Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Arctic, Earth System Modeling”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2021

Present and future aerosol impacts on Arctic climate change in the GISS-E2.1 Earth system model

The Arctic is warming 2 to 3 times faster than the global average, partly due to changes in short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs) including aerosols. In order to study the effects of atmospheric aerosols in this warming, recent past (1990–2014) and future (2015–2050) simulations have been carried out using the GISS-E2.1 Earth system model to study the aerosol burdens and their radiative and climate impacts over the Arctic (>60°N), using anthropogenic emissions from the Eclipse V6b and the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) databases, while global annual mean greenhouse gas concentrations were prescribed and kept fixed in all simulations. Results showed that the simulations have underestimated observed surface aerosol levels, in particular black carbon (BC) and sulfate (SO2−4), by more than 50 %, with the smallest biases calculated for the atmosphere-only simulations, where winds are nudged to reanalysis data. CMIP6 simulations performed slightly better in reproducing the observed surface aerosol concentrations and climate parameters, compared to the Eclipse simulations. In addition, simulations where atmosphere and ocean are fully coupled had slightly smaller biases in aerosol levels compared to atmosphere-only simulations without nudging. Arctic BC, organic aerosol (OA), and SO2−4 burdens decrease significantly in all simulations by 10 %–60 % following the reductions of 7 %–78 % in emission projections, with the Eclipse ensemble showing larger reductions in Arctic aerosol burdens compared to the CMIP6 ensemble. For the 2030–2050 period, the Eclipse ensemble simulated a radiative forcing due to aerosol–radiation interactions (RFARI) of −0.39 ± 0.01 W/sq. m, which is −0.08 W/sq. m larger than the 1990–2010 mean forcing (−0.32 W/sq. m), of which −0.24 ± 0.01 W/sq. m was attributed to the anthropogenic aerosols. The CMIP6 ensemble simulated a RFARI of −0.35 to −0.40 W/sq. m for the same period, which is −0.01 to −0.06 W/sq. m larger than the 1990–2010 mean forcing of −0.35 W/sq. m. The scenarios with little to no mitigation (worst-case scenarios) led to very small changes in the RFARI, while scenarios with medium to large emission mitigations led to increases in the negative RFARI, mainly due to the decrease in the positive BC forcing and the decrease in the negative SO2−4 forcing. The anthropogenic aerosols accounted for −0.24 to −0.26 W/sq. m of the net RFARI in 2030–2050 period, in Eclipse and CMIP6 ensembles, respectively. Finally, all simulations showed an increase in the Arctic surface air temperatures throughout the simulation period. By 2050, surface air temperatures are projected to increase by 2.4 to 2.6 °C in the Eclipse ensemble and 1.9 to 2.6 °C in the CMIP6 ensemble, compared to the 1990–2010 mean. Overall, results show that even the scenarios with largest emission reductions leads to similar impact on the future Arctic surface air temperatures and sea-ice extent compared to scenarios with smaller emission reductions, implying reductions of greenhouse emissions are still necessary to mitigate climate change.

Aerosols↗
NASA NTRS2012

Earth System Modeling and Field Experiments in the Arctic-Boreal Zone - Report from a NASA Workshop

