Comparison of Arctic Clouds Between European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts Simulations and Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Climate Research Facility Long-Term Observations at the North Slope of Alaska Barrow Site

• Published in: Journal of Geophysical Research
• Main Authors: Zhao, Ming, Wang, Zhien
• Format: Other Non-Article Part of Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: University of Wyoming. Libraries 2010
• Subjects: Arctic clouds; Atmospheric radiation measurements; Climate research; Cloud fraction; Cloud simulation; Cold season; European center for medium-range weather forecasts; Ice mass; Ice water paths; Liquid water paths; Low-level clouds; Mixed-phase cloud; Near-surface; North Slope of Alaska; Seasonal variation; Sensible heat flux; Surface heat fluxes; Temperature dependence; Temperature inversions; Vertical motions; Atmospheric boundary layer; Atmospheric humidity; Atmospheric radiation; Climate models; Climatology; Clouds; Heat flux; Ice; Radiometry; Weather forecasting; Computer simulation; accuracy assessment; arctic environment; boundary layer; climate modeling; cloud; humidity; magnitude; measurement method; numerical model; observational method; radiation balance; research work; temperature inversion; Alaska; United States; Engineering; Arctic; Barrow; north slope
• Online Access: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11919/730; https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JD014285

©2010 by the American Geophysical Union. This study evaluated the European Center for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) model-simulated clouds and boundary layer (BL) properties based upon Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Climate Research Facility observations at the North Slope of Alaska site during 1999-2007. The ECMWF model-simulated near-surface humidity had seasonal dependent biases as large as 20%, while also experiencing difficulty representing BL temperature inversion height and strength during the transition seasons. Although the ECMWF model captured the seasonal variation of surface heat fluxes, it had sensible heat flux biases over 20 W m-2 in most of the cold months. Furthermore, even though the model captured the general seasonal variations of low-level cloud fraction (LCF) and liquid water path (LWP), it still overestimated the LCF by 20% or more and underestimated the LWP over 50% in the cold season. On average, the ECMWF model underestimated LWP by ~30 g m-2 but more accurately predicted ice water path for BL clouds. For BL mixed-phase clouds, the model predicted water-ice mass partition was significantly lower than the observations, largely due to the temperature dependence of water-ice mass partition used in the model. The ECMWF model captured the general response of cloud fraction and LWP on large-scale vertical motion changes but overpredicted the magnitude of the difference, especially for LWP. The new cloud and BL schemes of the ECMWF model that were implemented after 2003 only resulted in minor improvements in BL cloud simulations in summer. These results indicate that significant improvements in cold season BL and mixed-phase cloud processes in the model are needed.