SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
A daily climatology of the atmospheric circulation of the Arctic and the associated cloud conditions were determined. These are used for comparisons with the variability of general circulation model, generated circulation, and cloud cover for the same region.
The Nile River basin is one of the global hotspots vulnerable to climate change impacts because of a fast-growing population and geopolitical tensions. Previous studies demonstrated that general circulation models (GCMs) frequently show disagreement in the sign of change in annual precipitation projections. Here, we first evaluate the performance of 20 GCMs from phase six of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) benchmarked against a high-spatial-resolution precipitation dataset dating back to 1983 from Precipitation Estimation from Remotely Sensed Information Using Artificial Neural Networks–Climate Data Record (PERSIANN-CDR). Next, a Bayesian model averaging (BMA) approach is adopted to derive probability distributions of precipitation projections in the Nile basin. Retrospective analysis reveals that most GCMs exhibit considerable (up to 64% of mean annual precipitation) and spatially heterogenous bias in simulating annual precipitation. Moreover, it is shown that all GCMs underestimate interannual variability; thus, the ensemble range is underdispersive and is a poor indicator of uncertainty. The projected changes from the BMA model show that the value and sign of change vary considerably across the Nile basin. Specifically, it is found that projected changes in the two headwaters basins, namely, the Blue Nile and Upper White Nile, are 0.03% and -1.65%, respectively; both are statistically insignificant at α = 0.05. The uncertainty range estimated from the BMA model shows that the probability of a precipitation decrease is much higher in the Upper White Nile basin whereas projected change in the Blue Nile is highly uncertain both in magnitude and sign of change.
We examine the accuracy of density prediction by the first principles model Thermosphere Ionosphere Electrodynamics General Circulation Model (TIEGCM) developed by the National Center for Atmospheric Research and compare it to the accuracy of three empirical models: Jacchia 71, the Naval Research Laboratory Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter Extended 2000 (NRLMSIS), Jacchia 1971, and Jacchia-Bowman 2008. Comparisons are made for three large storms: the October 2003 storm, the March 2013 storm, and the March 2015 storm. To evaluate the accuracy of these models we use tracking data for nine space objects in low Earth orbit. Additionally, we evaluate the accuracy of the TIEGCM and NRLMSIS with data from high precision accelerometers on the Challenging Minisatellite Payload (CHAMP) and Gravity field and Circulation Explorer (GOCE) satellites. The goal is to assess the use of a first principles model as a potential tool for forecasting satellite drag during large magnetic storms. For the storms considered, we found the TIEGCM, JB2008, and NRLMSIS models to be substantially more accurate than the Jacchia 71 model. The accuracies of the TIEGCM and JB2008 models were similar, but overall, the TIEGCM was more accurate. We found smaller differences for TIEGCM versus CHAMP than for NRLMIS for the Halloween Storm, and smaller differences than results published for JB2008 and the assimilative model HASDM. The empirical models are at present more practical for operational purposes, but the TIEGCM, developed as a research model, with a greater focus on operational use offers the potential for improved utility during stressing conditions.
It has been demonstrated that current-generation global ocean general circulation models (OGCM) are able to simulate large-scale sea level variations fairly well. In this study, a GFDL/MOM-based OGCM was used to investigate its sensitivity to different wind forcing. Simulations of global sea level using wind forcing from the ERS-1 Scatterometer and the NMC operational analysis were compared to the observations made by the TOPEX/Poseidon (T/P) radar altimeter for a two-year period. The result of the study has demonstrated the sensitivity of the OGCM to the quality of wind forcing, as well as the synergistic use of two spaceborne sensors in advancing the study of wind-driven ocean dynamics.
This paper describes the first implementation of the Δx = 3.25 km version of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) global atmosphere model and its behavior in a 40-day prescribed-sea-surface-temperature simulation (January 20 through February 28, 2020). This simulation was performed as part of the DYnamics of the Atmospheric general circulation Modeled On Non-hydrostatic Domains (DYAMOND) Phase 2 model intercomparison. Effective resolution is found to be ~ 6x the horizontal dynamics grid resolution despite using a coarser grid for physical parameterizations. Despite this new model being in an immature and untuned state, moving to 3.25 km grid spacing solves several long-standing problems with the E3SM model. In particular, Amazon precipitation is much more realistic, the frequency of light and heavy precipitation is improved, agreement between the simulated and observed diurnal cycle of tropical precipitation is excellent, and the vertical structure of tropical convection and coastal stratocumulus look good. In addition, the new model is able to capture the frequency and structure of important weather events (e.g., tropical cyclones, extratropical cyclones including atmospheric rivers, and cold air outbreaks). Interestingly, this model does not get rid of the erroneous southern branch of the intertropical convergence zone nor the tendency for strongest convection to occur over the Maritime Continent rather than the West Pacific, both of which are classic climate model biases. Several other problems with the simulation are identified, underscoring the fact that this model is a work in progress.
