Biases in simulated boreal snow cover and their influence on snow albedo feedback Chad Thackeray University of Waterloo CanSISE Regional Meeting February.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Satellite data products to support climate modelling: Phenology & Snow Cover Kristin Böttcher, Sari Metsämäki, Olli-Pekka Mattila, Mikko Kervinen, Mika.
Advertisements

Adeline Bichet, Lawrence Mudryk, Paul Kushner, Chris Derksen
Earth’s Albedo ELF Activity: Energy 1D As part of NOAA Environmental Literacy Grant #NA09SEC
1 22 June 2009 Arctic System Reanalysis Land Component Update Michael Barlage and Fei Chen Research Applications Laboratory (RAL) National Center for Atmospheric.
Climate change in centuries in observational and model data Evgeny Volodin, Institute of Numerical Mathematics RAS, Moscow, Russia.
Climatology and Climate Change in Athena Simulations Project Athena Team ECMWF, June 7, 2010.
Global Fire Emissions and Fire Effects on Biophysical Properties and the Associated Radiative Forcing Yufang Jin 1, James Randerson 1, G. R. van der Werf.
The Surface-based Temperature Inversion on the Antarctic Plateau Stephen R. Hudson and Richard E. Brandt University of Washington Contact Information:
Presented by: Audrey Eggenberger Geography: ASCS major Amazon Deforestation and Climate Change (1990) By: J. Shukla et. all Combined Climate and Carbon-Cycle.
DOE BER Climate Modeling PI Meeting, Potomac, Maryland, May 12-14, 2014 Funding for this study was provided by the US Department of Energy, BER Program.
Modeling Applications of the ESA GlobSnow Data Record
Outline Further Reading: Detailed Notes Posted on Class Web Sites Natural Environments: The Atmosphere GE 101 – Spring 2006 Boston University Myneni L28:
Outline Background, climatology & variability Role of snow in the global climate system Indicators of climate change Future projections & implications.
Surface Reflectivity from OMI using MODIS to Eliminate Clouds: Effects of Snow on UV-Vis Trace Gas Retrievals Gray O’Byrne, 1 Randall V. Martin, 1,2 Aaron.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Total Amount Altitude Optical Depth Longwave High Clouds Shortwave High Clouds Shortwave Low Clouds.
© Crown copyright /0653 Met Office and the Met Office logo are registered trademarks Met Office Hadley Centre, FitzRoy Road, Exeter, Devon, EX1.
Snow depth measurement at METEO-FRANCE Clotilde Augros, Co-author : Fabrice Zanghi METEO-FRANCE, Direction des Systèmes d’Observation, 7 rue Teisserenc.
An empirical formulation of soil ice fraction based on in situ observations Mark Decker, Xubin Zeng Department of Atmospheric Sciences, the University.
1. Introduction 3. Global-Scale Results 2. Methods and Data Early spring SWE for historic ( ) and future ( ) periods were simulated. Early.
Guo-Yue Niu and Zong-Liang Yang The Department of Geological Sciences The University of Texas at Austin Evaluation of snow simulations from CAM2/CLM2.0.
Regional Feedbacks Between the Ocean and the Atmosphere in the North Atlantic (A21D-0083) LuAnne Thompson 1, Maylis Garcia, Kathryn A. Kelly 1, James Booth.
Global Warming Cause for Concern. Cause for Concern? What is the effect of increased levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere? Nobody knows.
The Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research A partnership between CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology Red - ECMWF Green - Sintex Navy - POAMA-2.0.
Development and evaluation of Passive Microwave SWE retrieval equations for mountainous area Naoki Mizukami.
Diagram for the model structures Snow Cover and Runoff in Western China Guo-Yue Nu and Zong-Liang Yang The Dept. of Geological Sciences, The University.
Coupling of the Common Land Model (CLM) to RegCM in a Simulation over East Asia Allison Steiner, Bill Chameides, Bob Dickinson Georgia Institute of Technology.
NOTE to the Teacher  In an inquiry classroom, teachers facilitate the construction of new knowledge by activating and then pursuing the inquisitive nature.
Impacts of Aerosols on Climate Extremes in the USA Nora Mascioli.
How much do different land models matter for climate simulation? Jiangfeng Wei with support from Paul Dirmeyer, Zhichang Guo, Li Zhang, Vasu Misra, and.
MODSCAG fractional snow covered area (fSCA )for central and southern Sierra Nevada Spatial distribution of snow water equivalent across the central and.