Early climate modeling studies predicted that the Arctic Ocean and surrounding circumpolar land masses would heat up earlier and faster than other parts of the planet as a result of greenhouse gas-induced climate change, augmented by the sea-ice albedo feedback effect. These predictions have been largely borne out by observations over the last thirty years. However, despite constant improvement, global climate models have greater difficulty in reproducing the current climate in the Arctic than elsewhere and the scatter between projections from different climate models is much larger in the Arctic than for other regions. Biogeochemical cycle (BGC) models indicate that the warming in the Arctic-Boreal Zone (ABZ) could lead to widespread thawing of the permafrost, along with massive releases of CO2 and CH4, and large-scale changes in the vegetation cover in the ABZ. However, the uncertainties associated with these BGC model predictions are even larger than those associated with the physical climate system models used to describe climate change. These deficiencies in climate and BGC models reflect, at least in part, an incomplete understanding of the Arctic climate system and can be related to inadequate observational data or analyses of existing data. A workshop was held at NASA/GSFC, May 22-24 2012, to assess the predictive capability of the models, prioritize the critical science questions; and make recommendations regarding new field experiments needed to improve model subcomponents. This presentation will summarize the findings and recommendations of the workshop, including the need for aircraft and flux tower measurements and extension of existing in-situ measurements to improve process modeling of both the physical climate and biogeochemical cycle systems. Studies should be directly linked to remote sensing investigations with a view to scaling up the improved process models to the Earth System Model scale. Data assimilation and observing system simulation studies should be used to guide the deployment pattern and schedule for inversion studies as well. Synthesis and integration of previously funded Arctic-Boreal projects (e.g., ABLE, BOREAS, ICESCAPE, ICEBRIDGE, ARCTAS) should also be undertaken. Such an effort would include the integration of multiple remotely sensed products from the EOS satellites and other resources.

Sellers, Piers↗
NASA NTRS2022

Model Evaluation of Short-Lived Climate Forcers for the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme: A Multi-Species, Multi-Model Study

While carbon dioxide is the main cause for global warming, modeling short-lived climate forcers (SLCFs) such as methane, ozone, and particles in the Arctic allows us to simulate near-term climate and health impacts for a sensitive, pristine region that is warming at 3 times the global rate. Atmospheric modeling is critical for understanding the long-range transport of pollutants to the Arctic, as well as the abundance and distribution of SLCFs throughout the Arctic atmosphere. Modeling is also used as a tool to determine SLCF impacts on climate and health in the present and in future emissions scenarios. In this study, we evaluate 18 state-of-the-art atmospheric and Earth system models by assessing their representation of Arctic and Northern Hemisphere atmospheric SLCF distributions, considering a wide range of different chemical species (methane, tropospheric ozone and its precursors, black carbon, sulfate, organic aerosol, and particulate matter) and multiple observational datasets. Model simulations over 4 years (2008-2009 and 2014-2015) conducted for the 2022 Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) SLCF assessment report are thoroughly evaluated against satellite, ground, ship, and aircraft-based observations. The annual means, seasonal cycles, and 3-D distributions of SLCFs were evaluated using several metrics, such as absolute and percent model biases and correlation coefficients. The results show a large range in model performance, with no one particular model or model type performing well for all regions and all SLCF species. The multi-model mean (mmm) was able to represent the general features of SLCFs in the Arctic and had the best overall performance. For the SLCFs with the greatest radiative impact (CH4, 03, BC, and SO(sup 2-)(sub 4)), the mmm was within ±25 % of the measurements across the Northern Hemisphere. Therefore, we recommend a multi-model ensemble be used for simulating climate and health impacts of SLCFs. Of the SLCFs in our study, model biases were smallest for C"4 and greatest for OA. For most SLCFs, model biases skewed from positive to negative with increasing latitude. Our analysis suggests that vertical mixing, long-range transport, deposition, and wildfires remain highly uncertain processes. These processes need better representation within atmospheric models to improve their simulation of SLCFs in the Arctic environment. As model development proceeds in these areas, we highly recommend that the vertical and 3-D distribution of SLCFs be evaluated, as that information is critical to improving the uncertain processes in models.

Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Supporting Arctic Research, Engagement, and Policy With GMAO’s Next Generation Reanalysis & Prediction Systems

Modeling efforts at NASA aim to advance scientific understanding of the Earth system and its response to natural and human-induced changes and to improve our ability to predict climate, weather, and natural hazards. These efforts are particularly relevant for communities, scientists and stakeholders working and living in the Arctic. Here, we highlight current and planned Earth system prediction and data assimilation products from the Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO). We invite feedback and discussion on GMAO’s model and reanalysis development in support of Arctic research, engagement, and policy.

