Dynamical Downscaling of CCSM Using WRF Yang Gao 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yun-Fat Lam 1, John Drake 1, Kate Evans 2 1 University of Tennessee, USA 2 Oak Ridge.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Basics of numerical oceanic and coupled modelling Antonio Navarra Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia Italy Simon Mason Scripps Institution.

Advertisements

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Changes in U.S. Regional-Scale Air.

S ENSITIVITIES OF S PECTRAL N UDGING T OWARD M OISTURE FOR R EGIONAL C LIMATE M ODELING Tanya L. Otte 1, Martin J. Otte 1, Jared H. Bowden 2, and Christopher.

An intraseasonal moisture nudging experiment in a tropical channel version of the WRF model: The model biases and the moisture nudging scale dependencies.

Comparison of the CAM and RRTMG Radiation Schemes in WRF and coupled WRF-CMAQ models Aijun Xiu, Zac Adelman, Frank Binkowski, Adel Hanna, Limei Ran Center.

1 CODATA 2006 October 23-25, 2006, Beijing Cryospheric Data Assimilation An Integrated Approach for Generating Consistent Cryosphere Data Set Xin Li World.

Earth Science & Climate Change

Cost-effective dynamical downscaling: An illustration of downscaling CESM with the WRF model Jared H. Bowden and Saravanan Arunachalam 11 th Annual CMAS.

STUDY OF REGIONAL EXTREME CLIMATE AND ITS IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY IN U.S. Joshua S. Fu, Ph.D. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University.

Climate modeling Current state of climate knowledge – What does the historical data (temperature, CO 2, etc) tell us – What are trends in the current observational.

Recent performance statistics for AMPS real-time forecasts Kevin W. Manning – National Center for Atmospheric Research NCAR Earth System Laboratory Mesoscale.

2007 Group Meeting Global Climate and Air Pollution (GCAP) at Harvard University Nicky Lam and Joshua Fu University of Tennessee October 12, 2007.

REFERENCES Maria Val Martin 1 C. L. Heald 1, J.-F. Lamarque 2, S. Tilmes 2 and L. Emmons 2 1 Colorado State University 2 NCAR.

Three-State Air Quality Study (3SAQS) Three-State Data Warehouse (3SDW) 2011 WRF Modeling Model Performance Evaluation University of North Carolina (UNC-IE)

1 An Overview of the NARCCAP WRF Simulations L. Ruby Leung Pacific Northwest National Laboratory NARCCAP Users Meeting NCAR, Boulder, CO April ,

Simulations of Floods and Droughts in the Western U.S. Under Climate Change L. Ruby Leung Pacific Northwest National Laboratory US CLIVAR/NCAR ASP Researcher.

Improving Cloud Simulation in Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Through Assimilation of GOES Satellite Observations Andrew White Advisor: Dr. Arastoo.

Tanya L. Otte and Robert C. Gilliam NOAA Air Resources Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (In partnership with U.S. EPA National Exposure Research.

WRF-VIC: The Flux Coupling Approach L. Ruby Leung Pacific Northwest National Laboratory BioEarth Project Kickoff Meeting April 11-12, 2011 Pullman, WA.

Improvement of extreme climate predictions from dynamical climate downscaling Yang Gao 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, John B. Drake 1, Yang Liu 2, Jean-Francois Lamarque.

Ensemble-variational sea ice data assimilation Anna Shlyaeva, Mark Buehner, Alain Caya, Data Assimilation and Satellite Meteorology Research Jean-Francois.

The National Environmental Agency of Georgia L. Megrelidze, N. Kutaladze, Kh. Kokosadze NWP Local Area Models’ Failure in Simulation of Eastern Invasion.

Jerold Herwehe 1, Kiran Alapaty 1, Chris Nolte 1, Russ Bullock 1, Tanya Otte 1, Megan Mallard 1, Jimy Dudhia 2, and Jack Kain 3 1 Atmospheric Modeling.

Sensitivity Studies James Done NCAR Earth System Laboratory National Center for Atmospheric Research NCAR is Sponsored by NSF and this work is partially.

November 1, 2013 Bart Brashers, ENVIRON Jared Heath Bowden, UNC 3SAQS WRF Modeling Recommendations.

Prediction of Future North American Air Quality Gabriele Pfister, Stacy Walters, Mary Barth, Jean-Francois Lamarque, John Wong Atmospheric Chemistry Division,

Joshua Fu, Yun-Fat Lam* and Yang Gao University of Tennessee Daniel Jacob, Loretta Mickley and Shiliang Wu Harvard University Oct 20, 2009 The effects.

Russ Bullock 11 th Annual CMAS Conference October 17, 2012 Development of Methodology to Downscale Global Climate Fields to 12km Resolution.

Dynamical Downscaling Developing a Model Framework for WRF for Future GCM Downscaling Jared H. Bowden Tanya L. Otte June 25, th Annual Meteorological.

