar (ICESat‐2) and radar (CryoSat‐2) freeboards. These estimates cover the period between 14 October 2018 and the end of April 2019. Snow depth is related to freeboard differences by the refractive index/bulk density of the snow layer—the only free parameter in the approach. Area‐averaged snow depth ranges from 9 cm (on first‐year ice: 5 cm, multiyear ice: 14 cm) in late October to 19 cm (first‐year ice: 17 cm, multiyear ice: 27 cm) in April; on average, this snow is thinner over FYI. Spatial patterns and gradients of snow depth estimates compare well with reconstructions using snowfall from ERA‐Interim and ERA5, although snowfall from ERA5 is systematically higher. For all months, the results suggest that ~50% of the total freeboard is comprised of snow. Retrievals are within a few centimeters of snow depth data acquired by Operation IceBridge in April 2019. Sources of uncertainties associated with this freeboard‐differencing approach are discussed. Further, sea ice thicknesses calculated using the retrieved snow depth and a modified climatology are contrasted. Comparatively, the snow depth and calculated ice thickness using a modified climatology are higher by ~5 cm and 0.33 m, although these differences are not uniform throughout the season. Snow accumulation was slower between October and December but increased between December and January, unlike the modified climatology, which exhibited a monotonic accumulation for all months. Future opportunities for assessment and improvement of these estimates are discussed.

Arctic Ocean↗