Lauren C Andrews↗
NASA NTRS2012

On the Influence of North Pacific Sea Surface Temperature on the Arctic Winter Climate

Differences between two ensembles of Goddard Earth Observing System Chemistry-Climate Model simulations isolate the impact of North Pacific sea surface temperatures (SSTs) on the Arctic winter climate. One ensemble of extended winter season forecasts is forced by unusually high SSTs in the North Pacific, while in the second ensemble SSTs in the North Pacific are unusually low. High Low differences are consistent with a weakened Western Pacific atmospheric teleconnection pattern, and in particular, a weakening of the Aleutian low. This relative change in tropospheric circulation inhibits planetary wave propagation into the stratosphere, in turn reducing polar stratospheric temperature in mid- and late winter. The number of winters with sudden stratospheric warmings is approximately tripled in the Low ensemble as compared with the High ensemble. Enhanced North Pacific SSTs, and thus a more stable and persistent Arctic vortex, lead to a relative decrease in lower stratospheric ozone in late winter, affecting the April clear-sky UV index at Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes.

Hurwitz, Margaret M.↗
NASA NTRS2014

An AeroCom Assessment of Black Carbon in Arctic Snow and Sea Ice

Though many global aerosols models prognose surface deposition, only a few models have been used to directly simulate the radiative effect from black carbon (BC) deposition to snow and sea ice. Here, we apply aerosol deposition fields from 25 models contributing to two phases of the Aerosol Comparisons between Observations and Models (AeroCom) project to simulate and evaluate within-snow BC concentrations and radiative effect in the Arctic. We accomplish this by driving the offline land and sea ice components of the Community Earth System Model with different deposition fields and meteorological conditions from 2004 to 2009, during which an extensive field campaign of BC measurements in Arctic snow occurred. We find that models generally underestimate BC concentrations in snow in northern Russia and Norway, while overestimating BC amounts elsewhere in the Arctic. Although simulated BC distributions in snow are poorly correlated with measurements, mean values are reasonable. The multi-model mean (range) bias in BC concentrations, sampled over the same grid cells, snow depths, and months of measurements, are −4.4 (−13.2 to +10.7) ng/g for an earlier phase of AeroCom models (phase I), and +4.1 (−13.0 to +21.4) ng/g for a more recent phase of AeroCom models (phase II), compared to the observational mean of 19.2 ng/g. Factors determining model BC concentrations in Arctic snow include Arctic BC emissions, transport of extra-Arctic aerosols, precipitation, deposition efficiency of aerosols within the Arctic, and meltwater removal of particles in snow. Sensitivity studies show that the model-measurement evaluation is only weakly affected by meltwater scavenging efficiency because most measurements were conducted in non-melting snow. The Arctic (60-90degN) atmospheric residence time for BC in phase II models ranges from 3.7 to 23.2 days, implying large inter-model variation in local BC deposition efficiency. Combined with the fact that most Arctic BC deposition originates from extra-Arctic emissions, these results suggest that aerosol removal processes are a leading source of variation in model performance. The multi-model mean (full range) of Arctic radiative effect from BC in snow is 0.15 (0.07-0.25) W/sq m and 0.18 (0.06-0.28) W/sq m in phase I and phase II models, respectively. After correcting for model biases relative to observed BC concentrations in different regions of the Arctic, we obtain a multi-model mean Arctic radiative effect of 0.17 W/sq m for the combined AeroCom ensembles. Finally, there is a high correlation between modeled BC concentrations sampled over the observational sites and the Arctic as a whole, indicating that the field campaign provided a reasonable sample of the Arctic.

carbon↗
NASA NTRS2015

Sea Ice Outlook for September 2015 June Report - NASA Global Modeling and Assimilation Office

