1 / 10

Reanalyses for Water Budget in Canada: Suitability & Comparison with Point Observations

This research study evaluates the suitability of model reanalyses for estimating the water budget in Canada and compares them with in-situ point observations. The study also examines the impact of different forcings on modelled evapotranspiration (ET) and analyzes the partial contributions of uncertainties in climate variables on ET uncertainties.

resendez
Download Presentation

Reanalyses for Water Budget in Canada: Suitability & Comparison with Point Observations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Earth Sciences Sector Towards a water budget for Canada: are reanalyses suitable for the task? An Activity within the ESS Climate Change Programme Vladimir.Korolevich @nrcan.gc.ca Richard Fernandes, Shusen Wang, Anita Simic, Fanfei Gong, Peter Zelic (NRCan, ESS, CCRS)

  2. ET Estimation • Approach: Apply observed land surface forcings to validated point model (EALCO) for each 1km grid cell. • Requirements: • Satellite Earth Observation data for surface parameters. • Point estimates of ET for calibration and validation. • Validated sub-daily climate forcings over Canada: • Precipitation (rain and snow), 2m air temperature, 2m wind speed, 2m specific humidity, surface down welling shortwave and longwave radiation, 2m air pressure

  3. Research Question • How do model reanalysis forcings compare to in-situ point observations? • How does modelled ET differ based on different forcings? • For a given forcing dataset, what is the partial contribution of uncertainties for each climate variable to uncertainties in modelled ET?

  4. Observed Forcings1960-1990: Hourly Rain, Snow, Insolation, Air Temp, Specific Humidity, Surface Pressure Mean Annual Precipitation (1961-1990) at CWEEDS stations [mm/year]

  5. Reanalysis Forcings Anomalies Station longitude (deg E)

  6. Reference Annual ET based on Observed Forcings (1980-1990) [mm/year] .

  7. ET Anomalies *) CRU = Climatic Research Unit, East Anglia UK, 0.5 degree gridded observations

  8. Partial Contributions to ET Anomalies

  9. Conclusions • GR2 and NARR have similar annual biases to station observations. Downwelling radiation bias is substantial and needs more investigation as to timing and causes. • GR2 and NARR provide reasonable ET estimates compared to ET based on observations except over Rockies. “PRISM” type precip downscaling in NARR over Canada may substantially improve ET ET estimates in Canadian Rockies • Local calibration of either reanalysis forcings or reanalysis driven ET may be desirable if possible. • Renalysis forcings offer promise for driving water budget models over remote areas in Canada.

  10. . THANK YOU

More Related