Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “METEOROLOGY”

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.

At least 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2005

Diagnostic Comparison of Meteorological Analyses during the 2002 Antarctic Winter

Several meteorological datasets, including U.K. Met Office (MetO), European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP), and NASA's Goddard Earth Observation System (GEOS-4) analyses, are being used in studies of the 2002 Southern Hemisphere (SH) stratospheric winter and Antarctic major warming. Diagnostics are compared to assess how these studies may be affected by the meteorological data used. While the overall structure and evolution of temperatures, winds, and wave diagnostics in the different analyses provide a consistent picture of the large-scale dynamics of the SH 2002 winter, several significant differences may affect detailed studies. The NCEP-NCAR reanalysis (REAN) and NCEP-Department of Energy (DOE) reanalysis-2 (REAN-2) datasets are not recommended for detailed studies, especially those related to polar processing, because of lower-stratospheric temperature biases that result in underestimates of polar processing potential, and because their winds and wave diagnostics show increasing differences from other analyses between similar to 30 and 10 hPa (their top level). Southern Hemisphere polar stratospheric temperatures in the ECMWF 40-Yr Re-analysis (ERA-40) show unrealistic vertical structure, so this long-term reanalysis is also unsuited for quantitative studies. The NCEP/Climate Prediction Center (CPC) objective analyses give an inferior representation of the upper-stratospheric vortex. Polar vortex transport barriers are similar in all analyses, but there is large variation in the amount, patterns, and timing of mixing, even among the operational assimilated datasets (ECMWF, MetO, and GEOS-4). The higher-resolution GEOS-4 and ECMWF assimilations provide significantly better representation of filamentation and small-scale structure than the other analyses, even when fields gridded at reduced resolution are studied. The choice of which analysis to use is most critical for detailed transport studies (including polar process modeling) and studies involving synoptic evolution in the upper stratosphere. The operational assimilated datasets are better suited for most applications than the NCEP/CPC objective analyses and the reanalysis datasets.

stratosphere↗
NASA NTRS2017

PM2.5 Variation Related to AOD and Meteorological Conditions on Diurnal Scale in Beijing, China

PM2.5 (particulate matter with diameter less than 2.5um) is one of the major air pollutants in many regions around the globe. Column integrated aerosol optical depth (AOD) measurement provides a potential way to estimate surface PM2.5 concentration from the remote sensing technics. In this analysis, we compiled hourly measurements of surface PM2.5 and AOD made in Beijing, China and meteorological conditions provided by NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office's Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) product in recent years. On daily basis, hourly PM2.5 and AOD show positive correlation, i.e. correlation coefficient (R) is higher than 0.5 on about 50% of days. We apply multi-variant analysis to this dataset and estimate the magnitude of AOD variance that can be explained by or related to PM2.5 and relevant meteorological conditions changes.

PM2.5↗
DOE OSTI2024

Trends and meteorological drivers of extreme daily reservoir evaporation events in the western United States

Extreme daily evaporation from reservoir surfaces can lead to significant short-term water losses, affecting water quality, water supply, and reservoir operation strategies. Historical trends in daily reservoir evaporation events have eluded the scientific and operational communities, largely due to a lack of long-term, consistent data record. This study quantifies trends in extreme daily reservoir evaporation events at 165 major reservoirs located in the western U.S. Here, we use the place-based energy balance and aerodynamic Daily Lake Evaporation Model (DLEM) driven by multiple meteorological data products (RTMA, gridMET, Daymet) to estimate daily evaporation rates at these reservoirs from 1981 to 2022. The results—while are based on different meteorological forcing datasets—consistently indicate that the California, Lower Colorado, and Rio Grande hydrologic regions are more prone to higher daily evaporation extremes. Compared to the rest of western U.S, these three regions also experience a more pronounced increasing trend in the annual maximum daily evaporation rate, at about 0.3 mm day -1 decade -1 during 1981-2022. The results show that heat and dryness are the main drivers to the increasing trend of extreme evaporation, while extreme wind speed is the primary contributor to exceptionally high daily evaporation events across all regions. This phenomenon is particularly prominent in the arid Lower Colorado region, but less significant in the cold and humid Pacific Northwest region. We also find that the correlation between extreme wind speed and extreme evaporation degrades as the time scale increases from daily, to monthly and seasonal. Our findings have strong implications for the pattern and distribution of extreme evaporation events at the western U.S. reservoirs, and illustrate how various drivers influence extreme evaporation across different time scales.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Similarities in Meteorological Composites Among Different Atmospheric River Detection Tools During Landfall Over Western Coastal North America