The recent decline in perennial sea ice cover in Arctic Ocean is a topic of enormous scientific interest and has relevance to a broad variety of scientific disciplines and human endeavors including biological and physical oceanography, atmospheric circulation, high latitude ecology, the sustainability of indigenous communities, commerce, and resource exploration. A credible seasonal prediction of sea ice extent would be of substantial use to many of the stakeholders in these fields and may also reveal details on the physical processes that result in the current trends in the ice cover. Forecasts are challenging due in part to limitations in the polar observing network, the large variability in the climate system, and an incomplete knowledge of the significant processes. Nevertheless it is a useful to understand the current capabilities of high latitude seasonal forecasting and identify areas where such forecasts may be improved. Since 2008 the Arctic Research Consortium of the United States (ARCUS) has conducted a seasonal forecasting contest in which the average Arctic sea ice extent for the month of September (the month of the annual extent minimum) is predicted from available forecasts in early June, July, and August. The competition is known as the Sea Ice Outlook (SIO) but recently came under the auspices of the Sea Ice Prediction Network (SIPN), and multi-agency funded project to evaluate the SIO. The forecasts are submitted based on modeling, statistical, and heuristic methods. Forecasts of Arctic sea ice extent from the GMAO are derived from seasonal prediction system of the NASA Goddard Earth Observing System model, version 5 (GEOS 5) coupled atmosphere and ocean general circulation model (AOGCM). The projections are made in order to understand the relative skill of the forecasting system and to determine the effects of future improvements to the system. This years prediction is for a September average Arctic ice extent of 5.030.41 million km2.

SIPN↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Surface Albedo of Sea Ice in CMIP6 and the Implications for the Surface Albedo Feedback

The Arctic has experienced rapid sea ice loss and a substantial decline in surface albedo, significantly impacting its radiation budget. Climate models from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) reproduce these changes. However, inconsistencies remain among models regarding the magnitude, spatial distribution, and seasonal patterns of Arctic surface albedo evolution. This study investigates these discrepancies by comparing model outputs with observation from the Clouds and the Earth's Radiant Energy System (CERES). We develop a decomposition method to assess the contributions of sea ice albedo, sea ice concentration, and sea ice extent to Arctic surface albedo. Over land, differences in snow cover account for the substantial inter-model spread in surface albedo, while over the ocean, sea ice albedo, concentration, and extent all contribute. Comparisons between CMIP6 and the Atmospheric Model Intercomparison Project (AMIP) simulations, which use identically prescribed sea ice concentrations, reveals considerable inter-model spread in Arctic Ocean surface albedo due to differences in sea ice albedo. Applying the decomposition method to projections shows that models predicting larger decreases in sea ice concentration and extent, especially in the Central Arctic, exhibit lower surface albedo and stronger sea ice albedo feedback. Beyond 2050, Arctic Ocean surface albedo decline is mainly influenced by sea ice extent indicating that the retreat of the ice edge is the most important process to constrain the surface albedo feedback. This study provides insights into factors contributing to the spread and changes in Arctic surface albedo and the associated sea ice albedo feedback.

Patrick C Taylor↗
NASA NTRS2023

Arctic Warming in Response to Regional Aerosol Emissions Reductions

This study examines the Arctic surface air temperature response to regional aerosol emissions reductions using three fully coupled chemistry–climate models: National Center for Atmospheric Research-Community Earth System Model version 1, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory-Coupled Climate Model version 3 (GFDL-CM3) and Goddard Institute for Space Studies-ModelE version 2. Each of these models was used to perform a series of aerosol perturbation experiments, in which emissions of different aerosol types (sulfate, black carbon (BC), and organic carbon) in different northern mid-latitude source regions, and of biomass burning aerosol over South America and Africa, were substantially reduced or eliminated. We find that the Arctic warms in nearly every experiment, the only exceptions being the U.S. and Europe BC experiments in GFDL-CM3 in which there is a weak and insignificant cooling. The Arctic warming is generally larger than the global mean warming (i.e. Arctic amplification occurs), particularly during non-summer months. The models agree that changes in the poleward atmospheric moisture transport are the most important factor explaining the spread in Arctic warming across experiments: the largest warming tends to coincide with the largest increases in moisture transport into the Arctic. In contrast, there is an inconsistent relationship (correlation) across experiments between the local radiative forcing over the Arctic and the simulated Arctic warming, with this relationship being positive in one model (GFDL-CM3) and negative in the other two. Our results thus highlight the prominent role of poleward energy transport in driving Arctic warming and amplification, and suggest that the relative importance of poleward energy transport and local forcing/feedbacks is likely to be model dependent.