Impact of Emissions on Intercontinental Long-Range Transport Joshua Fu, Yun-Fat Lam and Yang Gao, University of Tennessee, USA Rokjin Park, Seoul National.

Preliminary Results of Global Climate Simulations With a High- Resolution Atmospheric Model P. B. Duffy, B. Govindasamy, J. Milovich, K. Taylor, S. Thompson,

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Going the Extra Mile in Downscaling:

1 Using Hemispheric-CMAQ to Provide Initial and Boundary Conditions for Regional Modeling Joshua S. Fu 1, Xinyi Dong 1, Kan Huang 1, and Carey Jang 2 1.

Comparison of Different Approaches NCAR Earth System Laboratory National Center for Atmospheric Research NCAR is Sponsored by NSF and this work is partially.

© Crown copyright Met Office Regional Temperature and Precipitation changes under high- end global warming Michael Sanderson, Deborah Hemming, Richard.

Meteorological Data Analysis Urban, Regional Modeling and Analysis Section Division of Air Resources New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.

Seasonal Modeling (NOAA) Jian-Wen Bao Sara Michelson Jim Wilczak Curtis Fleming Emily Piencziak.

(Mt/Ag/EnSc/EnSt 404/504 - Global Change) Climate Models (from IPCC WG-I, Chapter 10) Projected Future Changes Primary Source: IPCC WG-I Chapter 10 - Global.

Modern Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications: Introduction to NASA’s Modern Era Retrospective-analysis for Research and Applications:

1 CRGAQS: Meteorological Modeling prepared for Southwest Clean Air Agency 19 June 2006 prepared by Alpine Geophysics, LLC ENVIRON International Corp.

Office of Research and Development National Exposure Research Laboratory, Atmospheric Modeling and Analysis Division Using Dynamical Downscaling to Project.

Are Numerical Weather Prediction Models Getting Better? Cliff Mass, David Ovens, and Jeff Baars University of Washington.

William G. Benjey* Physical Scientist NOAA Air Resources Laboratory Atmospheric Sciences Modeling Division Research Triangle Park, NC Fifth Annual CMAS.

CCSM Performance, Successes and Challenges Tony Craig NCAR RIST Meeting March 12-14, 2002 Boulder, Colorado, USA.

Autonomous Polar Atmospheric Observations John J. Cassano University of Colorado.

1 Impact on Ozone Prediction at a Fine Grid Resolution: An Examination of Nudging Analysis and PBL Schemes in Meteorological Model Yunhee Kim, Joshua S.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Tropospheric Emission Spectrometer Studying.

Ocean Climate Simulations with Uncoupled HYCOM and Fully Coupled CCSM3/HYCOM Jianjun Yin and Eric Chassignet Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies.

Presented by LCF Climate Science Computational End Station James B. White III (Trey) Scientific Computing National Center for Computational Sciences Oak.

Response of fine particles to the reduction of precursor emissions in Yangtze River Delta (YRD), China Juan Li 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yang Gao 1, Yun-Fat Lam.

Impacts of Meteorological Conditions Modified by Urban Expansion on Surface Ozone over Yangtz River Delta and Pearl River Delta region, China Xuemei Wang,

Xiujuan Su 1, John Derber 2, Jaime Daniel 3,Andrew Collard 1 1: IMSG, 2: EMC/NWS/NOAA, 3.NESDIS Assimilation of GOES hourly shortwave and visible AMVs.

A41I-0105 Supporting Decadal and Regional Climate Prediction through NCAR’s EaSM Data Portal Doug Schuster and Steve Worley National Center for Atmospheric.

ESSL Holland, CCSM Workshop 0606 Predicting the Earth System Across Scales: Both Ways Summary:Rationale Approach and Current Focus Improved Simulation.

Developing Modeling Techniques Applicable for Simulating Future Climate Conditions in the Carolinas Megan Mallard ORISE Postdoctoral Fellow Atmospheric.

Wang Jiandong 1, Wang Shuxiao 1, Zhao Bin 1, Wang Long 1, David Wong 2, Jonathan Pleim 2, Hao Jiming 1 1. Tsinghua University, Beijing, China 2. U.S. EPA,

Does nudging squelch the extremes in regional climate modeling?

Tanya L. Spero1, Megan S. Mallard1, Stephany M

Simulation of the Arctic Mixed-Phase Clouds

Coupled atmosphere-ocean simulation on hurricane forecast

Regional and Global Ramifications of Boundary Current Upwelling

Dynamical downscaling of ERA-40 with WRF in complex terrain in Norway – comparison with ENSEMBLES U. Heikkilä, A. D. Sandvik and A.

C. Nolte, T. Spero, P. Dolwick, B. Henderson, R. Pinder

Impact of the vertical resolution on Climate Simulation using CESM

Mark A. Bourassa and Qi Shi

Impact of GOES Enhanced WRF Fields on Air Quality Model Performance

University of Washington Center for Science in the Earth System

GFDL-NCAR/CCSM collaborations

REGIONAL AND LOCAL-SCALE EVALUATION OF 2002 MM5 METEOROLOGICAL FIELDS FOR VARIOUS AIR QUALITY MODELING APPLICATIONS Pat Dolwick*, U.S. EPA, RTP, NC, USA.

