skip to main content


Title: Effects of grid spacing on high-frequency precipitation variance in coupled high-resolution global ocean–atmosphere models
Abstract

High-frequency precipitation variance is calculated in 12 different free-running (non-data-assimilative) coupled high resolution atmosphere–ocean model simulations, an assimilative coupled atmosphere–ocean weather forecast model, and an assimilative reanalysis. The results are compared with results from satellite estimates of precipitation and rain gauge observations. An analysis of irregular sub-daily fluctuations, which was applied by Covey et al. (Geophys Res Lett 45:12514–12522, 2018.https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL078926) to satellite products and low-resolution climate models, is applied here to rain gauges and higher-resolution models. In contrast to lower-resolution climate simulations, which Covey et al. (2018) found to be lacking with respect to variance in irregular sub-daily fluctuations, the highest-resolution simulations examined here display an irregular sub-daily fluctuation variance that lies closer to that found in satellite products. Most of the simulations used here cannot be analyzed via the Covey et al. (2018) technique, because they do not output precipitation at sub-daily intervals. Thus the remainder of the paper focuses on frequency power spectral density of precipitation and on cumulative distribution functions over time scales (2–100 days) that are still relatively “high-frequency” in the context of climate modeling. Refined atmospheric or oceanic model grid spacing is generally found to increase high-frequency precipitation variance in simulations, approaching the values derived from observations. Mesoscale-eddy-rich ocean simulations significantly increase precipitation variance only when the atmosphere grid spacing is sufficiently fine (< 0.5°). Despite the improvements noted above, all of the simulations examined here suffer from the “drizzle effect”, in which precipitation is not temporally intermittent to the extent found in observations.

 
more » « less
Award ID(s):
1851164
NSF-PAR ID:
10372600
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Springer Science + Business Media
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Climate Dynamics
Volume:
59
Issue:
9-10
ISSN:
0930-7575
Page Range / eLocation ID:
p. 2887-2913
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Abstract

    New estimates ofpCO2from profiling floats deployed by the Southern Ocean Carbon and Climate Observations and Modeling (SOCCOM) project have demonstrated the importance of wintertime outgassing south of the Polar Front, challenging the accepted magnitude of Southern Ocean carbon uptake (Gray et al., 2018,https://doi:10.1029/2018GL078013). Here, we put 3.5 years of SOCCOM observations into broader context with the global surface carbon dioxide database (Surface Ocean CO2Atlas, SOCAT) by using the two interpolation methods currently used to assess the ocean models in the Global Carbon Budget (Le Quéré et al., 2018,https://doi:10.5194/essd‐10‐2141‐2018) to create a ship‐only, a float‐weighted, and a combined estimate of Southern Ocean carbon fluxes (<35°S). In our ship‐only estimate, we calculate a mean uptake of −1.14 ± 0.19 Pg C/yr for 2015–2017, consistent with prior studies. The float‐weighted estimate yields a significantly lower Southern Ocean uptake of −0.35 ± 0.19 Pg C/yr. Subsampling of high‐resolution ocean biogeochemical process models indicates that some of the differences between float and ship‐only estimates of the Southern Ocean carbon flux can be explained by spatial and temporal sampling differences. The combined ship and float estimate minimizes the root‐mean‐squarepCO2difference between the mapped product and both data sets, giving a new Southern Ocean uptake of −0.75 ± 0.22 Pg C/yr, though with uncertainties that overlap the ship‐only estimate. An atmospheric inversion reveals that a shift of this magnitude in the contemporary Southern Ocean carbon flux must be compensated for by ocean or land sinks within the Southern Hemisphere.

     
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    We show that atmospheric gravity waves can generate plasma ducts and irregularities in the plasmasphere using the coupled SAMI3/WACCM‐X model. We find the equatorial electron density is irregular as a function of longitude which is consistent with CRRES measurements (Clilverd et al., 2007,https://doi.org/10.1029/2007ja012416). We also find that plasma ducts can be generated forL‐shells in the range 1.5–3.0 with lifetimes of ∼ 0.5 hr; this is in line with observations of ducted VLF wave propagation with lifetimes of 0.5–2.0 hr (Clilverd et al., 2008,https://doi.org/10.1029/2007ja012602; Singh et al., 1998,https://doi.org/10.1016/s1364-6826(98)00001-7).

     
    more » « less
  3. Abstract

    We introduce a new framework called Machine Learning (ML) based Auroral Ionospheric electrodynamics Model (ML‐AIM). ML‐AIM solves a current continuity equation by utilizing the ML model of Field Aligned Currents of Kunduri et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA027908), the FAC‐derived auroral conductance model of Robinson et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JA028008), and the solar irradiance conductance model of Moen and Brekke (1993,https://doi.org/10.1029/92gl02109). The ML‐AIM inputs are 60‐min time histories of solar wind plasma, interplanetary magnetic fields (IMF), and geomagnetic indices, and its outputs are ionospheric electric potential, electric fields, Pedersen/Hall currents, and Joule Heating. We conduct two ML‐AIM simulations for a weak geomagnetic activity interval on 14 May 2013 and a geomagnetic storm on 7–8 September 2017. ML‐AIM produces physically accurate ionospheric potential patterns such as the two‐cell convection pattern and the enhancement of electric potentials during active times. The cross polar cap potentials (ΦPC) from ML‐AIM, the Weimer (2005,https://doi.org/10.1029/2004ja010884) model, and the Super Dual Auroral Radar Network (SuperDARN) data‐assimilated potentials, are compared to the ones from 3204 polar crossings of the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program F17 satellite, showing better performance of ML‐AIM than others. ML‐AIM is unique and innovative because it predicts ionospheric responses to the time‐varying solar wind and geomagnetic conditions, while the other traditional empirical models like Weimer (2005,https://doi.org/10.1029/2004ja010884) designed to provide a quasi‐static ionospheric condition under quasi‐steady solar wind/IMF conditions. Plans are underway to improve ML‐AIM performance by including a fully ML network of models of aurora precipitation and ionospheric conductance, targeting its characterization of geomagnetically active times.

     
    more » « less
  4. Abstract

    The objective of this comment is to correct two sets of statements in Litwin et al. (2022,https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JF006239), which consider our research work (Bonetti et al., 2018,https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2017.0693; Bonetti et al., 2020,https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911817117). We clarify here that (a) the specific contributing area is defined in the limit of an infinitesimal contour length instead of the product of a reference contour width (Bonetti et al., 2018,https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2017.0693), and (b) not all solutions obtained from the minimalist landscape evolution model of Bonetti et al. (2020,https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911817117) are rescaled copies of each other. We take this opportunity to demonstrate that the boundary conditions impact the obtained solutions, which has not been considered in the dimensional analysis of Litwin et al. (2022,https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JF006239). We clarify this point by using dimensional analysis and numerical simulations for a square domain, where only one horizontal length scale (the side lengthl) enters the physical law.

     
    more » « less
  5. Abstract

    Precipitation and evapotranspiration, respectively, an input and an output for hydrologists and ocean scientists, but the opposite for meteorologists, quantify the intensity of vertical water exchange between land, ocean, and the atmosphere. The interesting paper by Dagan et al. (2019,https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GL084173) analyzed important constraints between such fluxes as a function of spatial scales. This commentary aims to provide a complementary, hydrologic point of view, emphasizing how their intermittency at different spatial and temporal scales is essentially related to the contrasting water storage capacities of the atmosphere and the Earth's surface. Alterations of such storage due to global warming and land cover change are a challenge for the geophysical community and beyond.

     
    more » « less