Arctic↗
NASA NTRS2017

Quantifying Chemical Ozone Loss in the Arctic Stratosphere with GEOS-STRATCHEM Data Assimilation System

A faithful representation of polar stratospheric chemistry in models and its connection with dynamical variability is essential for our understanding of the evolution of the ozone layer in a changing climate and during the projected continuing decline of ozone depleting substances in the atmosphere. We use a new configuration of the Goddard Earth Observing System Data Assimilation System with a stratospheric chemistry model to study ozone depletion in the Arctic polar stratosphere during the exceptionally cold (in the stratosphere) winters 2015/2016 and 2010/2011.

Arctic↗
NASA NTRS2022

Using Atmospheric Trace Gas Vertical Profiles to Evaluate Model Fluxes: A Case Study of Arctic-Cap Observations and Geos Simulations for the ABoVE Domain

Accurate estimates of carbon–climate feedbacks require an independent means for evaluating surface flux models at regional scales. The altitude-integrated enhancement (AIE) derived from the Arctic Carbon Atmospheric Profiles (Arctic-CAP) project demonstrates the utility of this bulk quantity for surface flux model evaluation. This bulk quantity leverages background mole fraction values from the middle free troposphere, is agnostic to uncertainties in boundary layer height, and can be derived from model estimates of mole fractions and vertical gradients. To demonstrate the utility of the bulk quantity, six airborne profiling surveys of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and carbon monoxide (CO) throughout Alaska and northwestern Canada between April and November 2017 were completed as part of NASA’s Arctic–Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE). The Arctic-CAP sampling strategy involved acquiring vertical profiles of CO2, CH4, and CO from the surface to 5 km altitude at 25 sites around the ABoVE domain on a 4- to 6-week time interval. All Arctic-CAP measurements were compared to a global simulation using the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) modeling system. Comparisons of the AIE bulk quantity from aircraft observations and GEOS simulations of atmospheric CO2, CH4, and CO highlight the fidelity of the modeled surface fluxes. The model–data comparison over the ABoVE domain reveals that while current state-of-the-art models and flux estimates are able to capture broad-scale spatial and temporal patterns in near-surface CO2 and CH4 concentrations, more work is needed to resolve fine-scale flux features that are captured in CO observations

CO2↗
NASA NTRS2020

Atmospheric Carbon Cycle Dynamics Over the Above Domain: an Integrated Analysis Using Aircraft Observations (Arctic-CA) and Model Simulations (GEOS)

The Arctic Carbon Atmospheric Profiles (Arctic-CAP) project conducted six airborne surveys of Alaska and northwestern Canada between April and November 2017 to capture the spatial and temporal gradients of northern high-latitude carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and carbon monoxide (CO) as part of NASA's Arctic-Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE). The Arctic-CAP sampling strategy involved acquiring vertical profiles of CO2, CH4 and CO from the surface to 5 km altitude at 25 sites around the ABoVE domain on a 4- to 6-week time interval. We observed vertical gradients of CO2, CH4 and CO that vary by eco-region and duration of the sampling period, which spanned the majority of the seasonal cycle. All Arctic-CAP measurements were compared to a global simulation using the Goddard Earth Observing System (GEOS) modeling system. Comparisons with GEOS simulations of atmospheric CO2, CH4 and CO highlight the potential of these multi-species observations to inform improvements in surface flux estimates and the representation of atmospheric transport. GEOS simulations provide estimates of the near surface average CO2 and CH4 enhancements that are well correlated with aircraft observations (R=0.74 and R=0.60 respectively), suggesting that GEOS has reasonable fidelity over this complex and heterogeneous region. This model-data comparison over the ABoVE domain reveals that while current state-of-the-art models and flux estimates are able to capture broadscale spatial and temporal patterns in near-surface CO2 and CH4 concentrations, more work is needed to resolve fine-scale flux features that are observed. The study also provides a framework for benchmarking a global model at regional scales, which is needed to use climate models as tools to investigate high-latitude carbon-climate feedbacks.

