Search for: All records

The surface downwelling longwave radiation component (LW↓) 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↓ signal measured at the surface. In this study, we examine the LW↓ model errors found in the Antarctic Mesoscale Prediction System (AMPS) operational forecast model and the ERA5 model relative to observations from the ARM West Antarctic Radiation Experiment (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↓ during clear-sky conditions, high error variability (standard deviations > 20 W m−2) during any type of cloud occurrence, and negative LW↓ biases when LBCLs are observed (bias magnitudes >15 W m−2 in tenuous LBCL cases and >43 W m−2 in optically thick/opaque LBCLs instances). We suggest that a generally dry and liquid-deficient atmosphere responsible for the identified LW↓ biases in both models is the result of excessive ice formation and growth, which could stem from the model initial and lateral boundary conditions, microphysics scheme, aerosol representation, and/or limited vertical resolution.

This study presents results from a model intercomparison project, focusing on the range of responses in deep convective cloud updrafts to varying cloud condensation nuclei (CCN) concentrations among seven state-of-the-art cloud-resolving models. Simulations of scattered convective clouds near Houston, Texas, are conducted, after being initialized with both relatively low and high CCN concentrations. Deep convective updrafts are identified, and trends in the updraft intensity and frequency are assessed. The factors contributing to the vertical velocity tendencies are examined to identify the physical processes associated with the CCN-induced updraft changes. The models show several consistent trends. In general, the changes between the High-CCN and Low-CCN simulations in updraft magnitudes throughout the depth of the troposphere are within 15% for all of the models. All models produce stronger (~+5%–15%) mean updrafts from ~4–7 km above ground level (AGL) in the High-CCN simulations, followed by a waning response up to ~8 km AGL in most of the models. Thermal buoyancy was more sensitive than condensate loading to varying CCN concentrations in most of the models and more impactful in the mean updraft responses. However, there are also differences between the models. The change in the amount of deep convective updrafts varies significantly. Furthermore, approximately half the models demonstrate neutral-to-weaker (~−5% to 0%) updrafts above ~8 km AGL, while the other models show stronger (~+10%) updrafts in the High-CCN simulations. The combination of the CCN-induced impacts on the buoyancy and vertical perturbation pressure gradient terms better explains these middle- and upper-tropospheric updraft trends than the buoyancy terms alone.

In the atmosphere,microphysicsrefers to the microscale processes that affect cloud and precipitation particles and is a key linkage among the various components of Earth's atmospheric water and energy cycles. The representation of microphysical processes in models continues to pose a major challenge leading to uncertainty in numerical weather forecasts and climate simulations. In this paper, the problem of treating microphysics in models is divided into two parts: (i) how to represent the population of cloud and precipitation particles, given the impossibility of simulating all particles individually within a cloud, and (ii) uncertainties in the microphysical process rates owing to fundamental gaps in knowledge of cloud physics. The recently developed Lagrangian particle‐based method is advocated as a way to address several conceptual and practical challenges of representing particle populations using traditional bulk and bin microphysics parameterization schemes. For addressing critical gaps in cloud physics knowledge, sustained investment for observational advances from laboratory experiments, new probe development, and next‐generation instruments in space is needed. Greater emphasis on laboratory work, which has apparently declined over the past several decades relative to other areas of cloud physics research, is argued to be an essential ingredient for improving process‐level understanding. More systematic use of natural cloud and precipitation observations to constrain microphysics schemes is also advocated. Because it is generally difficult to quantify individual microphysical process rates from these observations directly, this presents an inverse problem that can be viewed from the standpoint of Bayesian statistics. Following this idea, a probabilistic framework is proposed that combines elements from statistical and physical modeling. Besides providing rigorous constraint of schemes, there is an added benefit of quantifying uncertainty systematically. Finally, a broader hierarchical approach is proposed to accelerate improvements in microphysics schemes, leveraging the advances described in this paper related to process modeling (using Lagrangian particle‐based schemes), laboratory experimentation, cloud and precipitation observations, and statistical methods.