WRAP 2014 Regional Modeling

Presentation transcript:

Dynamical Downscaling of CCSM Using WRF Yang Gao 1, Joshua S. Fu 1, Yun-Fat Lam 1, John Drake 1, Kate Evans 2 1 University of Tennessee, USA 2 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA 9th Annual CMAS Conference, Chapel Hill, North Carolina October 11, 2010

Motivation The Community Earth System Model (CESM) is being used to simulate IPCC AR5 scenarios. To study climate change on regional and local scales, downscaling becomes an important technique to link global and regional models. There are high uncertainties in regional climate downscaling. Different sensitivity cases are needed to optimize the regional climate simulations.

Linkage from Global model to Regional Model Community Earth System Model CESM 1.0 Regional Climate Model WRF km by 36km CONUS D1: 12 km by 12km domain D2: 4km by 4km Eastern US domain Community Land Model (CLM) Community Atmosphere Model (CAM) Community Sea Ice Model (CSIM) Ocean component (POP) 1 degree by 1 degree 3 hourly resolution (D1) (D2)

Global and Regional Model Configurations Most of the physics schemes are different in CESM and WRF except radiation scheme

3.5-day overlapping run segments in January, April, July and October in 2002 Typical Analysis Nudging vs. No nudging Horizontal wind components (U and V) in all layers Temperature (T) and Water vapor mixing ratio (Q) above the PBL 2) Scheme options comparison: CAM/CAM vs. RRTMG/RRTMG for shortwave/longwave radiation WRF: CAM 3 (A spectral-band scheme used in the NCAR Community Atmosphere Model (CAM 3.0) for climate simulations.) CESM (CAM4): (Parameterizations of shortwave and longwave Radiation in CAM3 and CAM4 are the same) Sensitivity Scenarios

CESM (Temperature)METGRID Time: :00 Patterns and Spatial distribution are similar CCSM (Skin T) METGRID (Relative Humidity) (Wind Vector) Initial condition integrity

Comparison between CESM and WRF We mainly focus on the following parameters comparison on the surface layer: 10 m Wind speed*, 10 m Wind direction*, 2 m temperature, 2 m specific humidity and precipitation (*Note: CESM does not output 10 meters wind speed and wind direction, so the lowest model layer (around 60 m) values are used for the comparison)

Temperature at 2 meters Dashed time series represent 2m temperature from CESM Overall, temperature with RRTMG rw/lw radiation scheme and with nudging has lower bias than the other two cases.

Correlation between temperature bias and temperature There is high relationship between the temperature and the bias. Bias tends to change from positive to negative when the temperature from CESM increases.

Specific Humidity at 2 meters CAM and RRTMG schemes perform similar with each other. Nudging performs better for most of the sub-region than no nudging case. The biases are mainly ranging from -2 to 2 g/kg.

Wind Speed bias at 10 meters Most of the cases, wind speed has negative bias. The two radiation schemes have quite similar performance on wind speed.

Wind direction bias at 10 meters Overall, nudging case has much lower bias than no nudging for wind direction. Radiation schemes does not have much impact on the wind directions.

Precipitation bias Small bias in January, April and October. In July, WRF predicts more precipitation than CESM.

Comparison of WRF output with observational data Climate data may not represent a specific year. We try to evaluate how far the WRF downscaling simulations compared with Meteorological Assimilation Data Ingest System (MADIS) observational data. Overall, RRTMG radiation scheme with nudging performs better than the other two cases, so we only compare WRF output with observational data for the RRTMG/NUDGING case.

Wind Speed at 10 meters Mean obs Mean prd Bias Comparison between MADIS and WRF OUTPUT Compared with observational data, the biases of wind speeds are within 2 m/s for most of the sub-region. Wind direction is also comparable with observational data. Wind Direction at 10 meters Mean obs Mean prd Bias

Specific humidity at 2 meters Comparison between MADIS and WRF OUTPUT The bias of temperature and specific humidity ranges from -2 to 2 degree and -1 to 1 g/kg, respectively. Mean obs Mean prd Bias Temperature at 2 meters

Overall, nudging case performs better than no nudging case. RRTMG radiation scheme with nudging case shows the lowest bias for temperature compared with CAM radiation scheme and no nudging case. There is high relationship between the temperature and the bias. Bias tends to change from positive to negative when the temperature from CESM increases. WRF simulations driven by CESM are comparable to the observational data, and the range of biases for temperature, wind speed, specific humidity are from -2 to 2 degrees, from 1 to 2 m/s and from-1 to 1 g/kg, respectively. Summary

Downscaling from CESM to WRF for12km by 12km CONUS domain and 4km by 4km Eastern US domain Chemistry Downscaling from CESM to CMAQ Future work

Thanks for your attention! Questions?