C Sweeney↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

High Latitude Atmospheric Rivers: Teleconnections and Impacts

Atmospheric rivers (ARs) are long, narrow synoptic scale features that act as moisture transport vehicles by moving water vapor poleward. They are typically found in storm tracks and often have profound implications for regional hydroclimate. For high latitude locales such as Antarctica and the Arctic, ARs are fewer in number but often have an outsized impact by either producing significant snow accumulation events, or, depending on their thermal characteristics, initiating melt events on ice sheets, ice shelves, and sea ice. In this study, we apply both reanalysis and climate model data to evaluate high latitude ARs for both the Arctic and Antarctic in the context of teleconnections and modes of variability. Specifically, we fold in both MERRA-2 and ERA5 reanalysis as well as historical and climate change simulations from the CESM2 (Community Earth System Model, Version 2) and E3SMv2 (Energy Exascale Earth System Model, v2) with multiple ensemble members to better understand natural variability versus climate change signals. An overview of AR climatology and impacts will be presented, including a baseline uncertainty quantification analysis using data from ARTMIP (the Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project). AR impacts during specific modes of variability will be characterized by diagnosing precipitation and boundary layer temperature associated with Ars influencing the cryosphere. Modes of variability investigated include the SAM (Southern Annular Mode), PDO (Pacific Decadal Oscillation), PSA2 (Pacific South American Mode 2), the IOD (Indian Ocean Dipole), and the AO (Arctic Oscillation).

Atmospheric Rivers↗
NASA NTRS2004

Daytime Cloud Property Retrievals Over the Arctic from Multispectral MODIS Data

Improving climate model predictions over Earth's polar regions requires a complete understanding of polar clouds properties. Passive satellite remote sensing techniques can be used to retrieve macro and microphysical properties of polar cloud systems. However, over the Arctic, there is minimal contrast between clouds and the background snow surface observed in satellite data, especially for visible wavelengths. This makes it difficult to identify clouds and retrieve their properties from space. Variable snow and ice cover, temperature inversions, and the predominance of mixed-phase clouds further complicate cloud property identification. For this study, the operational Clouds and the Earth s Radiant Energy System (CERES) cloud mask is first used to discriminate clouds from the background surface in Terra Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) data. A solar-infrared infrared nearinfrared technique (SINT) first used by Platnick et al. (2001) is used here to retrieve cloud properties over snow and ice covered regions.

Spangenberg, Douglas A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

FUTURE LEVELS OF AEROSOLS & RADIATIVE FORCING OVER THE ARCTIC

The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) is currently assessing the impacts of Short-Lived Climate Forcers (SLCF) on Arctic climate and air quality. In support of the assessment, we used the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Sciences (GISS) Earth System Model (modelE2.1), with prescribed sea surface temperature and sea-ice fraction, to simulate SLCF concentrations globally between 1995 and 2015. Two simulations were conducted, using the One-Moment Aerosol (OMA) and the Multiconfiguration Aerosol TRacker of mIXing state (MATRIX) aerosol modules. OMA is a mass-based scheme in which aerosols are assumed to remain externally mixed and have a prescribed and constant size distribution, while MATRIX is an aerosol microphysics scheme based on the quadrature method of moments, which is able to explicitly simulate the mixing state of aerosols. Anthropogenic emissions from the ECLIPSE v6b emissions database were used, along with emissions from aircrafts and open biomass burning from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6), while the natural emissions of sea salt, DMS, isoprene and dust are calculated interactively. The simulated monthly surface concentrations of sulfate (SO4), black carbon (BC), organic carbon (OA), and ozone (O3) are compared with observations from a set of Arctic stations, extracted from the EBAS and IMPROVE databases, as well as a few additional locations. Simulated aerosol optical depths (AOD) are also compared with Advanced Very-High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR). The study will present the evaluation of the modelE2.1 in simulating SLCF levels over the Arctic using different aerosol schemes, along with observed and simulated trends of SLCFs over the Arctic between 1995 and 2015.