5. Temperature Change due to the CO 2 Forcing Alone Spatial variability is due to spatial variations of temperature, water vapor, and cloud properties.
Seasonal albedo and snow cover evolution of CMIP5 models in boreal forest regions Chad Thackeray CanSISE East Meeting July 25, 2014.
1.Introduction Prediction of sea-ice is not only important for shipping but also for weather as it can have a significant climatic impact. Sea-ice predictions.
The White Arctic: A Snow Impacts Synthesis for the Terrestrial Arctic Matthew Sturm 1 Glen E. Liston 2 Donald K. Perovich 1 Christopher A. Hiemstra 2 1.
Printed by Introduction: The nature of surface-atmosphere interactions are affected by the land surface conditions. Lakes (open water.
Vegetation Phenology and the Hydrological Cycle of Monsoons
Ice Cover in New York City Drinking Water Reservoirs: Modeling Simulations and Observations NIHAR R. SAMAL, Institute for Sustainable Cities, City University.
Towards development of a Regional Arctic Climate System Model --- Coupling WRF with the Variable Infiltration Capacity land model via a flux coupler Chunmei.
The European Heat Wave of 2003: A Modeling Study Using the NSIPP-1 AGCM. Global Modeling and Assimilation Office, NASA/GSFC Philip Pegion (1), Siegfried.
Arctic Sea Ice – Now and in the Future. J. Stroeve National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences.
Deforestation and the Stream Flow of the Amazon River -- Land Surface Processes and Atmospheric Feedbacks Michael T. Coe1, Marcos Heil Costa2, and Britaldo.
Center for Satellite Applications and Research (STAR) Review 09 – 11 March 2010 Image: MODIS Land Group, NASA GSFC March 2000 The Influences of Changes.
17.1 Atmosphere Characteristics
“Comparison of model data based ENSO composites and the actual prediction by these models for winter 2015/16.” Model composites (method etc) 6 slides Comparison.
Hongxu Zhao and Richard Fernandes
Figure 1. (A) Evapotranspiration (ET) in the equatorial Santarém forest: observed (mean ± SD across years of eddy fluxes, K67 site, blue shaded.
Point Comparison in the Arctic (Barrow N, 156.6W ) Part I - Assessing Satellite (and surface) Capabilities for Determining Cloud Fraction, Cloud.
How Much Will the Climate Warm? Alex Hall and Xin Qu UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences UCLA Institute of the Environment Environmental.
An Overview of the La Niña Michelle L’Heureux.
Narrowing the Divergence in Simulations of Climate Feedbacks Alex Hall and Xin Qu UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences Berkeley Atmospheric.
1 Xiaoyan Jiang, Guo-Yue Niu and Zong-Liang Yang The Jackson School of Geosciences The University of Texas at Austin 03/20/2007 Feedback between the atmosphere,
Sea Ice, Solar Radiation, and SH High-latitude Climate Sensitivity Alex Hall UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences SOWG meeting January 13-14,
An advanced snow parameterization for the models of atmospheric circulation Ekaterina E. Machul’skaya¹, Vasily N. Lykosov ¹Hydrometeorological Centre of.
Arctic RIMS & WALE (Regional, Integrated Hydrological Monitoring System & Western Arctic Linkage Experiment) John Kimball FaithAnn Heinsch Steve Running.
Sea-ice albedo, clouds, and cloud-radiation interactions in the Arctic in the CMIP5 model ensemble Johannes Karlsson and Gunilla Svensson Department of.
Understanding and constraining snow albedo feedback Alex Hall and Xin Qu UCLA Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences 2nd International Conference.
Aim: study the first order local forcing mechanisms Focusing on 50°-90°S (regional features will average out)
Towards development of a Regional Arctic Climate System Model ---
Natural Environments: The Atmosphere
Seasonal Arctic heat budget in CMIP5 models
Constraining snow albedo feedback with the present-day seasonal cycle
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Alfredo Ruiz-Barradas Sumant Nigam
NASA Satellite Images for 2007
Instrumental Surface Temperature Record
Modeling the Atmos.-Ocean System
Predictability assessment of climate predictions within the context
Understanding and constraining snow albedo feedback
Investigating land-climate interactions across land cover types
Volcanic Climate Impacts and ENSO Interaction
Presentation transcript:

Biases in simulated boreal snow cover and their influence on snow albedo feedback Chad Thackeray University of Waterloo CanSISE Regional Meeting February 10, 2014

Introduction Snow albedo feedback (SAF) is a positive feedback climate mechanism that plays a crucial role in directing shortwave forcing in a changing climate. A large spread in SAF strength among the CMIP5 models explains much of the variation in predictions of warming over the Northern Hemisphere. Previous work has shown that modeled SAF strength is significantly weaker than observed over the boreal forest during the spring melt period. Partitioning between SAF components (CON versus TEM) is different between observational studies, and remained largely unchanged between CMIP3 and CMIP5. The primary goal of this work is to investigate the boreal SAF weakness in greater detail, making use of multiple observational products (MODIS, APP-x, and BERMS). We also strive to diagnose the underlying cause of differences in observed versus simulated SAF. Historical runs of CCSM4 and CLM4 are used here.

Figure 1 – Total (NET) Snow Albedo Feedback strength (%/K) over the boreal forest (>75%) for CCSM4 (green), CLM4 (red), APP-x (yellow), and MODIS (blue). During April-May SAF in MODIS and APP-x is approximately twice the simulated SAF from both offline and freely coupled runs. Strongly influencing the seasonal (MAMJ) mean feedback strength. SAF strength over the boreal forest is weaker than what is seen over the rest of the Northern Hemisphere because of its low peak albedo.

Figure 2: Map of NET snow albedo feedback bias (MODIS - CCSM4) for April-May. The dark green line shows the 50% boreal region, while black stippling indicates the >75% area. (a) This bias (between MODIS and CCSM4) is large over regions with high fractions of boreal forest cover. CCSM4 is largely underestimating the NET feedback strength over a majority of the hemisphere.

Figure 3 – Monthly Albedo and snow cover fraction (SCF) change for boreal forest (>75%). Monthly changes are climatologies over the period for CLM4, CCSM4, MODIS, and APP-x. Snow products used include CLM4, CCSM4, MODIS, and GlobSnow. The grey box encompasses a time period when observational uncertainty is high due to large solar zenith angles. In observations snow albedo increases or stays constant throughout the winter, until Mar-Apr when it decreases sharply until MJ. By contrast, the models transition to springtime snow-free albedo much earlier, with large decreases during Jan-Mar, and only weak decreases during Apr-Jun. In Jan-Feb and Feb-Mar, there is a difference in the sign of monthly albedo change for the observations (positive month to month albedo change) versus the models (negative month to month albedo change).

Table 1: Mean Snow Depth Biases from CLM4 in relation to GlobSnow (derived from SWE) CLM4GlobSnowModel - Obs (cm) 90th Percentile Depth (cm) Max. Depth (cm) For the rest of this work, we focus on CLM4, with the understanding that this model is representative of the biases in CCSM4 – primary reasons for this are: 1) observation-based forcing, so the comparison with observations is much cleaner 2) daily snow cover and albedo data were archived for CLM4 but not CCSM4. Model biases in spring snow cover fraction (Fig.3) and pre-melt maximum snow depth do not account for the differences in observed and simulated albedo.

Figure 4: Daily climatological Snow Depth and Albedo scatterplots for (a) CLM4 over Pure Boreal Forest (>90%) and (b) Old Jack Pine (a) (b) There is a strong decline in CLM4 albedo during Feb and Mar (pre-melt) in spite of snow depths that exceed 40 cm. The observational albedo peaks in early December once depth exceeds ~10 cm. Model peak albedo occurs closers to a 20 cm threshold. The seasonal evolution of simulated snow depth versus albedo is very different from observations at a tower site. Partially due to litter (pine needles and dirt) on the snow pack that is not captured by the model.

Figure 5: Relationship between snow depth, albedo, and temperature for a Boreal forest grid cell in CLM4 (a) Canopy Sticking (00-01) (b) Warming Events (01-02) (c) OJP Scatterplots of daily albedo and temperature are shown for (a) Canopy sticking (b) Warming events (c) Tower data Note the albedo ‘sticking’ at peak value within CLM4 (panel a and b). Tower data shows a greater clustering of points at a snow covered but non-peak albedo (circled in red). In a year with more mid-winter warming events, we see a greater number of days where albedo is between the peak and minimum snow albedos (Panel B). There is a complete absence of boreal grid cells with albedo > 0.3 at OJP even at temps <250 K, indicating the model albedo is unrealistically high in these situations. (c) (b) (a)

Figure 6: (a) Monthly climatological change in water on canopy (blue) and albedo (red) from CLM4 –Northern Hemisphere Boreal Forest (>75%). (b) Same relationship shown in a scatterplot Changes in boreal canopy snow storage account for the winter season changes in simulated albedo and hence the disagreement with observations. There is a sharp decrease in boreal canopy snow storage during Jan-Mar that drives the albedo decrease. It is the canopy albedo that is driving seasonal changes, while surface variations are muted.

Figure 7: The relationship between NET SAF bias (OBS-CCSM4) and Exposed Leaf Area Index over a region with at least 1% boreal evergreen forest (green) and with at least 75% boreal evergreen forest (orange) for March-April. Areas where the previously discussed SAF bias is greatest tend to have a high Leaf Area Index (LAI), suggesting that it is in denser canopies where the bias is greatest. A majority of these locations are within the boreal region (orange) shown on Figure 2.

Conclusions Large disagreements in albedo between models and satellite retrievals have a significant impact on the total snow albedo feedback strength. A decrease in canopy snow in January - March is the main cause of these albedo differences. Development of a more realistic snow-canopy parameterization based on satellite and site measurements will help to minimize observational discrepancies. Future work should address the positive SAF bias over the Canadian subarctic tundra, and also attempt to use multi-model ensembles.