Climate models are among humanity's most ambitious and elaborate creations. They are designed to simulate the interactions of the atmosphere, ocean, land surface, and cryosphere on time scales far beyond the limits of deterministic predictability, and including the effects of time-dependent external forcings. The processes involved include radiative transfer, fluid dynamics, microphysics, and some aspects of geochemistry, biology, and ecology. The models explicitly simulate processes on spatial scales ranging from the circumference of the Earth down to one hundred kilometers or smaller, and implicitly include the effects of processes on even smaller scales down to a micron or so. The atmospheric component of a climate model can be called an atmospheric global circulation model (AGCM). In an AGCM, calculations are done on a three-dimensional grid, which in some of today's climate models consists of several million grid cells. For each grid cell, about a dozen variables are time-stepped as the model integrates forward from its initial conditions. These so-called prognostic variables have special importance because they are the only things that a model remembers from one time step to the next; everything else is recreated on each time step by starting from the prognostic variables and the boundary conditions. The prognostic variables typically include information about the mass of dry air, the temperature, the wind components, water vapor, various condensed-water species, and at least a few chemical species such as ozone. A good way to understand how climate models work is to consider the lengthy and complex process used to develop one. Lets imagine that a new AGCM is to be created, starting from a blank piece of paper. The model may be intended for a particular class of applications, e.g., high-resolution simulations on time scales of a few decades. Before a single line of code is written, the conceptual foundation of the model must be designed through a creative envisioning that starts from the intended application and is based on current understanding of how the atmosphere works and the inventory of mathematical methods available.
The present generation of general circulation models (GCM) use parameterized cumulus schemes and run at hydrostatic grid resolutions. To improve the representation of cloud-scale moist processes and landeatmosphere interactions, a global, Multi-scale Modeling Framework (MMF) coupled to the Land Information System (LIS) has been developed at NASA-Goddard Space Flight Center. The MMFeLIS has three components, a finite-volume (fv) GCM (Goddard Earth Observing System Ver. 4, GEOS-4), a 2D cloud-resolving model (Goddard Cumulus Ensemble, GCE), and the LIS, representing the large-scale atmospheric circulation, cloud processes, and land surface processes, respectively. The non-hydrostatic GCE model replaces the single-column cumulus parameterization of fvGCM. The model grid is composed of an array of fvGCM gridcells each with a series of embedded GCE models. A horizontal coupling strategy, GCE4fvGCM4Coupler4LIS, offered significant computational efficiency, with the scalability and I/O capabilities of LIS permitting landeatmosphere interactions at cloud-scale. Global simulations of 2007e2008 and comparisons to observations and reanalysis products were conducted. Using two different versions of the same land surface model but the same initial conditions, divergence in regional, synoptic-scale surface pressure patterns emerged within two weeks. The sensitivity of largescale circulations to land surface model physics revealed significant functional value to using a scalable, multi-model land surface modeling system in global weather and climate prediction.
Although many improvements have been made in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5), clouds remain a significant source of uncertainty in general circulation models (GCMs) because their structural and optical properties are strongly dependent upon interactions between aerosol/cloud microphysics and dynamics that are unresolved in such models. Recent changes to the planetary boundary layer (PBL) turbulence and moist convection parameterizations in the NASA GISS Model E2 atmospheric GCM(post-CMIP5, hereafter P5) have improved cloud simulations significantly compared to its CMIP5 (hereafter C5) predecessor. A study has been performed to evaluate these changes between the P5 and C5 versions of the GCM, both of which used prescribed sea surface temperatures. P5 and C5 simulated cloud fraction (CF), liquid water path (LWP), ice water path (IWP), cloud water path (CWP), precipitable water vapor (PWV), and relative humidity (RH) have been compared to multiple satellite observations including the Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System-Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (CERES-MODIS, hereafter CM), CloudSat- Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO; hereafter CC), Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS), and Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer for Earth Observing System (AMSR-E). Although some improvements are observed in the P5 simulation on a global scale, large improvements have been found over the southern midlatitudes (SMLs), where correlations increased and both bias and root-mean-square error (RMSE) significantly decreased, in relation to the previous C5 simulation, when compared to observations. Changes to the PBL scheme have resulted in improved total column CFs, particularly over the SMLs where marine boundary layer (MBL) CFs have increased by nearly 20% relative to the previous C5 simulation. Globally, the P5 simulated CWPs are 25 gm22 lower than the previous C5 results. The P5 version of the GCM simulates PWV and RH higher than its C5 counterpart and agrees well with the AMSR-E and AIRS observations. The moister atmospheric conditions simulated by P5 are consistent with the CF comparison and provide a strong support for the increase in MBL clouds over the SMLs. Over the tropics, the P5 version of the GCM simulated total column CFs and CWPs are slightly lower than the previous C5 results, primarily as a result of the shallower tropical boundary layer in P5 relative to C5 in regions outside the marine stratocumulus decks.