Aersosols↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Snow Depth from AMSR-2 Using Multispectral Satellite Data in an Artificial Neural Network

By using diffusion theory and Monte Carlo lidar radiative transfer simulations, Hu et al. (2022b) has derived snow depth from the first-, second- and third-order moments of the lidar backscattering pathlength distribution. Lu et al. (2022) calculated the snow depth by applying the methods to the satellite ICESat-2 lidar measurements over the Arctic sea ice, as well as land surfaces of Northern Hemisphere. In this paper, an artificial neural network (ANN) algorithm, employing several channels from Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer 2 (AMSR-2) and the humidity vertical profiles from Global Modeling and Assimilation Office (GMAO) Goddard Earth Observing System for Instrument Teams (GEOS-IT) product, is trained to determine snow depth identified by time and geolocation matched 2019 ICESat-2 snow-depth data during winter months over the Arctic sea ice. The trained ANN snow-depth was applied to 2018 AMSR-2 clear pixel data, although the algorithms perform reasonably well in thinner clouds. The validation data (different from the training set) of ANN snow depth from AMSR-2 showed a good agreement with time matched and co-located snow-depth values from ICESat-2. The bias was near zero, with mean absolute error (MAE) 0.05 cm and a root-mean-square-error (RMSE) 0.08 cm. Prior applying the trained ANN snow depth to AMSR-2 data, a cloud screening algorithm was developed with a similar approach. A separate ANN cloud mask was trained to determine an AMSR-2 pixel is clear or cloudy with time and geolocation matched 2015 CALIOP Vertical Feature Mask (VFM) over Arctic sea ice. The ANN cloud mask from AMSR-2 under-estimated cloud fraction by 3-6% compared to CALIOP . The additional research is needed to conclusively evaluate the ANN cloud mask accuracy. Finally, this paper will lay the foundation for a sustained long-term snowfall and snow-storm monitoring system. The future Cloud Aerosol LIdar for Global scale Observations of the ocean-Land Atmosphere system (CALIGOLA) mission will provide a means to calculate snow depth from the lidar backscattering pathlength distribution, benefiting from the UV, visible and infrared pulses. With the calculated snow depth as the truth one could develop a machine learning algorithm, as it was done in this paper, using a passive microwave instrument available at that time to generate a wide range of snow depth data, covering extensive spatial areas in the cross-orbit direction.

Neural Network↗
NASA NTRS2019

The Salience of Nonlinearities in the Boreal Winter Response to ENSO: Arctic Stratosphere and Europe

The salience of nonlinearities in the Arctic stratospheric response to El Niño - Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is evaluated in a 41 member ensemble of the period 1980 to 2009 in the NASA Goddard Earth Observing System Chemistry-Climate Model. Central Pacific El Niño (CP EN) events preferentially increase zonal wavenumber 2, while Eastern Pacific El Niño (EP EN) events preferentially increase zonal wavenumber 1, though these nonlinearities become statistically robust only after more than 45 events are considered. This leads to a difference in the morphology of SSW events preferentially forced by each ENSO flavor. While the zonal-mean Arctic stratospheric response is little different between EP and CP EN once one accounts for the relative weakness of CP events, the tropospheric subpolar negative North Atlantic Oscillation response is stronger for CP events. Other nonlinearities are even less salient: there is no indication of any nonlinearities in the wave driving between moderate EP EN and extreme EP EN, nor between EN and La Niña (LN). However in approximately 15% of the integrations within our ensemble, there is no difference in SSW frequency between EN and LN, suggesting that a similar SSW frequency for both EN and LN, as has occurred over the past 60 years, can occur by chance. The intra-ensemble variability in LN SSW frequency can be related back to intra-ensemble variability in the tropospheric response to LN.

Arctic↗