evaluating biophysical impacts of land cover in clm and vr ...burakowski, june 22, 2016, cesm-lmwg...

Evaluating Biophysical Impacts of Land Cover in CLM and VR-CESM with Ameriflux Tower Clusters

CESM Land Model Working Group Breckenridge, CO June 22, 2016

Elizabeth Burakowski, UNH & NCAR Scott Ollinger, Andrew Ouimette, Lucie Lepine

Gordon Bonan, Ahmed Tawfik, Colin Zarzycki, NCAR Kim Novick, Indiana University

Photo by David Lutz

1880s 2010

Harvard University David Foster

Intrinsic Biophysical Factorization

Lee et al. 2011 4

Burakowski, June 22, 2016, CESM-LMWG Breckenridge, CO

Assume a forest and adjacent open field share same background climate:

Difference in surface temperature (Open – Forest)


Lee et al. 2011 5

Radiative forcing due to changes in

ALBEDO




Lee et al. 2011 6


ALBEDO

Energy Redistribution due to changes in

SURFACE ROUGHNESS




Lee et al. 2011 7


ALBEDO


SURFACE ROUGHNESS


BOWEN RATIO



Approach: Eddy Covariance Towers

8

•  Meteorological forcing •  Turbulent energy fluxes (latent, sensible) •  Radiative fluxes (incoming and outgoing

shortwave and longwave)

Eddy Covariance

Tower Clusters


A tale of two Durhams

9 Insert scale bar

1500 m

Durham, NH UNH

Durham, NC Duke

Durham, NH

Durham, NC


1500 m

UNH Tower Cluster, Durham, NH

10

Cornfield Feb 2014-present

Deciduous Forest May 2014-present

Hayfield Feb 2014-present

United States Climate Reference Network (USCRN)

UNH Eddy Covariance Tower


Duke Tower Cluster Durham, NC

11

Open Field

Hardwood Forest

Loblolly Pine

Duke Eddy Covariance Towers 2004-2008 analysis period

Novick et al., 2015; Juang et al. 2007

Image from Stoy et al. 2006


Approach: Point CLM4.5 Simulations

12

•  Forced with tower meteorological data, not coupled to the atmosphere, 35 yr spin up

•  Assigned plant functional type:

Eddy Covariance

Tower Clusters

PTCLM4.5 Land only

Broadleaf Deciduous Temperate Forest

C3 Non-Arctic Grass

Duke UNH Duke UNH


0.5

1

1.5

0

0.5

0

1

0

1.5

1

0.99

0.95

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.50.4

0.30.20.10

Nor

mal

ized

sta

ndar

d de

viat

ion

Co r r e l a t i on Coe f f i c i en t

RM

SD

ReferenceUS−Dk1 λEUS−KF1US−Dk2US−TF1US−Dk3US−MF1US−Dk1 HUS−KF1US−Dk2US−TF1US−Dk3US−MF1US−Dk1 RnUS−KF1US−Dk2US−TF1US−Dk3US−MF1

PTCLM4.5 Performance, ��Turbulent Fluxes and Net Radiation

13


Approach: Variable Resolution CESM

14

Eddy Covariance

Tower Clusters

PTCLM4.5 Land only

VR-CESM1.3 Land-Atm Coupled

•  Atmosphere-land coupled global simulation, 1979-2008

•  Prescribed SSTs & sea ice

•  CESM1.3 (CLM4.5, CAM5.3)

•  1 degree è 0.25 degree

•  Fractional land cover Zarzycki et al. 2015


Approach: Annual, Winter, Summer

15

Eddy Covariance

Tower Clusters

PTCLM4.5 Land Only

VR-CESM1.3 Land-Atm Coupled

Intrinsic Biophysical Factors

Radiative Roughness Bowen Lee et al. 2011

Hourly Hourly 3-Hourly


−10−5

05

10(a) Ameriflux Radiative

Tower

−10−5

05

10(b) Ameriflux Roughness

−10−5

05

10(c) Ameriflux Bowen

−10−5

05

10(d) Ameriflux Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−10−5

05

10

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Ameriflux Actual

(f) PTCLM, VR−CESM Radiative

PTCLMVR−CESM

(g) PTCLM, VR−CESM Roughness

(h) PTCLM, VR−CESM Bowen

(i) PTCLM, VR−CESM Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)

(j) PTCLM, VR−CESM Actual

∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]