The effectiveness of climate change impact assessments and the development of adaptation strategies depend on the availability of high-quality future weather data. However, significant gaps exist between the needs of the energy research community and the focus of the climate modeling community, primarily due to a historical lack of communication and collaboration between the two groups. Here, to address this issue, this work provides a comprehensive overview of the critical aspects involved in creating future weather data for building and energy system modeling, including emissions scenarios, general circulation models, downscaling methods, categories of future weather data, and uncertainties in climate simulations. Moreover, it critically evaluates the applicability and suitability of various types of future weather data in five key application scenarios: energy use analysis, resilience analysis, HVAC design, utility-scale analysis, and renewable energy analysis. Finally, this work presents recommendations for high-level actions and research directions to foster collaboration between the energy research and climate modeling communities and to promote the integration of future weather data into energy codes and the design practices of buildings and energy systems.
The Radiative-Convective Equilibrium Model Intercomparison Project (RCEMIP) is an intercomparison of multiple types of numerical models configured in radiative-convective equilibrium (RCE). RCE is an idealization of the tropical atmosphere that has long been used to study basic questions in climate science. Here, we employ RCE to investigate the role that clouds and convective activity play in determining cloud feedbacks, climate sensitivity, the state of convective aggregation, and the equilibrium climate. RCEMIP is unique among intercomparisons in its inclusion of a wide range of model types, including atmospheric general circulation models (GCMs), single column models (SCMs), cloud-resolving models (CRMs), large eddy simulations (LES), and global cloud-resolving models (GCRMs). The first results are presented from the RCEMIP ensemble of more than 30 models. While there are large differences across the RCEMIP ensemble in the representation of mean profiles of temperature, humidity, and cloudiness, in a majority of models anvil clouds rise, warm, and decrease in area coverage in response to an increase in sea surface temperature (SST). Nearly all models exhibit self-aggregation in large domains and agree that self-aggregation acts to dry and warm the troposphere, reduce high cloudiness, and increase cooling to space. The degree of self-aggregation exhibits no clear tendency with warming. There is a wide range of climate sensitivities, but models with parameterized convection tend to have lower climate sensitivities than models with explicit convection. In models with parameterized convection, aggregated simulations have lower climate sensitivities than unaggregated simulations.
An analysis of the signal-to-noise ratio of the best gravity field available shows that a basis exists for the recovery of the dominant parameters of the quasi-stationary sea surface topography. Results obtained from the analysis of GEOS-3 show that it is feasible to recover the quasi-stationary dynamic sea surface topography as a function of wavelength. The gravity field models required for synoptic ocean circulation modeling are less exacting in that constituents affecting radial components of orbital position need not be known through shorter wavelengths.
The requirements for radiation measurements suitable for the understanding, improvement, and verification of models used in performing climate research are considered. Both zonal energy balance models and three dimensional general circulation models are considered, and certain problems are identified as common to all models. Areas of emphasis include regional energy balance observations, spectral band observations, cloud-radiation interaction, and the radiative properties of the earth's surface.
There is a growing body of theoretical and empirical support for the concept of instabilities in the climate system, and indications that abrupt climate change may in some cases contribute to abrupt extinctions. Theoretical indications of instabilities can be found in a broad spectrum of climate models (energy balance models, a thermohaline model of deep-water circulation, atmospheric general circulation models, and coupled ocean-atmosphere models). Abrupt transitions can be of several types and affect the environment in different ways. There is increasing evidence for abrupt climate change in the geologic record and involves both interglacial-glacial scale transitions and the longer-term evolution of climate over the last 100 million years. Records from the Cenozoic clearly show that the long-term trend is characterized by numerous abrupt steps where the system appears to be rapidly moving to a new equilibrium state. The long-term trend probably is due to changes associated with plate tectonic processes, but the abrupt steps most likely reflect instabilities in the climate system as the slowly changing boundary conditions caused the climate to reach some threshold critical point. A more detailed analysis of abrupt steps comes from high-resolution studies of glacial-interglacial fluctuations in the Pleistocene. Comparison of climate transitions with the extinction record indicates that many climate and biotic transitions coincide. The Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction is not a candidate for an extinction event due to instabilities in the climate system. It is quite possible that more detailed comparisons and analysis will indicate some flaws in the climate instability-extinction hypothesis, but at present it appears to be a viable candidate as an alternate mechanism for causing abrupt environmental changes and extinctions.
