1 / 11

Cloud- Radiative Driving of the Madden-Julian Oscillation as Seen by the A-Train

Cloud- Radiative Driving of the Madden-Julian Oscillation as Seen by the A-Train. Tony Del Genio Yonghua Chen , CloudSat /CALIPSO Meeting, 11/3/14. The MJO: Many independent studies that agree High-quality obs The models are t errible They haven’t gotten b etter in a decade.

zacharee-horn
Download Presentation

Cloud- Radiative Driving of the Madden-Julian Oscillation as Seen by the A-Train

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. Cloud-Radiative Driving of the Madden-Julian Oscillationas Seen by the A-Train Tony Del Genio Yonghua Chen , CloudSat/CALIPSO Meeting, 11/3/14

  2. The MJO: • Many independent • studies that agree • High-quality obs • The models are • terrible • They haven’t gotten • better in a decade (Flato et al. 2014, IPCC AR5 WG1, Chapter 9)

  3. What makes the MJO? (from Adam Sobel’s 2013 EUCLIPSE lecture) Let h = moist static energy = cpT + gz + Lq (vertically integrated) S = sources and sinks of h (advection, surface fluxes, radiation) So dh/dt = S; this is called a “moisture mode” (depends on sensitivity of convection to moisture) (depends on correlation of radiative heating or surface evaporation with precip)

  4. GEOPROF-LIDAR GISS GCM, DYNAMO NoMJO 10 MJOs, 2006-2010 Good MJO

  5. ECMWF-AUX inputs into FLXHR-LIDAR heating appear to be reasonable for MJO anomalies

  6. OLR a good proxy for net heating anomaly; largest in Indian Ocean and ~5 days in advance of MJO peak

  7. s peak time Maximum radiative heating anomaly occurs before MJO peak, but positive anomalies continue long after precipitationreturns to normal

  8. SW anomaly mostly opposes LW, but both stabilize onset region

  9. FLXHR-LIDAR minus FLXHR heating differences vs. MJO phase – thin cirrus matter to onset phase

  10. ISCCP-TMI (no MJO) • Magnitude of observed OLR, rain anomalies comparable to that in good MJO models for 2009 YOTC Event E hindcast • Strong OLR’-P’ correlation supports idea of cloud-radiative driving of MJO (good MJO)

  11. Summary • GEOPROF-LIDAR convection depth vs. AMSR-E CWV appears to be a good metric for GCM cumulus parameterizations; consistent with moisture mode ideas about MJO eastward propagation • OLR a good proxy for total column radiative heating anomaly, but SW absorption affects the profile and reinforces upper level heating near MJO onset • Cirrus heating also appears to play a role before MJO onset (Kelvin waves?) • Cloud-radiative feedback likely to be the driver of the MJO; well correlated with precipitation anomalies, though cloud anomalies persist as rain decreases • It is now possible for GCMs to make MJOs, and even perhaps for the right reason

More Related