Many atmospheric river detection tools (ARDTs) have been developed over the past few decades to identify atmospheric rivers (ARs). Different ARDTs have been observed to capture a variety of frequencies, shapes, and sizes of ARs. Due to this, questions have arisen about the underlying phenomena associated with the detected ARs: do all ARDTs detect the same meteorological phenomena? In this paper, we assess eight ARDTs and investigate the underlying synoptic scale phenomena during landfalling ARs along the west coast of North America. We find that during landfalling AR events, prevalent low-pressure and high-pressure systems converge and enhance moisture influx toward the landfalling site. We identify that all eight ARDTs identify AR conditions associated with baroclinic waves, with the region of intense integrated vapor transport (IVT) located downstream of the upper level (500 hPa) trough. The magnitude of IVT is enhanced by the strength of the pressure gradients in the confluence region. Although the ARDTs assessed agree on the general phenomena, there are however subtle differences in each ARDT per the clustering analysis we performed. We conclude that the eight ARDTs identify similar underpinning synoptic scale meteorological phenomena.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Characterizing How Meteorological Forcing Selection and Parameter Uncertainty Influence Community Land Model Version 5 Hydrological Applications in the United States

Despite the increasing use of large-scale Land Surface Models (LSMs) in predicting hydrological responses in extreme conditions, there's a critical gap in understanding the uncertainties in these predictions. This study addresses this gap through a detailed diagnostic evaluation of the uncertainties arising from meteorological forcing selection and model parametrization in hydrological simulations of the Community Land Model version 5 (CLM5). CLM5 is configured at a spatial scale of about 12-km to simulate runoff processes for 464 headwater watersheds, selected from the Catchment Attributes for Large-Sample Studies (CAMELS) dataset to be representative of physiographic and climatic gradients across the conterminous United States. For each watershed, CLM5 is driven by five commonly used gridded forcing datasets in combination with a large ensemble (> 1200) of key CLM5 hydrologic parameters. Our results suggest that uncertainty in CLM5 runoff simulations resulting from both forcing and parametric sources is markedly higher in arid regions, e.g., Great Plains and Midwest regions. Uncertainty in low flow is dominated by parametric uncertainty, while the selection of meteorological forcing contributes more dominantly to high flow and seasonal flows during fall and spring. Our analysis also demonstrates that the selection of forcing datasets and the metrics used to calibrate CLM5 significantly impact the model’s predictive accuracy in extreme event severity for both floods and droughts. Overall, the results from this study highlight the need to understand and account for forcing and parametric uncertainties in CLM5 simulations, particularly for hazard and risk assessments addressing hydrologic extremes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Quality-Controlled Meteorological Data from the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC) Network, Phoenix, Arizona (1987-2024)

This dataset contains 15- or 30-minute interval meteorological data from the Flood Control District of Maricopa County (FCDMC), Arizona, USA, covering eight key variables across multiple sensor stations between 1987 and 2024. Each variable is stored as a separate CSV file, containing time-series data that have undergone rigorous quality control (QC) procedures and, where appropriate, short-gap interpolation for consistency. The quality control (QC) pipeline consisted of four sequential tests: (1) a range test to ensure all values fall within physically realistic limits, (2) a step test to identify abrupt and implausible changes between consecutive records, (3) a proximity test that validates flagged values from step test using data from nearby stations and exceedance probability thresholds, and (4) a persistence test to detect and remove periods of unrealistically constant readings. These thresholds were calibrated to Arizona’s environmental conditions and sensor specifications. After QC, short gaps (≤2 hours) were linearly interpolated to ensure consistent temporal resolution, except for wind variables. Due to a major upgrade in FCDMC’s data transmission system, only ALERT-2 protocol data (2016–2024) for wind variables are included; earlier ALERT-1 data were excluded because of irregular sampling and high missing rates. This dataset supports regional climate and infrastructure resilience studies by providing standardized, high-resolution meteorological data for the greater Phoenix metropolitan area.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Meteorological and Soil Data from Ecohydrology Sensor Towers at Pump House and Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado, 2019-2025