C3NAG − BDT, Annual 2015

Intrinsic Biophysical Factors, Annual��Open – Forest ΔTs

16

Burakowski et al., in prep

UNH Cluster Durham, NH

open land warmer

open land cooler

TOWER MODEL

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]

C3 Non−Arctic Grass minus Broadleaf Deciduous Temperate Forest Annual 2015 Biophysical Factors

RADIATIVE

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


−10−5

05


Tower

−10−5

05


−10−5

05


−10−5

05

10(d) Ameriflux Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−10−5

05

10

Hour (Local Time)



PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]



17



open land warmer

open land cooler

TOWER MODEL

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


RADIATIVE

ROUGHNESS

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


−10−5

05


Tower

−10−5

05


−10−5

05


−10−5

05

10(d) Ameriflux Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−10−5

05

10

Hour (Local Time)



PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]



18



open land warmer

open land cooler

TOWER MODEL

RADIATIVE

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


BOWEN

ROUGHNESS

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


−10−5

05


Tower

−10−5

05


−10−5

05


−10−5

05

10(d) Ameriflux Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−10−5

05

10

Hour (Local Time)



PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]



19



open land warmer

open land cooler

TOWER MODEL

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


RADIATIVE

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


BOWEN

ROUGHNESS

Rad + Rough + Bowen

SUM

−10−5

05


Tower

−10−5

05


−10−5

05


−10−5

05

10(d) Ameriflux Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−10−5

05

10

Hour (Local Time)



PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]



20



open land warmer

open land cooler

TOWER MODEL

−9−6−3

0369

(a) Tower Radiative

Tower

−9−6−3

0369

(b) Tower Roughness

−9−6−3

0369

(c) Tower Bowen

−9−6−3

0369

(d) Tower Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−9−6−3

0369

Hour (Local Time)

(e) Tower Actual


PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]


RADIATIVE

ROUGHNESS

ACTUAL

ΔTs ≈LWoutεσ

4

BOWEN

Rad + Rough + Bowen

SUM


21

Duke Cluster Durham, NC

open land warmer

open land cooler

TOWER MODEL

RADIATIVE

ROUGHNESS

BOWEN

ACTUAL

Rad + Rough + Bowen

SUM


ΔTs ≈LWoutεσ

4

−10−5

05

10 (a) Ameriflux Radiative

Tower

−10−5

05

10 (b) Ameriflux Roughness

−10−5

05

10 (c) Ameriflux Bowen

−10−5

05

10 (d) Ameriflux Sum

0 4 8 12 16 20 24−10−5

05

10

Hour (Local Time)



PTCLMVR−CESM




0 4 8 12 16 20 24Hour (Local Time)


∆ T

s (°

C) [

Ope

n −

Fore

st]

C3NAG − BDT Annual

Annual Intrinsic Biophysical Factors��VR-CESM1.3

22

Roughness is dominant biophysical factor influencing annual differences in surface skin temperature in coupled model.

1979-2008

= + +

= Figure 3c from Lee et al. 2011 ΔTs ≈

LWoutεσ

4

Burakowski et al. in prep


Winter Intrinsic Biophysical Factors��VR-CESM1.3

23

Roughness is dominates in south Albedo dominates in north.

1979-2008

= + +

= ΔTs ≈LWoutεσ

4



Summer Intrinsic Biophysical Factors��VR-CESM1.3

24

Roughness dominates eastern US. Bowen results in slight cooling.

1979-2008

= + +

= ΔTs ≈LWoutεσ

4



25

Key Findings

•  Open land generally cooler at night, warmer during day

•  Modeled biophysical components (radiative, bowen, roughness) similar to tower observations.

•  Actual differences in skin temperature not always consistent with sum of intrinsic biophysical factors.


26

Future Work

•  Apply Intrinsic Biophysical Mechanism framework to other biome clusters (boreal, tropical) in PTCLM and VR-CESM

•  Evaluate implications of surface roughness on land management

•  Assess impacts of warmer climate, reduced snowpack on biophysical factors


Acknowledgements

National Science Foundation Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (EPSCoR) Award #1101245

Computing, processing, and data storage provided by the NCAR Computational and Information Systems Laboratory (CISL)

27

National Aeronautics and Space Administration Terrestrial Ecology Program NNX12AK56G S01

USDA New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station

email: [email protected]


evaluating biophysical impacts of land cover in clm and vr ...burakowski, june 22, 2016, cesm-lmwg...

Documents