Engineering topics

Schlosser, C. Adam

Publications and source records attributed to Schlosser, C. Adam.

6 records

DOE OSTI2024

Assessing compounding climate-related stresses and development pathways on the power sector in the central U.S.

Future configurations of the power system in the central region of the USA are dependent on relative costs of alternative power generation technologies, energy and environmental policies, and multiple climate-induced stresses. Higher demand in the summer months combined with compounding supply shocks in several power generation technologies can potentially cause a “perfect storm” leading to failure of the power system. Potential future climate stress must be incorporated in investment decisions and energy system planning and operation. We assess how projected future climate impacts on the power system would affect alternative pathways for the electricity sector considering a broad range of generation technologies and changes in demand. We calculate a “potential supply gap” metric for each pathway, system component, and sub-region of the US Heartland due to climate-induced effects on electricity demand and power generation. Potential supply gaps range from 5% in the North Central region under mild changes in climate to 21% in the Lakes-Mid Atlantic region under more severe climate change. We find increases in electricity demand to be more important in determining the size of the potential supply gap than stresses on power generation, while larger shares of renewables in the power system contribute to lower supply gaps. Our results provide a first step toward considering systemic climate impacts that may require changes in managing the grid or on potential additional capacity/reserves that may be needed.

Gurgel, Angelo Costa↗

DOE OSTI2023

A Large Ensemble Global Dataset for Climate Impact Assessments

We present a self-consistent, large ensemble, high-resolution global dataset of long-term future climate, which accounts for the uncertainty in climate system response to anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases and in geographical patterns of climate change. The dataset is developed by applying an integrated spatial disaggregation (SD) - bias-correction (BC) method to climate projections from the MIT Integrated Global System Model (IGSM). Four emission scenarios are considered that represent energy and environmental policies and commitments of potential future pathways, namely, Reference, Paris Forever, Paris 2 °C and Paris 1.5 °C. The dataset contains nine key meteorological variables on a monthly scale from 2021 to 2100 at a spatial resolution of 0.5°x 0.5°, including precipitation, air temperature (mean, minimum and maximum), near-surface wind speed, shortwave and longwave radiation, specific humidity, and relative humidity. We demonstrate the dataset’s ability to represent climate-change responses across various regions of the globe. This dataset can be used to support regional-scale climate-related impact assessments of risk across different applications that include hydropower, water resources, ecosystem, agriculture, and sustainable development.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2003

Observing the Global Water Cycle from Space

This paper presents an approach to measuring all major components of the water cycle from space. The goal of the paper is to explore the concept of using a sensor-web of satellites to observe the global water cycle. The details of the required measurements and observation systems are therefore only an initial approach and will undergo future refinement, as their details will be highly important. Key elements include observation and evaluation of all components of the water cycle in terms of the storage of water-in the ocean, air, cloud and precipitation, in soil, ground water, snow and ice, and in lakes and rivers-and in terms of the global fluxes of water between these reservoirs. For each component of the water cycle that must be observed, the appropriate temporal and spatial scales of measurement are estimated, along with the some of the frequencies that have been used for active and passive microwave observations of the quantities. The suggested types of microwave observations are based on the heritage for such measurements, and some aspects of the recent heritage of these measurement algorithms are listed. The observational requirements are based on present observational systems, as modified by expectations for future needs. Approaches to the development of space systems for measuring the global water cycle can be based on these observational requirements.

Hildebrand, Peter H.↗

NASA NTRS2002

The Impact of Land Initialization and Assimilation on Climate Predictability and Prediction

Analysis will be presented which explores the impact of land conditions on monthly to seasonal climate simulations in a variety of atmospheric general circulation models (AGCMs). In one set of experiments, the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory (GDFL) AGCM is used to explore the nature of soil-moisture predictability and associated climate predictability as an initial value problem. For another set of experiments, the Center for Ocean Land Atmosphere (COLA) and the Goddard Earth Observing System 2 (GEOS-2) AGCMs are used to investigate the impact of realistic snow initialization and assimilation in retrospective climate forecasts for the northern hemisphere spring (March-June).

Schlosser, C. Adam↗

NASA NTRS1999

Timescales of Soil Moisture Anomalies: Results from Two GCMs

Soil moisture anomalies dissipate over timescales that may span weeks to months. Characterizing the geographical and seasonal variations in these timescales can have important practical benefit; significant soil moisture "memory" allows long-lead forecasts of soil moisture, which have been found in recent studies to be essential for useful Ion--lead forecasts of precipitation in many regions. In this talk, we will present and compare the soil moisture timescales derived in two separate general circulation model (GCM) studies. Both studies employ multiple ensembles of short-term climate simulations. Timescales at a given point are effectively estimated by determining how quickly the soil moisture distribution generated in one ensemble of simulations (characterized by a unique set of initial soil moisture conditions) approaches that produced by another ensemble (characterized by a different set of initial soil moisture conditions). The talk will include a discussion of why the timescales produced by the two GCMs differ in some regions, and it will also describe the impact of soil moisture memory on simulated precipitation.

Koster, Randal D.↗

NASA NTRS1995

Use of midlatitude soil moisture and meteorological observations to validate soil moisture simulations with biosphere and bucket models

Soil moisture observations in sites with natural vegetation were made for several decades in the former Soviet Union at hundreds of stations. In this paper, the authors use data from six of these stations from different climatic regimes, along with ancillary meteorological and actinometric data, to demonstrate a method to validate soil moisture simulations with biosphere and bucket models. Some early and current general circulation models (GCMs) use bucket models for soil hydrology calculations. More recently, the Simple Biosphere Model (SiB) was developed to incorporate the effects of vegetation on fluxes of moisture, momentum, and energy at the earth's surface into soil hydrology models. Until now, the bucket and SiB have been verified by comparison with actual soil moisture data only on a limited basis. In this study, a Simplified SiB (SSiB) soil hydrology model and a 15-cm bucket model are forced by observed meteorological and actinometric data every 3 h for 6-yr simulations at the six stations. The model calculations of soil moisture are compared to observations of soil moisture, literally 'ground truth,' snow cover, surface albedo, and net radiation, and with each other. For three of the stations, the SSiB and 15-cm bucket models produce good simulations of seasonal cycles and interannual variations of soil moisture. For the other three stations, there are large errors in the simulations by both models. Inconsistencies in specification of field capacity may be partly responsible. There is no evidence that the SSiB simulations are superior in simulating soil moisture variations. In fact, the models are quite similar since SSiB implicitly has a bucket embedded in it. One of the main differences between the models is in the treatment of runoff due to melting snow in the spring -- SSiB incorrectly puts all the snowmelt into runoff. While producing similar soil moisture simulations, the models produce very different surface latent and sensible heat fluxes, which would have large effects on GCM simulations.

Robock, Alan↗