This data package includes hourly meteorological and soil sensor data at eight ecohydrology monitoring sites in East River Watershed, Colorado as part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (WFSFA) research led by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL). Four field sites were located on the hillslope of East River (ER) near Pump House (PH) at Mount Crested Butte (ER-PHS1 to 4), and the other four are in the Snodgrass Mountain (SG) area (SG-EHS5 to 8). In terms of vegetation cover, three sites are in montane grasslands (ER-PHS1, ER-PHS2, and SG-EHS5), three are below evergreen conifer canopy (ER-PHS3, SG-EHS6, and SG-EHS7), and two are below deciduous aspen canopy (ER-PHS4 and SG-EHS8). The monitoring period began in October 2019 at the East River sites, in October 2020 at SG-EHS5 and SG-EHS6, and in October 2021 at SG-EHS7 and SG-EHS8. In September 2024, all four East River sites were fully retired. The four Snodgrass Mountain sites remain active. Each site is equipped with a comprehensive suite of meteorological sensors on a tripod and soil sensors that measure weather, energy fluxes, and soil variables. This data package includes measurements from ten different types of sensors and up to thirteen individual sensors per site, including (1) a weather station (measurement height ranges from 2.8~3.8 meters (m) above ground), (2) a quantum sensor for photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) (2.4~3.3m), (3) a net radiometer (1.7~2.1m), (4) an infrared radiometer (1.6~2.2m), (5) a sonic distance sensor (1.5~1.9m), (6) a soil carbon dioxide (CO2) flux chamber (0m), (7) a soil heat flux plate (-0.05m below ground), (8) a soil oxygen sensor (-0.3m), (9) a soil water potential sensor (-0.3m), and (10) soil water content sensors at 3~4 depths (-1.15 ~ -0.1m). A total of twenty-three variables is reported in this data package, including (1) atmospheric variables: air temperature (TA), atmospheric pressure (PA), vapor pressure (VP), and vapor pressure deficit (VPD), (2) precipitation variables: rain precipitation (P) and snow depth (D_SNOW), (3) energy fluxes variables: four-component net radiation (NETRAD) (shortwave/longwave incoming/outgoing radiation, SW_IN, SW_OUT, LW_IN, LW_OUT), photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD), and soil heat flux (G), (4) soil variables: soil water content (SWC), soil water potential (SWP), soil temperature (TS), soil bulk electrical conductivity (COND_SOIL), and soil gaseous oxygen concentration (O2_SOIL), (5) wind variables: two-dimensional wind speed (WS), gust speed (WS_MAX), and wind direction (WD), and (6) surface variables: surface infrared temperature (T_CANOPY) and soil CO2 flux (CO2_SOIL). Please see the Methods section for data processing and QA/QC steps taken to generate the hourly datasets. The following files are included in this data package (notes on version: v{x}-{y}, where x is the metadata version, and y is the data version, when applicable): (1) “metadata_site_v{x}-{y}.csv” - a site metadata file that summarizes location information of all sites, including site ID, description, coordinates, timeframe, elevation, and vegetation cover, (2) “metadata_instrument_v{x}-{y}.csv” - an instrument metadata file that summarizes sensor information of all sites, including sensor manufacturer and model, measurement height, and sampling and averaging interval of all variables, (3) "data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.csv" - eight data files that contain hourly data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (4) “/figure/data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.png" - eight figures that help visualize data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (5) “/photo/*” - photos of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, and (6) four file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (*_dd.csv) files that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. Notes: (1) Measurement height: Each variable name is followed by conventional positional qualifiers “H_V_R”, where H indicates the relative horizontal positions of that specific variable, V the vertical positions, and R the replicates. In this data package, only the vertical qualifier V varies, and V increases from the highest vertical position (V=1) to the lowest. Variables with the same qualifier are not necessarily measured by the same sensor, and the same variable with the same qualifier across different sites are not necessarily measured at the same height. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor information and measurement heights, and whether a variable is measured below the canopy. (2) Variable availability: Snow depth is not available at ER-PHS3 and SG-EHS7. SWC, soil temperature, and soil bulk EC at the deepest depth (<-1m) are not available at SG-EHS6 and SG-EHS7. The missing value code for numeric variables is -9999, except for SWP. For SWP, the missing value code is +9999, because SWP values are negative. (3) Sampling frequency: Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the increase of sampling frequency of some variables from 30-min to 1-min at ER-PHS1 to 4 in July 2020. (4) Sensors: While the methods of each sensor are not detailed, all sensors are commercially available, and their methods can be found in their manuals. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor manufacturer and model information. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

