Modelling of snow and ice melt at ETH Camp (West Greenland): A study of surface albedo

• Published in: Journal of Geophysical Research
• Main Authors: Lefebre, F., Gallee, H., van Ypersele de Strihou, Jean-Pascal, Greuell, W
• Other Authors: UCL - SST/ELI/ELIC - Earth & Climate
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Amer Geophysical Union 2003
• Subjects: modeling surface albedo on Greenland; snow albedo; modeling surface mass balance at ETH Camp; Greenland surface mass balance; Greenland; Ice Sheet
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/2078.1/41029; https://doi.org/10.1029/2001JD001160

[1] The objective of this paper is to present the validation over Greenland of a thermodynamic snow-ice model that was complemented with the snow metamorphism and albedo parameterizations of the Centre d'Etudes de la Neige (Grenoble, France) in order to make the surface albedo variable and interactive. Special attention is given to the surface albedo since it is the most important parameter in energy exchanges with the atmosphere for snow and ice melt. The development of an integrated (snow, ice, and water) albedo model takes into account the different surface types observed on an ice sheet, and the snow albedo is calculated from the simulated surface snow grains. The validation for a polar site has been done at ETH Camp (West Greenland, 1155 m above sea level) during the 1990 and 1991 summer seasons. Although both ablation seasons differed greatly (in 1990 it showed a negative mass balance while in 1991 it ended with a positive mass balance), a single model configuration was able to provide good results for both 1990 and 1991. These simulations show that the snow metamorphism laws included enable an accurate simulation of the surface albedo and henceforth of the surface mass balance for a polar site, provided that the snow model is correctly forced at its surface level and that meltwater retention, percolation, and drainage are well represented in the snow model. The model results are also compared with two other modeling approaches, and differences between the three snow models are detailed.