An evaluation of surface climatology in state-of-the-art reanalyses over the Antarctic Ice Sheet

• Published in: Journal of Climate
• Main Authors: Gossart, A., Helsen, S., Lenaerts, J.T.M., Vanden Broucke, S., van Lipzig, N.P.M., Souverijns, N.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: 2019
• Subjects: Antarctic; The Antarctic; Antarctic Peninsula; Merra; Antarc*; Ice Sheet
• Online Access: http://www.vliz.be/nl/open-marien-archief?module=ref&refid=322935

In this study, we evaluate output of near-surface atmospheric variables over the Antarctic Ice Sheet from four reanalyses: the new European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts ERA-5 and its predecessor ERA-Interim, the Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR), and the Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications, version 2 (MERRA-2). The near-surface temperature, wind speed, and relative humidity are compared with datasets of in situ observations, together with an assessment of the simulated surface mass balance (approximated by precipitation minus evaporation). No reanalysis clearly stands out as the best performing for all areas, seasons, and variables, and each of the reanalyses displays different biases. CFSR strongly overestimates the relative humidity during all seasons whereas ERA-5 and MERRA-2 (and, to a lesser extent, ERA-Interim) strongly underestimate relative humidity during winter. ERA-5 captures the seasonal cycle of near-surface temperature best and shows the smallest bias relative to the observations. The other reanalyses show a general temperature underestimation during the winter months in the Antarctic interior and overestimation in the coastal areas. All reanalyses underestimate the mean near-surface winds in the interior (except MERRA-2) and along the coast during the entire year. The winds at the Antarctic Peninsula are overestimated by all reanalyses except MERRA-2. All models are able to capture snowfall patterns related to atmospheric rivers, with varying accuracy. Accumulation is best represented by ERA-5, although it underestimates observed surface mass balance and there is some variability in the accumulation over the different elevation classes, for all reanalyses.