LYNM PE1 Shot A Meteorology Team Technical Report

Weather support for Shot A was done by NOAA’s Air Resources Laboratory (ARL) / Special Operations and Research Division (SORD) and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL). Weather support activities included wind and precipitation forecasting, maintaining and monitoring PE1 meteorology towers MT02-11, maintaining and monitoring the ARL/SORD tower on Aqueduct Mesa (A12AI, also called MT01), maintaining and monitoring the Blackbrush energy flux tower, radiosonde preparation and launch, providing weather conditions on shot day for go/no-go criteria, and quality control and submission of the datasets. ARL/SORD additionally maintains and monitors the meteorological tower network (Mesonet) and sodar (at Desert Rock) for NNSS.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

LANL Meteorological Program: 2023 Data Completeness/Quality Report

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) operates seven mesa-top instrumented meteorology towers: Technical Area (TA) 6, TA-49, TA-53, TA-54, TA-63, TA-54B, and TA-16B. An additional instrumented tower is located in Mortandad Canyon (TA-5 MDCN), and there is a rain gauge at North Community (NCOM), located within the town of Los Alamos. The 10 meter (m) towers at TA-63, TA-54B, and TA-16B have been in testing since they were installed in 2021, and will be included in a future data completeness report. A description of the meteorology monitoring network, prior to the installation of the TA-63, TA-54B, and TA-16B is found in Dewart and Boggs (2014). Four of the mesa-top towers (e.g., TA-6, TA-49, TA-53, and TA-54) are instrumented at the 1.2 m, 11.5 m, 23 m, and 46 m levels. In addition, the TA-6 tower is instrumented at the 92 m level. The TA-5 MDCN tower is 10 m in height and is instrumented at 1.2 m and 10 m. Data are collected and averaged every 15 minutes. Range checking is performed on each measurement every 15 minutes; data that are beyond normal ranges are eliminated from the data set and replaced by a code for missing data. In addition, data are reviewed weekly by qualified meteorologists to identify bad data not identified by the range checking technique. The data steward eliminates these data from the data set and replaces them with a code for missing data. The instrument technicians also review that data and schedule instrument replacement, as required. All instruments are calibrated at a frequency that meets the criteria identified in ANSI/ANS-3.11-2015. Data completeness is determined by the number of total 15-minute records available versus the number of possible measurements for the entire year. As a rule, the meteorologists do not attempt to estimate data that are eliminated as bad data. Original datalogger records, including bad data, can be recalled from program archival storage.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Meteorological Services Annual Data Report for 2024

This document presents the meteorological data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) by Meteorological Services (Met Services) for the calendar year 2024. The purpose is to publicize the data sets available to emergency personnel, researchers and facility operations. Met services has been collecting data at BNL since 1949. Data from 1994 to the present is available in digital format. Data is presented in monthly plots of one-minute data. This allows the reader the ability to peruse the data for trends or anomalies that may be of interest to them. Full data sets are available to BNL personnel and to a limited degree outside researchers. The full data sets allow plotting the data on expanded time scales to obtain greater details (e.g., daily solar variability, inversions, etc.).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Targeted Mobile Measurements to Isolate the Impacts of Aerosols and Meteorology on Deep Convection

One of the main goals of the Department of Energy (DOE) Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER) field campaign near Houston, TX was to improve understanding of meteorology and aerosol effects on deep convective storms. To help TRACER achieve its goals of disentangling aerosol-cloud interactions from meteorology, the Texas A&M University (TAMU) team deployed the new fully mobile Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurement Van (ROAM-V) carrying instruments to measure aerosol and atmospheric properties that was moved to multiple locations on a deployment day of isolated convection initiated by the sea breeze.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