A method is devised for calculating wind, momentum, and other flux parameters that characterize the planetary boundary layer (PBL) and thereby facilitate the calibration of spaceborne vs. in situ flux estimates. Single Doppler lidar data are used to estimate the variance of the mean wind and the covariance related to the vertically pointing fluxes of horizontal momentum. The skewness of the vertical velocity and the range of kinetic energy dissipation are also estimated, and the surface heat flux is determined by means of a statistical Navier-Stokes equation. The conclusion shows that the PBL structure combines both 'bottom-up' and 'top-down' processes suggesting that the relevant parameters for the atmospheric boundary layer be revised. The conclusions are of significant interest to the modeling techniques used in General Circulation Models as well as to flux estimation.
The Penn State/NCAR mesoscale model, as adapted for use at ARC, was used as a testbed for the development and validation of cloud models for use in General Circulation Models (GCM's). This modeling approach also allows us to intercompare the predictions of the various cloud schemes within the same dynamical framework. The use of the PSU/NCAR mesoscale model also allows us to compare our results with FIRE-II (First International Satellite Cloud Climatology Project Regional Experiment) observations, instead of climate statistics. Though a promising approach, our work to date revealed several difficulties. First, the model by design is limited in spatial coverage and is only run for 12 to 48 hours at a time. Hence the quality of the simulation will depend heavily on the initial conditions. The poor quality of upper-tropospheric measurements of water vapor is well known and the situation is particularly bad for mid-latitude winter since the coupling with the surface is less direct than in summer so that relying on the model to spin-up a reasonable moisture field is not always successful. Though one of the most common atmospheric constituents, water vapor is relatively difficult to measure accurately, especially operationally over large areas. The standard NWS sondes have little sensitivity at the low temperatures where cirrus form and the data from the GOES 6.7 micron channel is difficult to quantify. For this reason, the goals of FIRE Cirrus II included characterizing the three-dimensional distribution of water vapor and clouds. In studying the data from FIRE Cirrus II, it was found that no single special observation technique provides accurate regional distributions of water vapor. The Raman lidar provides accurate measurements, but only at the Hub, for levels up to 10 km, and during nighttime hours. The CLASS sondes are more sensitive to moisture at low temperatures than are the NWS sondes, but the four stations only cover an area of two hundred kilometers on a side. The aircraft give the most accurate measurements of water vapor, but are limited in spatial and temporal coverage. This problem is partly alleviated by the use of the MAPS analyses, a four-dimensional data assimilation system that combines the previous 3-hour forecast with the available observations, but its upper-level moisture analyses are sometimes deficient because of the vapor measurement problem. An attempt was made to create a consistent four-dimensional description of the water vapor distribution during the second IFO by subjectively combining data from a variety of sources, including MAPS analyses, CLASS sondes, SPECTRE sondes, NWS sondes, GOES satellite analyses, radars, lidars, and microwave radiometers.
The topics covered include the following: land and climate modeling; sensitivity studies; the process of a land model; model-specific parameterizations; water stress; within-canopy resistances; partial vegetation; canopy temperature; and present experience with a land model coupled to a general circulation model.
In this report, we address the intercomparison of precipitation (P), evaporation (E), and surface hydrologic forcing (P-E) for 23 Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) general circulation models (GCM's) including relevant observations, over a variety of spatial and temporal scales. The intercomparison includes global and hemispheric means, latitudinal profiles, selected area means for the tropics and extratropics, ocean and land, respectively. In addition, we have computed anomaly pattern correlations among models and observations for different seasons, harmonic analysis for annual and semiannual cycles, and rain-rate frequency distribution. We also compare the joint influence of temperature and precipitation on local climate using the Koeppen climate classification scheme.
Upper thermospheric meridional wind data at midlatitudes and for low magnetic activity are examined for solar activity variations following an analysis scheme suggested by a Coordinated Analysis of the Thermosphere workshop. Wind data from incoherent scatter, Fabry-Perot, and F2 peak heights show decreasing diurnal amplitudes with increasing solar activity during all seasons, except for Saint Santin data, which show a slight increase in summer. Equivalent winds from F2 peak height data have strong decreases in diurnal amplitude in all seasons. The coupled thermosphere ionosphere model and thermosphere ionosphere global circulation model predictions of diurnal amplitude, while differing considerably in magnitude, also show decreasing amplitudes during all seasons except summer, while the HWM90 empirical model amplitudes increase slightly with solar activity during all seasons. The diurnal mean wind trends with solar activity are fairly weak, except for Millstone Hill incoherent scatter radar, which shows a shift from strong southward to near zero or northward wind with increasing activity. Model results for the mean generally fall within the band of measurements. Near midnight, most of the data also show that the typically southward winds weaken with increasing solart activity in all seasons except summer, when results are mixed. There are significant differences between the trends and between absolute values for the various data sets and models which need further investigation.