Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990

Advances in regional climate modelling must be strongly based on analysis of physical processes in comparisonwith data. In a data-poor region such as the Arctic, this procedure may be enhanced by a community-basedapproach, that is, though collaborative analysis by several research groups. To illustr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rinke, Annette, Lynch, A. H., Dethloff, Klaus
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: 2000
Subjects:
Online Access:https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/2646/
https://hdl.handle.net/10013/epic.13230
id ftawi:oai:epic.awi.de:2646
record_format openpolar
spelling ftawi:oai:epic.awi.de:2646 2024-09-15T17:50:42+00:00 Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990 Rinke, Annette Lynch, A. H. Dethloff, Klaus 2000 https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/2646/ https://hdl.handle.net/10013/epic.13230 unknown Rinke, A. orcid:0000-0002-6685-9219 , Lynch, A. H. and Dethloff, K. (2000) Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990 , Journal of Geophysical Research, 105 , pp. 29669-29683 . hdl:10013/epic.13230 EPIC3Journal of Geophysical Research, 105, pp. 29669-29683 Article isiRev 2000 ftawi 2024-06-24T03:53:43Z Advances in regional climate modelling must be strongly based on analysis of physical processes in comparisonwith data. In a data-poor region such as the Arctic, this procedure may be enhanced by a community-basedapproach, that is, though collaborative analysis by several research groups. To illustrate this approach,simulations were performed with two regional climate models HIRHAM and ARCSyM, over the Arctic basin to65oN, laterally driven at the boundaries by observational analyses. It was found that both models are able toreproduce reasonably the main features of the large-scale flow and the surface parameters in the Arctic. Distinctdifferences in the simulations can be attributed to specific characteristics of the boundary layer and surfaceparameterizations which result in surface flux differences, and to the lateral moisture forcing, both of which affectmoisture availability in the atmosphere. Further disparities are associated with the additional degrees of freedomallowed in the coupled model ARCSyM. Issues of model configuration and experimental design are discussed,including domain size, grid spacing, boundary formulations, model initialization and spinup, and ensemble approaches. In order to reach definitive conclusions in a regional climate model intercomparison, ensemble simulationswith adequate spin-up and equivalent initialization of surface fields will be required. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Arctic Basin Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar- and Marine Research (AWI): ePIC (electronic Publication Information Center)
institution Open Polar
collection Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar- and Marine Research (AWI): ePIC (electronic Publication Information Center)
op_collection_id ftawi
language unknown
description Advances in regional climate modelling must be strongly based on analysis of physical processes in comparisonwith data. In a data-poor region such as the Arctic, this procedure may be enhanced by a community-basedapproach, that is, though collaborative analysis by several research groups. To illustrate this approach,simulations were performed with two regional climate models HIRHAM and ARCSyM, over the Arctic basin to65oN, laterally driven at the boundaries by observational analyses. It was found that both models are able toreproduce reasonably the main features of the large-scale flow and the surface parameters in the Arctic. Distinctdifferences in the simulations can be attributed to specific characteristics of the boundary layer and surfaceparameterizations which result in surface flux differences, and to the lateral moisture forcing, both of which affectmoisture availability in the atmosphere. Further disparities are associated with the additional degrees of freedomallowed in the coupled model ARCSyM. Issues of model configuration and experimental design are discussed,including domain size, grid spacing, boundary formulations, model initialization and spinup, and ensemble approaches. In order to reach definitive conclusions in a regional climate model intercomparison, ensemble simulationswith adequate spin-up and equivalent initialization of surface fields will be required.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Rinke, Annette
Lynch, A. H.
Dethloff, Klaus
spellingShingle Rinke, Annette
Lynch, A. H.
Dethloff, Klaus
Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990
author_facet Rinke, Annette
Lynch, A. H.
Dethloff, Klaus
author_sort Rinke, Annette
title Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990
title_short Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990
title_full Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990
title_fullStr Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990
title_full_unstemmed Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990
title_sort intercomparison of arctic regional climate simulations: case studies of january and june 1990
publishDate 2000
url https://epic.awi.de/id/eprint/2646/
https://hdl.handle.net/10013/epic.13230
genre Arctic
Arctic Basin
genre_facet Arctic
Arctic Basin
op_source EPIC3Journal of Geophysical Research, 105, pp. 29669-29683
op_relation Rinke, A. orcid:0000-0002-6685-9219 , Lynch, A. H. and Dethloff, K. (2000) Intercomparison of Arctic regional climate simulations: Case studies of January and June 1990 , Journal of Geophysical Research, 105 , pp. 29669-29683 . hdl:10013/epic.13230
_version_ 1810292513587593216