WFIP3 - RHOD Site - PNNL Surface Meteorological Suit / Raw Data

This dataset contains raw data from the WFIP3 RHOD site supplementary meteorological sensors: T/RH and barometer; 1-sec average. The supplementary meteorological suite was added to PNNL Surface Flux Station to provide independent measurements of air temperature, relative humidity, and atmospheric pressure.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Surface Meteorological Station / Raw Data

This dataset contains raw data from the WFIP3 RHOD site supplementary meteorological sensors: T/RH and barometer; 1-sec average. The supplementary meteorological suite was added to PNNL Surface Flux Station to provide independent measurements of air temperature, relative humidity, and atmospheric pressure.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

RHOD Site - Surface Meteorological Station / Processed Data

This dataset contains raw data from the WFIP3 RHOD site supplementary meteorological sensors: T/RH and barometer; 1-sec average. The supplementary meteorological suite was added to PNNL Surface Flux Station to provide independent measurements of air temperature, relative humidity, and atmospheric pressure.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Influence of covariance of aerosol and meteorology on co-located precipitating and non-precipitating clouds over the Indo-Gangetic Plain

Aerosol–cloud–precipitation interaction (ACPI) plays a pivotal role in the global and regional water cycle and the earth's energy budget; however, it remains highly uncertain due to the different underlying physical mechanisms. Therefore, this study aims to systematically analyze the effects of aerosols and meteorological factors on ACPI in the co-located precipitating clouds (PCs) and non-precipitating clouds (NPCs) in winter and summer seasons by employing the long-term (2001–2021) retrievals from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission (TRMM) coupled with the National Center for Environmental Prediction/National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCEP/NCAR) reanalysis-II datasets over the Indo-Gangetic Plain (IGP). The results exhibit a decadal increase in aerosol optical depth (AOD) over Lahore (5.2 %), Delhi (9 %), Kanpur (10.7 %), and Gandhi College (22.7 %) and a decrease over Karachi (-1.9 %) and Jaipur (-0.5 %). The most stable meteorology with high values of lower-tropospheric stability (LTS) is found in both seasons over Karachi. In the summer season, the occurrence frequency of clouds is high (74 %) over Gandhi College, 60 % of which are PCs. Conversely, the lowest number of PCs is found over Karachi. Similarly, in the winter season, the frequency of cloud occurrence is low over Karachi and high over Lahore and Gandhi College. The analysis of cloud top pressure (CTP) and cloud optical thickness (COT) indicates high values of cloud fraction (CF) for thick and high-level clouds over all study areas except Karachi. The microphysical properties such as cloud effective radius (CER) and cloud droplet number concentration (CDNC) bear high values (CER ≳ 15 µm and CDNC ≳ 50 cm -3 ) for both NPCs and PCs in summer. The AOD–CER correlation is good (weak) for PCs (NPCs) in winter. Similarly, the sensitivity value of the first indirect effect (FIE) is high (ranging from 0.2 ± 0.13 to 0.3 ± 0.01 in winter and from 0.19 ± 0.03 to 0.32 ± 0.05 in summer) for PCs and low for NPCs. The sensitivity value for the second indirect effect (SIE) is relatively higher (such as 0.6 ± 0.14 in winter and 0.4 ± 0.04 in summer) than FIE. Sensitivity values of the aerosol-cloud interaction (ACI) are low (i.e., -0.06 ± 0.09) for PCs in summer. Furthermore, the precipitation rate (PR) exhibits high values in the summer season, primarily due to the significant contribution from optically thick clouds with lower CDNC (≲ 50 cm -3 ) and larger CER and the intermediate contribution from optically thick clouds with higher CDNC ( ≳ 50 cm -3 ).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Surface ozone and meteorological variables at CoURAGE TBS site during summer IOP

This dataset provides continuous near ground-level in situ ozone and meteorological data at the TBS site (S7) during the CoURAGE summer IOP. The ozone inlet and the weather station were approximately 5 meters above the surface. In situ ozone (ppbv) was collected with a 2BTech Model 205 dual beam ozone monitor. The meteorological data (temperature, pressure, relative humidity, wind speed, and wind direction) was collected with an AIRMAR 220WX WeatherStation Instrument with relative humidity (RH) module. The data has 2-second temporal resolution.

bar_pres↗